Morpho (MORPHO)

➥ 2 winners in DeFi and RWA within the last 24 hours - @Morpho generated $2.71M in lending fees - @maplefinance at $1.14M in fees + $130K in rev This put them ahead of Aave at about $965K Only behind Tether + Circle overall but these 2 are in a very different category That matters because @aave is still far larger: - $12.95B TVL + $10.32B active loans - versus Morpho with $7.07B TVL + $3.77B active loans - versus Maple’s $2.19B TVL + $1.90B active loans Maple is smaller, but today it's converting credit demand into fees more efficiently I would not frame this as rev capture yet @DefiLlama shows Morpho revenue at 0, so the signal is borrower demand, not protocol take-rate Basically lending activity is moving toward Morpho in a very real way btw, DeFi x RWA are still among the best performing categories this cycle

$MORPHO, $AAVE, $ARB, and $UNI are among the best performing tokens today. Meanwhile ANSEM is down 37%. A return to fundamentals is happening. https://t.co/00KwIoAgNR

🚨LATEST: $MORPHO from @Morpho is now live on @solana via @sunrise. The integration expands access to the Morpho ecosystem for Solana users, bringing one of DeFi’s largest lending protocols closer to the network’s growing onchain economy. https://t.co/bWbPz5QM4B

back to this as i used to write these thesis a while ago it’s a good way to map out and communicate my thoughts clearly i will start with my first thesis $MORPHO my view is that defi lending: - moves from pooled money markets into modular credit infrastructure, as institutions enter and it becomes too big to fail - creation of specialized credit markets, risks contained, composability increases - upside is its growing loan base and fee activity eventually accrue into $MORPHO token value overview - morpho is modular lending infrastructure, not just another money market. - aave is closer to a pooled lending protocol. - morpho is closer to a credit engine where different markets can be created with custom collateral, loan assets, LLTVs, oracles, and risk curators. - my bet is that defi lending moves from generalized pools into specialized credit markets: stablecoin lending, ETH-backed borrowing, BTC collateral, RWA collateral, institutional vaults, and fixed-rate lending. key numbers - market cap: ~$1.23b - fdv: ~$1.90b - active loans: ~$3.61b - market cap / active loans: ~0.34x - 30d fees: ~$21.2m - annualized fees: ~$215.7m - gross protocol revenue: q2 2026: $51.0m q1 2026: $44.7m q4 2025: $59.3m thesis - the main thesis is that morpho can become the backend credit layer for onchain finance. - lending is unlikely to stay as one generic pool. - different collateral types need different risk parameters. - morpho’s isolated market design fits this better than a single shared-risk model - morpho’s edge is distribution through infrastructure. wallets, exchanges, fintech apps, vault curators, and RWA platforms can build lending products on top of morpho without building the full credit stack themselves. - this gives morpho a broader market than a normal lending frontend. it can grow even if users do not directly interact with the morpho app. - the industry setup supports this. stablecoins, tokenized treasuries, BTC-backed borrowing, and institutional onchain credit all need lending infrastructure. - @Morpho is positioned to be one of the neutral layers underneath that. bull case - active loans continue growing from ~$3.6b toward $10b+, and @RobinhoodApp integration should fuel that growth - morpho v2 expands the market from variable-rate defi lending into fixed-term credit. - more vault curators and institutional products use morpho as backend infrastructure. - RWA collateral and tokenized treasuries become more useful inside morpho markets. - @base and other chains drive more embedded lending distribution. - governance activates fees or creates a clearer economic link between protocol usage and MORPHO. bear case - protocol growth does not translate into token value. - this is the biggest issue. morpho can be useful while $MORPHO still underperforms. - $AAVE, $SPK, $FLUID, $EUL and other lending protocols copy modular vault/market designs. - curator risk increases as more third-party vaults launch. - lending margins compress as credit markets become more competitive. - fixed-rate lending adoption may be slower than expected. - RWA/institutional adoption may move to permissioned systems instead of open defi protocols. - risk-off markets reduce borrowing demand and increase collateral/liquidation risk.

Week after week, Morpho keeps climbing the DeFi rankings… and Midnight hasn't even launched yet There’s only one position that’s good enough for the future open credit network of the world 🫣 https://t.co/D5C3MGuL2i

Morpho is becoming the backend lending engine that Robinhood and Coinbase build their yield products on. Distribution integrations: > @RobinhoodCrypto Earn launched July 1 2026 on Robinhood Chain with vaults curated by Steakhouse Financial, $17 million TVL at 7.1% APY in its first week. > @coinbase routes USDC deposits through Steakhouse-curated Morpho vaults for its onchain lending product on Base. Capital and performance: > Total deposits scaled from $9.1B to $10.6B before a recent dip, now recovering. > @base deposits sit at ~$4.4B. > Weekly borrow interest grew from $2.1M in February to $4.7M in the last week of June. > Protocol fees rose from $11.34M in March to $21.2M in June. > Steakhouse Financial's curated AUM grew from $365M to $1.0B between april and now across 42 vaults on @Morpho V2. > Gauntlet curates ~$244M across 23 V2 vaults and $655M on V1. > Key vaults including Steakhouse and Midas/Fasanara recorded zero material bad debt through Q1 2026 stress periods and high-liquidation events. RWA momentum: > syrupUSDC deposits grew from $145.1M to $269.1M, and loans against it from $62.9M to $116.8M, since April 22nd > @OndoFinance's tokenized equities SPYon and QQQon accepted as collateral, with securities lending in progress. > Margin loans live on deSPXA. > Peso-denominated vault on Base, curated by Gauntlet via Bitso and Juno's MXNB. The honest tensions: > A $300M funding proposal passed with only 22 voters, 8 holding more than $5 of economic stake. > Aave still holds deeper total liquidity, and the curator model depends on curators maintaining risk discipline as AUM scales. > The confidential yield product is early-stage, and Robinhood deposit growth still leans heavily on incentives rather than organic demand The core take: > Steakhouse's curated AUM nearly tripled since April. Borrow interest almost doubled over the same window. > Robinhood and Coinbase are routing real user flow through the same rails. > The governance concerns are real. > The Aave gap is real but the direction of every operational metric is the same. > TVL is converting into borrow demand. That is how lending protocols prove themselves.

Robinhood Chain is tackling over $240 million in TVL. Most contributors name @Morpho and @ethena. The lending market always finds the fastest path to fill up the liquidity. At the time of writing, assets on @RobinhoodCrypto remain mostly stablecoins - not RWAs. Does this fact conflict with the first statement of Robinhood that the network is RWA-focused? Since Robinhood is still at an early stage, there should be a transition from stable to RWA port soon.

Study teams that already have it integrated @Velvet_Capital

ROBINHOOD CHAIN METRICS SURGE DAYS AFTER MAINNET LAUNCH @RobinhoodApp chain active addresses, txs, DEX vol, TVL are all soaring. Most are pointing to memes and @Pumpfun , but @Morpho and @ethena are doing some heavy lifting too. Read more here: https://t.co/neknY6xtC3 https://t.co/2C6aTVAeQ5