ChainChoice verdict

Aave GHO

CDP StablecoinsEntity Aave · 5 productsCountry not set

#4 overall across 7 scored cdp stablecoins. 13 points behind #1 Liquity V2 (BOLD). Scored 67 on the published 41–99 scale under methodology 2026.09.15, from the evidence read on file.

Find my best

Availability not verified. Tell the explorer where you are and this verdict tests the record’s published market tags against it. An untested record is shown as not verified — never as available. Supported markets on record: Global. Set your country in the explorer

Why this rank

Why Aave GHO ranks #4

Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (17.0 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.

4 published criteria · Σ weight 100

CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence

6+6.726.09#4/7Loading evidence…

4+3.204.08#3/7Loading evidence…

6+3.846.010#4/7Loading evidence…

5+3.204.07#2/7Loading evidence…

Hairline = pool best · tick = pool median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero

Margin−6behind Curve crvUSD, #3

RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 65–69 and stays #4

Evidence4 of 4 scoredno receipt file for this category

What would move the rank

Each line is the ranking run again with one of Aave GHO’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Curve crvUSD+373#4 → #3

What actually backs the coin 4 → 9 on its ladder · passes Curve crvUSD+575#4 → #3

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear 6 → 1 on its ladder · Sky (formerly MakerDAO) USDS passes it−556#4 → #5

Smallest climb: liquidation mechanics you actually bear 6 → 9 passes Curve crvUSD, #3.

Strengths

Where it leads

1 from the score data

Record says best for

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear — 6/10
Cost of the loan and who controls it — 6/10

Tradeoffs

Where it trails

4 from the score data

Record watch-outs

GHO is deliberately crippled as collateral: reading the Aave v3 reserve configuration on-chain returns ltv = 0bps and liquidationThreshold = 0bps for GHO itself, meaning you cannot post GHO to borrow against it anywhere in Aave. It is a one-way exit. Combined with the persistent sub-$1 price, you mint at $1 of debt, sell at $0.9986 (DefiLlama, 15 September 2026), and cannot recycle the proceeds as collateral within the protocol that issued it.
Corrected during verification: REFUTED — and refuted by the very register the research should have read. Calling getFacilitatorsList() + getFacilitator() on GHO 0x40D16FC0246aD3160Ccc09B8D0D3A2cD28aE6C2f returns seven facilitators whose minted levels sum to exactly 649,000,000: CoreGhoDirectMinter 135,000,000 (20.8%); 'GhoDirectFacilitator GSMs Mainnet' 310,000,000 (47.8%); 'GhoDirectFacilitator GSM Arbitrum' 50,000,000 (7.7%); 'GhoDirectFacilitator Plasma' 50,000,000; LidoGhoDirectMinter 45,000,000; HorizonGhoDirectMinter 59,000,000; FlashMinter 0. GSM = GHO Stability Module, Aave's peg-stability module (fixed-rate USDC/USDT swap facility). So 55.5% of GHO supply is minted by facilities LABELLED GSM ON-CHAIN, and only ~20.8% originates from the Aave v3 pool i.e. actual user borrows against posted collateral. Separately, the inference itself is a non-sequitur: totalSupply matching circulating supply says nothing whatsoever about issuance origin — Sky's totalSupply also matches its circulating figure while being 41.3% PSM. This is precisely the critique the research levels at Sky and crvUSD in its own uncomfortableFindings, but failed to run against GHO. The collateralIntegrity score of 8 (joint-highest in the set, above Sky's 2 and crvUSD's 6) is unsupportable on this evidence. Read again 15 September 2026: eight facilitators now sum to 699,000,000 (a 50,000,000 'GhoDirectFacilitator GSM Monad' bucket was added), and bucket labels overstate PSM origin: 291.4M of the 310M 'GSMs Mainnet' level sits idle in GhoReserve 0x54C58157DeF387A880AE62332D1445f03adbE7E9, whose getUsed() shows 18.6M drawn by the mainnet GSMs (about 2.7% of supply). User borrows across the Core, Lido and Horizon markets are 209.7M (30.0%), not ~20.8%, and 150M is bridged to the Plasma, GSM Arbitrum and GSM Monad facilities, whose composition on those chains was not read. collateralIntegrity is now 4.

Competitive position

Where Aave GHO leads and where it trails

Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.

Availability#1 / 714.0 of 20 · pool best

Published criteria#4 / 712.7 of 30 · best 17.8

Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · pool best

Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · pool best

Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · pool best

Where Aave GHO leads

What actually backs the coin#3 / 7
Observed peg behaviour under stress#2 / 7

Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.

