Aave Faces $6 Billion Deposit Exodus After Kelp Hack Exposes DeFi Lender's Structural Vulnerability

Aave has witnessed a massive exodus of $6.6 billion in deposits, but it's not due to a direct hack on the platform. The total value locked in the protocol plummeted from $26.4 billion on April 18 to approximately $20 billion by Sunday morning, according to DefiLlama. The AAVE token price dropped 16% to $92, while daily fees surged to $1.99 million as liquidations swept through the weekend. Depositors are fleeing because Aave is shouldering a liability it didn't create. When attackers drained 116,500 rsETH from Kelp's bridge on Saturday, they used the stolen tokens as collateral on Aave V3 to borrow wrapped ether. On-chain trackers estimate the Aave-specific borrowing at around $196 million, with total positions across Aave, Compound, and Euler reaching approximately $236 million. Aave, the largest lending protocol in DeFi, allows users to deposit cryptocurrency to earn yield, while others borrow against collateral. Kelp, a liquid restaking protocol, takes already-staked ether on Ethereum and routes it through a separate yield-generating system called EigenLayer, issuing a receipt token, rsETH, in exchange. That rsETH is what users trade and, crucially, what some users posted as collateral on Aave to borrow against. On Saturday, attackers tricked Kelp's cross-chain bridge into releasing 116,500 rsETH, worth around $292 million, to a controlled address. They then deposited the stolen rsETH onto Aave V3 as collateral and borrowed wrapped ether against it. Aave initially stated that the Umbrella reserve would cover any deficit but later softened its stance to 'explore paths to offset the deficit.' The concentration of loans on Ethereum explains why the damage is significant. Aave's loan book spans 22 chains, but Ethereum alone holds $14.24 billion of the $17.82 billion in outstanding borrows, with WETH accounting for 39.49% of all loans on the protocol. The attack targeted the exact collateral-to-WETH pair that dominates Aave's book. Stani Kulechov, Aave's founder, stated that the exploit was external and the protocol's contracts were not compromised. However, Aave accepted a liquid restaking token as collateral, and that token's backing vanished on a bridge Aave does not control. Depositors are likely to lose either way. Liquid restaking tokens were whitelisted across major lending protocols because they carried yield and represented a growing share of Ethereum's locked value. Risk models priced them as if they would hold peg under normal conditions, but none accounted for a scenario where the collateral goes to zero due to a bridge exploit on a chain Aave does not control. The token price is now trying to determine whether Umbrella is large enough to cover the hole and whether stkAAVE holders who back that reserve will absorb the loss.