[TEMP CHECK] Aave Service Provider & Orbit Delegate Revenue Alignment Framework

[TEMP CHECK] Aave Service Provider & Orbit Delegate Revenue Alignment Framework

Authors: ApuMallku & Phenk53

Date: 2026-02-04

Simple Summary

This proposal seeks to establish the “Aave Revenue Alignment & Governance Integrity Framework”. It codifies the fiduciary duties of all entities receiving financial compensation or governance incentives from the Aave DAO.

The Framework mandates that actively engaged Service Providers (SPs) and Orbit Delegates are prohibited from operating proprietary, revenue-generating ventures — like web front-ends, mobile applications, and infrastructure tools — built on Aave while receiving DAO funding, unless a formal revenue-sharing agreement is ratified and approved by the DAO, as its seen as fair for tokenholder.

This proposal is inspired by Arbitrums watchdog for grants misuse and the general idea is, if you work for the DAO, you work for its revenue. If you want to start your own ventures, you have to leave the DAO or share with it.

Motivation

Currently, the Aave DAO subsidizes the operational overhead of various entities to maintain and expand the protocol. However, a systemic misalignment has emerged:

1. Revenue Leakage: SPs leverage DAO-funded research, infrastructure, and non-public information to launch private, fee-collecting products that bypass the DAOs treasury.

2. Brand Dilution: The “Aave” identity is being utilized by private entities to provide a veneer of officiality to ventures that do not return value to the DAOs treasury.

3. Governance Capture: Orbit Delegates, who hold significant political power, may face conflicts of interest when voting on parameters that affect their private commercial ventures.

To protect the $AAVE tokenholders and ensure the long-term sustainability of the DAO, all value generated through the protocol’s infrastructure must be centralized within the DAO’s treasury.

Specification

Any product (Web, Mobile, or Infrastructure) developed or operated by an active SP or Orbit Delegate that interfaces with the Aave Protocol is classified as a “Derivative Venture.”

Default Prohibition:
Private monetization of Derivative Ventures is prohibited while the entity is actively engaged with the DAO and receives compensation.

The 70/30 Revenue Rule:
To authorize a monetized venture, the entity must commit to a revenue-share model where a minimum of 70% of gross revenue is streamed to the Aave DAOs treasury. Additionally, it has to be approved by the DAO in a separate proposal.

Aave Governance Integrity Council (AGIC):
To ensure this framework is not merely “social consensus”, the DAO will elect the AGIC, a member oversight committee.

Powers:
The AGIC is authorized to audit SP activity, maintain a “Disclosure Registry,” and investigate “shadow” applications or hidden fees.

Enforcement:
The AGIC holds the power to initiate an emergency vote to terminate the payment streams of any entity found in violation of this framework.

Composition:
It should consist of 1 person of each actively engaged SP and an Orbit delegate.

Selection Process:
The members of the AGIC will be selected through a separate and dedicated governance proposal. Team members of each SP and orbit delegates can run for election. The DAO will vote on who they want to have in the AGIC via Snapshot.

Incentives:
Drawing inspiration from Arbitrums watchdog, AGIC members are entitled to a compensation/bounty for successful investigations and findings that lead to the protection of the DAOs treasury.

To give the DAO an example we can take the recent findings from Orbit delegate @EzR3aL from his post in December about the cowswap integration by Aave Labs.
This finding and the current revenue amount of roughly 5m$ would lead to a bounty for him.
The exact amount can be defined together with the DAO, but we propose a bounty of 5-10%.

Rationale:

Fiduciary Duty:
SPs are working towards the DAO and its tokenholders. In no other industry is a contractor allowed to build a competing private business using their “employer’s” tools and brand to generate revenue for themselves.

Token Value:
By recapturing “lost” revenue from these privatized ventures, the DAO increases the fundamental value backing the $AAVE ecosystem and giving back confidence to $AAVE tokenholder.

Ecosystem Scalability:
The DAO must transition toward a model where intellectual property (IP) and branding are fully controlled by the DAO itself, rather than centralized entities. The current status quo, where off-chain assets remain siloed, creates a “glass ceiling” for innovation. A clear example is the recent abandonment of “Project E” by BGD Labs, where legal and branding complexities hindered a high-potential initiative. For AAVE to truly expand, it must empower third-party projects to build on top of the protocol without fear of “gatekeeping” or legal ambiguity, ensuring the DAO is an enabler of growth, not a bottleneck.

Innovation:
This proposal does not intend to stop innovation. It’s about securing these innovations within the DAOs treasury and even wants to push for it. If any SP or orbit delegate has a great product idea that increases the DAOs revenue, this entity should propose it to the DAO and receive a fair compensation for it.
One example is GHO, which has been created for free for the DAO and Aave Labs should have received a fair compensation for it.

Next Steps

  1. Gather feedback from the community.

  2. If consensus is reached on this TEMP CHECK, escalate this proposal to the Snapshot stage.

  3. If Snapshot outcome is YAE, prepare different proposals to vote on AGIC and decide other parameters.

Disclaimer

The authors of this proposal are not acting on behalf of any third party and are not and have never been compensated for creating this TEMP CHECK proposal.

ApuMallku has been a DAO member for nearly 3 years and is holding either AAVE, aAAVE or stkAAVE as well as GHO or sGHO token.