Closest alternatives

The 3 nearest rows by score

Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.

Browse all 7

Curve crvUSD#3 of 7 · score 73 · 6.0 points ahead

Aave GHO leads on

Observed peg behaviour under stress5 vs 4

Curve crvUSD leads on

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear9 vs 6
Cost of the loan and who controls it7 vs 6

Largest single reason Curve crvUSD is ahead: published criteria (+6.5 display points).Scenario cost: Curve crvUSD has no verified pricing for this scenario.

Compare View verdict

Sky (formerly MakerDAO) USDS#5 of 7 · score 58 · 9.0 points behind

Aave GHO leads on

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear6 vs 4
What actually backs the coin4 vs 2
Cost of the loan and who controls it6 vs 3

Sky (formerly MakerDAO) USDS leads on

Observed peg behaviour under stress7 vs 5

Largest single reason Aave GHO is ahead: published criteria (+8.6 display points).Scenario cost: Sky (formerly MakerDAO) USDS has no verified pricing for this scenario.

Compare View verdict

Liquity V1 (LUSD)#2 of 7 · score 76 · 9.0 points ahead

Aave GHO leads on

Observed peg behaviour under stress5 vs 3

Liquity V1 (LUSD) leads on

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear7 vs 6
What actually backs the coin7 vs 4
Cost of the loan and who controls it10 vs 6

Largest single reason Liquity V1 (LUSD) is ahead: published criteria (+9.4 display points).Scenario cost: Liquity V1 (LUSD) has no verified pricing for this scenario.

Compare View verdict

Against the leader

Why Liquity V2 (BOLD) ranks above Aave GHO

80 vs 67 · gap 13.0

The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 13.0 to within rounding.

DimensionThisLiquity V2 (BOLD)Gap share

Availability · 23% weight14.014.00

Published criteria · 35% weight12.717.8−13.3

Friction · 12% weight2.72.70

Trust record · 9% weight3.23.20

Measured data · 21% weight8.38.30

Published criterionThisLiquity V2 (BOLD)Points

Liquidation mechanics you actually bear · w3568−2.24

What actually backs the coin · w2548−3.20

Cost of the loan and who controls it · w2069−1.92

Observed peg behaviour under stress · w2054+0.64

Net6780−13.0

Compare with #1 Liquity V2 (BOLD)View verdict

For your setup

Find out if Aave GHO fits you

The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Aave GHO lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.

3–5 questions
No account required
Ranking-blind: no commercial input
Personalised in under 60 seconds

Find my best cdp stablecoinNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.

Your scenario

Aave GHO is not priced for this scenario

Interest on what you borrow at the published rate. Variable rates move; excludes origination and liquidation penalties. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.

interest/yr · default scenario — set your own

Amount borrowed

Amount borrowed · your input$10k

Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 15 Sept 2026.

interest/yr

Pricing not verified

Under the default inputs · USD

Category medianNot priced0 of 7 rows priced

Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter

Cost is stated as interest/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.

7 of 7 rows in the pool have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.

Evidence

No evidence reading date recorded

One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.

4 of 4 cells scored

Score evidenceUnknownno observation on file

Public receiptsNo receipt filecategory publishes no receipt file

Evidence confidenceNot countedcoverage and corroboration, never freshness

Rank stabilityHoldsone point moves 2.2 display points

No structured observation is on file for this provider in this category; the strengths are the catalog’s published values.

7 listed rows in this category still await an evidence read and sit outside the scored pool.

No receipt file. This category publishes no receipt file, because no structured research payload exists for it yet. The ledger below shows the published strengths without their receipts; the scores on this page are unchanged.

CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt

Liquidation mechanics you actually bearstrength 6 · weight 35Report an errorno source page——UnknownNo receipt

What actually backs the coinstrength 4 · weight 25Report an errorno source page——UnknownNo receipt

Cost of the loan and who controls itstrength 6 · weight 20Report an errorno source page——UnknownNo receipt

Observed peg behaviour under stressstrength 5 · weight 20Report an errorno source page——UnknownNo receipt

* category-wide reading date; the cell carries none of its own.

