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

Aave has experienced a massive exodus of $6.6 billion in deposits, but this was not a direct result of a 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 saw a 16% decline to $92, while daily fees surged to $1.99 million as liquidations swept through the weekend. Depositors are abandoning Aave due to a vulnerability the platform did not 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 borrow to be around $196 million, with total positions across Aave, Compound, and Euler reaching $236 million. Aave is the largest lending protocol in DeFi, allowing 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. This rsETH is used by users for trading and, critically, as collateral on Aave to borrow against. On Saturday, attackers tricked Kelp's cross-chain bridge into releasing 116,500 rsETH, worth approximately $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 exploring paths to offset the deficit. The damage is concentrated due to Aave's loan book spanning 22 chains, with Ethereum holding $14.24 billion of the $17.82 billion in outstanding borrows. WETH accounts for 39.49% of all loans on the protocol, making the attack particularly impactful. Stani Kulechov, Aave's founder, emphasized that the exploit was external and the protocol's contracts were not compromised. However, Aave accepted a liquid restaking token as collateral, and the token's backing vanished on a bridge Aave does not control, leaving depositors vulnerable to losses. Liquid restaking tokens were whitelisted across major lending protocols due to their yield and representation of Ethereum's locked value. Risk models priced them as if they would maintain their peg under normal conditions but did not account for a scenario where the collateral becomes worthless due to a bridge exploit on an unrelated chain. The token price now reflects concerns about whether the Umbrella reserve is sufficient to cover the resulting hole and whether stkAAVE holders backing that reserve will absorb the loss.