Thanks for putting this forward and for the effort to outline a vision. However, I will be voting against if any such proposal is put forward. Aave V4 is the future of the protocol, and the DAO must stay aligned on this path for both strategic and practical reasons.
1. Aave V4 is the evolution of the protocol
Aave V4 is not a side branch; it is the natural continuation of the path from V1 to V2 to V3 to V4. It carries forward the same core functions as V3 but with less overhead, improved efficiency, and much greater modularity. The DAO has already recognized this by funding its development and confirming it as the protocol’s future. Splitting focus now risks fragmenting liquidity and confusing the ecosystem about Aave’s direction.
2. Migration and community alignment should follow precedent
With V1 and V2, the community aligned behind orderly migrations. V4 should be no different. If we fail to align, the result will be liquidity fragmentation, reduced DAO revenue, and negative consequences for both business development and users. The DAO’s BD arm is actively building relationships and attracting liquidity; introducing competition between V3 and V4 undermines those efforts.
3. Network effects and market positioning
Aave’s competitive advantage is built on deep liquidity and strong network effects. Fragmenting liquidity between V3 and V4 weakens this foundation and hands an advantage to competitors. From a BD and institutional perspective, a split roadmap signals indecision and makes onboarding harder. Partners want stability and clarity, not parallel versions competing for attention.
4. Upgradability at scale is a major risk
At Aave’s current scale, upgrading protocol logic directly is dangerous. Even minor errors can threaten billions in liquidity. On top of that, competitors already point to upgradability as a risk in BD conversations. Expanding V3 further through upgrades only reinforces that narrative. I will only support upgrades for essential bug patches; anything else is too dangerous.
5. DAO accountability and treasury efficiency
The DAO has already voted for V4 and funded its development. Continuing to invest in V3 beyond maintenance undermines governance credibility and wastes treasury resources. Every dollar spent on V3 is one not spent accelerating V4 adoption, integrations, and ecosystem growth. The DAO must respect its prior decisions and maximize the value of its investments.
6. V3 is not deprecated overnight
This does not mean V3 is deprecated immediately. It will remain active until liquidity migrates to V4 hubs. But strategically, the DAO must commit to building forward into V4, not sideways into V3. V3 should be safely maintained for users, while development energy goes to V4.
7. Continuing development of V3 is a distraction
If BGD introduces proposals to continue developing V3 in a way that competes with V4, I will vote against it. The DAO already paid for V4, and supporting V3 in parallel undermines that investment. Resources are better spent supporting builders and other SPs expanding V4’s modular ecosystem, which is explicitly designed to enable innovation from multiple providers.
8. Security and operational complexity
Maintaining multiple active versions increases the security surface, auditing needs, and operational complexity. Oracles, risk parameters, and liquidation systems all become harder to manage when liquidity is split. A unified focus on V4 reduces these risks and keeps Aave more resilient.
9. User and brand confidence
Users and partners expect clarity. A split roadmap creates confusion over which version is the future, undermining trust and weakening Aave’s brand as DeFi’s innovation leader. Aave has always been strongest when it moves forward decisively as one community, and that must continue with V4.
10. Time for unity around V4
Aave’s success has always come from united, orderly evolution. V4 is the next step in that journey. Its modular design will create significant opportunities for SPs, integrations, and innovation, while providing a safer and more efficient foundation. Dividing resources between V3 and V4 will only slow progress and weaken the DAO’s position.
For these reasons, I will vote against if any such proposal is put forward. The DAO has already chosen V4 as the protocol’s future, and now is the time to align, consolidate, and build together.