Facts

What the record publishes

facts, not scores

Pricing: Read on-chain 2026-09-15 (Ethereum block 25984978, 19:33:35Z) from Aave v3 Pool 0x87870Bca3F3fD6335C3F4ce8392D69350B4fA4E2, getReserveData(GHO): currentVariableBorrowRate = 4.25%. The rate was 3.75% on 2026-08-04 and 4.00% at block 25983562; a multisig transaction at block 25984485 (2026-09-15T17:54:59Z) set baseVariableBorrowRate to 425 bps (RateDataUpdate on strategy 0x9ec6F08190DeA04A54f8Afc53Db96134e5E3FdFB). GHO borrowed in Aave's Lido market costs 3.84% and in the Horizon RWA market 3.00% at the same block. Aave docs on rate control: 'If the trailing 30-day average price of GHO stays outside a $0.995 - $1.005 price range, the GHO Stewards are able to adjust the Borrow Rate no more than 500bps per 2-day period, up to a maximum 25% APR.'Aave GHO — official pricing page ↗ · 15 Sept 2026
Prices published in: USDAave GHO — official pricing page ↗ · 15 Sept 2026
Licences held: Not published
Compliance level: partial
Regulatory note: Not published
Supported chains: Multi-chain
Markets served: global
Primary markets: Not published
Restricted markets: Not published
Operating limits: Not published
Availability note: Permissionless contracts; the aave.com interface excludes 'Restricted Jurisdictions' by Terms of Service (Belarus, Côte d’Ivoire, Crimea, Cuba, Donetsk, Iran, Iraq, Kherson, Liberia, Libya, Luhansk, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Zaporizhzhia), not the contracts themselves. Bucket: global.

Legal entity on file: Aave, placed in 5 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.

History

What the record carries

Changes to published ranks and scores are recorded in a ledger, but this page does not chart that record yet, so no score line is drawn: history begins with the current verified snapshot. Below it, the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.

7 methodology entries

currentCurrent verified snapshot · methodology 2026.09.15Score 67, #4 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
16 Sept 2026
2026.09.15
Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide
- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
14 Sept 2026
2026.09.12
A tie is decided by the published criteria first
- changed Tie key: criteriaAverage (unrounded weighted average of the published criterion scores) now comes directly after the weighted total and before the generic factors, in the engine, in formula.tieBreakChain and in the note that describes it.
- changed Published order: 130 positions move in 46 categories and no score changes. Five published #1s change: wallet (MetaMask → Rabby Wallet), stablecoin_issuance (Anchorage Digital → Brale), options_vaults (SOFA.org → Typus Finance), flash_loans (Dai Flash Mint → Morpho) and tokenised_commodities (Kinesis Gold → Matrixdock Gold).
- fixed Personalised weights are no longer rounded to one decimal. Rounding each dimension weight separately changed the ratio between dimensions the reader had not touched (a trust priority turned objectiveFit and quantitative 30:18 into 27.4:16.5), so a stated priority could reorder rows on criteria nobody re-weighted. Published weights are whole numbers, so no published order or score changes from this.
- changed Personalised orders: replaying the golden answer suite against the fixtures committed with 2026.09.11, 1,002 of 2,217 cases change their order and 181 their #1 (21 of them country briefs), mostly where answers leave rows tied on whole points and the criteria now decide; 45 change their confidence label. The tie key changes no score; the unrounded weights can move a reader’s weighted total, and with it their Fit for you number, by a small amount.
10 Sept 2026
2026.09.5
The published review cadence is now one the work actually keeps · platform-wide
- changed reviewCadenceDays 30 → 45 across all 119 category specs, and the two prose sites that quoted "the 30-day review cadence" in tokenised_bonds.
- changed check-review-cadence-is-kept ceiling 7 → 3, negative-tested: restoring a single 30-day promise over 49-day evidence takes it to 4 and fails the build.
- fixed Measured by regenerating rankings.json: no category changed order and no score moved, and the golden suite confirms it independently — across all 119 fixtures and 2,217 cases the only fields that differ are methodologyVersion and contentHash. A cadence is a claim about freshness, not an input to any ranking.

Full methodology changelog

Methodology

How this verdict was produced

Methodology version: 2026.09.15 · last platform-wide change 16 Sept 2026
Data snapshot: No reading date recorded
Last recalculated: At page build from the published inputs — the same run every visitor sees.
Published run: runWizardEngine(cdp_stablecoins, defaults) · no visitor answers
Receipt id: cdp_stablecoins:aave_gho:2026.09.15:ef23937abbc6

What changed in this methodology version?

2026.09.15 · Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources

Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.

How cdp stablecoins are weighted Changelog

Rankings, scores and Fit read no affiliate, payout, conversion or sponsorship data. This page's commercial note appears once, beside the outbound action, and is written by no component that scores.