Phenk53 has been an Aave delegate for almost a year and is holding either AAVE, aAAVE or stkAAVE as well as GHO or sGHO token.

Copyright

Copyright and related rights waived under Creative Commons Zero (CC0).

9 Likes

Hello and congrats for creating your first TEMP CHECK @phenk53.
Its nice seeing that during these last weeks much more DAO delegates and tokenholder engage for creating proposals.

I think this proposal is overall a very good idea, but likely needs to be split into more proposals, after this has either been approved or not.
For example you will need a proposal

  • for the creation of the AGIC and selecting its member
  • decide on the revenue rule (although i think anythink below 65% should not even be considered)
  • a proposal to decide on the bounty model you proposed (which I think is good and Arbitrums watchdog has seen some great success)

Then regarding the framework overall. The last months have proven that the DAO is vulnerable to revenue bleeding.
I think many of the past approved products with revenue sharing models that were voted on had negative impact on the DAOs revenue and the token price as well. For investors its not clear anymore where the value is coming from and where it is going to, basically where to invest.
I myself did mistakes in the past regarding some votes, that with todays knowledge I would have voted differently.

Its time to bring back all revenue to the DAO and its treasury and get every SP and Orbit delegate (good addition) aligned with tokenholder. Without these, we wouldn’t be able to build Aave, vote on proposal and decide on the future.

Im not going to talk about the IP here, as this has been discussed already and likely needs to be adressed in the future again.
But I totally agree that anyone receiving compensation from the DAO needs to be fully committed to work only for the DAO, the treasury and $AAVE tokenholder.
My take is that if you are making money on top of Aave while being paid by the DAO, its kind of insidertrading. In any other industry this would be illegal.
That means if you wnat to do so, feel free, but you have to leave the DAO in terms of receiving funds/a payment stream.

The selection of the proposed AGIC sounds fair to me, but the DAO could also consider adding 1-2 people to this that do not receive any compensation from the DAO, for more neutrality.

BGDLabs already stated that Project E was cancelled because of the reasons mentioned in this proposal and its great seeing them admitting this and aligning with the DAO.
Others should follow or be removed from payment streams, chats, working groups, etc.

This part seems crucial to me. Its not about stopping or hindering innovation, but making sure its flowing back to the DAO. And any good idea from anyone should be compensated fairly.
GHO is a good example here as stated.

With that being said, I think some points need to be addressed in separate propsals afterwards. But the general direction of this has 100% support from me and people that delegate to me. I have been discussing this proposal with some of them before making this comment.

Thank you @ApuMallku and @phenk53

Some analogy to explain it in easy words what this proposal explains and wants to achieve.

Mcdonalds is my employer and im getting paid.
I dont start selling burgers afterhours on the parking lot just for my own profit.
I can do this, but need to quit my job, pay rent (aka fee sharing) and then its fine.
If he says no, I have to decide, do I quit my good paying job and leave to sell burger somewhere else, or do I stay, give my best and get promoted.

8 Likes

I think it would be great and highly important to get other delegates and SP feedback here.
@Kene_Anode @sid_areta @TokenLogic @LlamaRisk @ChaosLabs @AaveLabs @bgdlabs.

OP requested to move this one to snapshot. If no further comments will be made I will do so and hope for more feedback at ARFC.

3 Likes

Yeah would be nice to get additional feedback from the community on this since it directly affects every AAVE-Token-Holder..

Even if you disagree with the proposal, your input is important because this effectively defines what “working for the DAO” actually means in Aave governance going forward.

3 Likes

I strongly support this proposal. Given the prolonged delay by the laboratory team in introducing relevant governance and revenue alignment solutions, the DAO cannot afford to passively wait any longer. To protect the interests of token holders and ensure the long-term health of the protocol, the DAO must proactively adopt a dual-track approach—establishing clear rules and oversight mechanisms—and cannot afford to sit idly by while governance loopholes persist.

5 Likes

We will definitely vote in favor of this initiative. Thanks for working on this and coming up with a well structured proposal.

Limiting AGIC to only people from active SP and Orbit delegates might be detrimental to the overall neutrality. External AGIC members who can investigate with no bias and only in the interest of the DAO / token holders should be very positive.

3 Likes

strong support of this proposal, lots of details needs to be refined and discussed at ARFC stage when we reach that.

7 Likes

This proposal is a step in the right direction from my perspective. Any service provider who derives additional income by leveraging Aave’s products should share such revenue with the DAO.

Specific details of this guideline must be ironed out at the TEMP-CHECK stage, but overall, I support this proposal.

6 Likes

The current proposal has been escalated to TEMP CHECK Snapshot under Skywards, after receiving the request from original authors @ApuMallku and @phenk53 to escalate it to TEMP CHECK Snapshot.

Vote will start tomorrow, we encourage everyone to participate.

3 Likes

I would say this proposal should be cancelled, giving that the Labs proposal has many comments in it regarding audit etc. Which essentially is this proposal.
Maybe it needs to be revisited in the near future though.

So just to avoid confusion we should cancel it for now.

5 Likes

Agreed. Let’s cancel this proposal and see what we get from the Labs’ one.

4 Likes

As per authors request, @ApuMallku @phenk53 , proposal has been cancelled to focus on other proposals on Forum that will cover the content of this proposal. Closing thread as well.

3 Likes