Aave DAO Questions Aave Labs Over Revenue From CoW Swap Integration

TLDR

• Aave Labs now collects $200K weekly from swap fees after CoW Swap replaced ParaSwap.

• The DAO lost 10% of its expected annual revenue due to the fee redirection.

• Aave Labs maintains the front-end and claims it never promised fee sharing.

• Contributors argue Aave’s brand and protocol were built using DAO-funded efforts.

A dispute over front-end ownership and fee distribution has emerged between Aave DAO and Aave Labs. The controversy arose after Aave community members discovered that swap fees from the CoW Swap integration are now routed to Aave Labs instead of the DAO treasury.

The change affects around $10 million annually — about 10% of Aave DAO’s projected revenue — and has sparked renewed debate on governance, branding, and control in decentralized protocols.

Swap Fee Change Raises Governance Concerns

On December 11, 2025, pseudonymous Aave DAO delegate EzR3aL published an open letter on the governance forum. The post questioned where swap-generated revenue was being directed. Using on-chain data, EzR3aL traced the destination to a private wallet linked to Aave Labs.

The fee redirection came after Aave replaced ParaSwap with CoW Swap in mid-2025. Under the old system, any surplus revenue from swaps was sent to the DAO treasury without explicit user fees. The new system charges users 15–25 basis points per transaction and sends this income to Aave Labs.

Weekly revenue from this change is estimated at over $200,000. Prior ParaSwap-based transfers were around 46 ETH per week, equivalent to $150,000 at current prices.

Aave Labs Responds to Criticism

Stani Kulechov, Aave Labs founder and CEO, addressed the issue on social media and governance forums. He said that the previous revenue was a surplus voluntarily donated to the DAO, not guaranteed revenue.

“It was never a fee switch, it’s been a surplus that we donated to the DAO,” said Kulechov. He also stated that Aave Labs is responsible for all costs related to the Aave.com front-end, including maintenance, development, and security.

Kulechov added that it is reasonable for Aave Labs to monetize its own products, especially when those features do not directly use the protocol. He acknowledged that the communication could have been better but defended the technical decision to use CoW Swap, citing better execution prices and protection against MEV.

DAO Members Claim Misuse of Brand and Resources

Marc Zeller of the Aave Chan Initiative expressed concern over what he called “stealth privatization.” He said the decision allowed Aave Labs to profit from tools and branding developed using DAO resources.

“Aave Labs, in the pursuit of their own monetization, redirected Aave user volume towards competition. This is unacceptable,” Zeller said. He also questioned if future features like Aave Vaults or Horizon would be similarly separated from the DAO.

Zeller highlighted that DAO-funded teams have contributed to the Aave front-end. He argued that such collaborations were done under the assumption that all revenue would benefit the DAO.

Future of DAO-Labs Relationship Under Scrutiny

Aave operates under a hybrid structure where governance is managed by a decentralized DAO, while product development is largely led by Aave Labs. The separation was designed to reduce legal risks but is now causing disagreements.

Longtime contributor Ernesto Boado noted that responsibilities for the interface were never clearly defined. He said Aave Labs began maintaining the front-end in 2022 without formal DAO governance or budget approvals.

Gabriel Shapiro, a legal expert, suggested the DAO could resolve these tensions by either formalizing itself as a legal entity or implementing structured rules for external contributors. Some community members also suggested introducing a framework like BORG to align governance and product development.

The post Aave DAO Questions Aave Labs Over Revenue From CoW Swap Integration appeared first on CoinCentral.