Aave vs Fluid
How Aave vs Fluid compare on our ratings, lending protocol specs, funding, pros and cons.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Our score | 4.0/5 | 3.9/5 |
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Security & track record | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Rates | 3.5 | 4.5 |
| Market depth | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| Ease of use | 3.5 | 4.0 |
| Decentralization | 4.5 | 3.5 |
| Specs | ||
| KYC required | No | No |
| Lending model | Pooled | Pooled |
| Chains | Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Avalanche, BNB Chain, Other | Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Other |
| Main collateral assets | USDC, USDT, WETH, wBTC, LINK, wstETH, cbBTC, GHO, AAVE, ETH-correlated assets | ETH, USDC, GHO, BTC, USDGO |
| Flash loans | Yes | Not disclosed |
| Permissionless markets | No | Not disclosed |
| Audited | Yes | Yes |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes |
| Governance token | AAVE | FLUID |
| Isolated markets | Yes | Not disclosed |
| Real-world-asset collateral | Yes | Yes |
| Own stablecoin | Yes | Not disclosed |
| Rates | Variable | Variable |
| Company | ||
| Founded | 2017 | 2018 |
| Headquarters | Finland | — |
| Investors | Blockchain Capital, Framework Ventures, Standard Crypto | Standard Crypto, Alliance, Andre Cronje, LongHash Ventures +4 |
| Strengths and weaknesses | ||
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Best for | Multi-chain DeFi borrowers, Collateralised crypto lending, Stablecoin liquidity strategies | Onchain collateralized borrowing, Dual-yield liquidity providers, Non-KYC multichain lending |
Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

