Aave founder Stani Kulechov is facing a wave of criticism after acquiring a significant amount of AAVE tokens shortly before a crucial governance vote. A timing which, according to part of the community, calls into question the fairness of the decision-making process within the DAO. The controversy has reignited concerns about the concentration of voting power and the ability of the governance system to reflect the interests of the entire community, rather than those of the largest holders.
In brief
- A $10 million purchase of AAVE ahead of a DAO vote raised concerns about voting influence and the ability of governance to represent the collective interest.
- Critics say token-based governance allows large holders to quickly capture power, leaving little protection for minority voters.
- The controversy intensified when a proposal on branded assets was put to a Snapshot vote despite still ongoing debate and objections from key contributors.
- Snapshot data shows that three portfolios concentrate more than 58% of voting power, reigniting calls for stricter supervision of Aave's governance.
Founder’s Token Activity Raises New Concerns Over Aave DAO Equity
The backlash came after Kulechov purchased approximately $10 million worth of AAVE tokens, shortly before a major DAO proposal was put to a vote. This timing has attracted attention, as Aave's governance power is directly proportional to token ownership, allowing large buyers to immediately exert significant influence over outcomes.
In a post on According to him, this episode highlights the structural weaknesses of governance systems based on tokens, particularly in the absence of clear limits on the concentration of influence.
Crypto commentator Sisyphus also raised additional questions, questioning the economic coherence of this decision. According to his analysis, Kulechov would have sold several million dollars worth of AAVE between 2021 and 2025, making this recent buyout difficult to justify. These statements have fueled debate about the founder's real influence and his long-term alignment with the interests of the community.
The controversy has also broadened to a separate proposal relating to control of the assets of the Aave brand. This sought to determine whether AAVE holders should regain ownership of domains, social media accounts and intellectual property through a legal structure under the control of the DAO.
Snapshot data shows high concentration of voting power
Despite extensive discussion, organizers moved the proposal forward to a Snapshot vote, causing an outcry among several stakeholders. Ernesto Boado, former CTO of Aave Labs and author of the proposal, later said the vote was initiated without his consent, calling the process a breakdown in community trust.
Critics point to several factors causing the tensions:
- Mass purchases of tokens can directly influence voting results.
- The tokens held by the founder risk disproportionate influence on key decisions.
- Minority holders have limited protections against coordinated voting.
- Governance delays can limit the quality of open debate.
- Lacks of transparency risk eroding trust in DAO mechanisms.
Samuel McCulloch of USD.ai also reacted to the situation. He described the vote as fundamentally lopsided due to the concentration of governance power. According to Snapshot data, a small number of wallets control a significant share of the total vote.
The top three voters alone represent more than 58% of the voting power. The largest holds 27.06%, or approximately 333,000 AAVE, while the second largest portfolio controls 16.369%or nearly 228,000 tokens.
While debates over governance dominated the news, market indicators continued to signal persistent weakness. The AAVE token was trading at $147.90 at press time, with a 24-hour volume of $404.27 million and a market cap of $2.26 billion. The price was down 1.69% on the day and remained below its 200-day simple moving average.
Recent performance also remains irregular: only 14 of the last 30 days have closed in the green, and the token is still trading nearly 78% below its all-time high. Market sentiment remains negative, with the Fear and Greed Index sitting at 24, a level associated with extreme fear.
Maximize your Tremplin.io experience with our 'Read to Earn' program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
