# Lending crypto coins — market cap, protocol fees and revenue

> Lending vs Bitcoin — Relative Strength & Breadth

Bottom line: Aave ranks first for research priority in Lending crypto at 37.6/100, and its native activity evidence clears the coverage gate. The theme's 13-week excess versus Bitcoin is +31.3% on 43% breadth, which is what decides whether that lead is isolated or broad. 1 of the 14 assets here carries enough native evidence to move past a tape-led label.

## Agent research brief

- What matters now: Lending is +31.3% versus Bitcoin over 13 weeks. 43% breadth shows mixed participation rather than a broad sector move.
- Best research lead: Aave ranks first at 37.6/100 with 87% total evidence and 74% native evidence.
- The contradiction: 1/14 assets clear the native-evidence gate; the rest should not be treated as fundamentally confirmed.
- What to do with it: Keep this as a research queue, not an entry list. The market gate reopens only when Bitcoin trend and sector breadth improve.

Data: price 2026-07-24; protocol 2026-07-24; chain users/transactions unavailable; chain TVL unavailable; market-cap snapshot 2026-07-04.

## 4-Factor Crypto Evidence Score

A within-theme research-priority score for the 14 assets in Lending, out of 100. The four displayed point contributions add exactly to the total, and the market regime changes the action label, never the arithmetic. Aave is highest at 37.6/100 on 87% evidence. It ranks research attention, not portfolio action.

1. Aave (AAVE): 37.6/100 — Lagging · market gate closed; 18.3 + 4.5 + 4.3 + 10.5 = 37.6; evidence 87%; native evidence 74%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
2. COINDEPO (COINDEPO): 65.8/100 — Illiquid · research only; 33.2 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.6 = 65.8; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
3. Olympus (OHM): 57/100 — Illiquid · research only; 20.2 + 15.0 + 16.5 + 5.3 = 57.0; evidence 63%; native evidence 26%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
4. Venus (XVS): 56.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 21.7 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 9.9 = 56.6; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
5. FOLKS (FOLKS): 53.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 23.8 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 4.8 = 53.6; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
6. Cap (CAP): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
7. Moonwell (WELL): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
8. Quantix Finance (QFI): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
9. Morpho (MORPHO): 49.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.1 = 49.6; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
10. Zest Protocol (ZEST): 49.2/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 14.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 9.6 = 49.2; evidence 23%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
11. Compound (COMP): 47.5/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.0 = 47.5; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
12. Spark (SPK): 46.9/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 4.4 = 46.9; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
13. Kamino (KMNO): 42.7/100 — Illiquid · research only; 9.2 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 8.5 = 42.7; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
14. Euler (EUL): 37.2/100 — Illiquid · research only; 7.1 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.1 = 37.2; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

## Which projects are generating the most network fees?

What the numbers say: Olympus leads Lending crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $2.8M, 80% ahead of Aave. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

- Olympus (OHM): $2.8M
- Aave (AAVE): $1.5M

## Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

What the numbers say: Olympus leads Lending crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $2.8M, 111% ahead of Aave. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

- Olympus (OHM): $2.8M
- Aave (AAVE): $1.3M

## Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

What the numbers say: Aave leads Lending crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $103.9M. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

- Aave (AAVE): $103.9M
- Olympus (OHM): $0

## Every asset

- Aave (AAVE) — 90d -1.0%; RS-BTC +16%; score 37.6; activity protocol
- COINDEPO (COINDEPO) — 90d +33%; RS-BTC +50%; score 65.8; activity tape only
- Olympus (OHM) — 90d -9.9%; RS-BTC +7.5%; score 57; activity protocol
- Venus (XVS) — 90d +13%; RS-BTC +30%; score 56.6; activity tape only
- FOLKS (FOLKS) — 90d +36%; RS-BTC +54%; score 53.6; activity tape only
- Cap (CAP) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity tape only
- Moonwell (WELL) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity tape only
- Quantix Finance (QFI) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity tape only
- Morpho (MORPHO) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 49.6; activity tape only
- Zest Protocol (ZEST) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 49.2; activity tape only
- Compound (COMP) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 47.5; activity tape only
- Spark (SPK) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 46.9; activity tape only
- Kamino (KMNO) — 90d -9.5%; RS-BTC +7.9%; score 42.7; activity tape only
- Euler (EUL) — 90d -25%; RS-BTC -7.8%; score 37.2; activity tape only

## Limitations

- Crypto network activity is not company earnings. Protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders.
- Market-cap values are a dated universe snapshot, not point-in-time historical supply data.
- Current category labels are applied to historical prices; this creates survivorship and taxonomy hindsight.
- Funding rates, open interest, liquidations, exchange flows, unlock schedules, historical circulating supply and developer activity are not held and are not inferred.
- Equal weighting is used for sector history because true historical market-cap weights are unavailable.

## FAQs

### What is Lending crypto?

Lending crypto refers to cryptocurrency projects grouped by what they actually do rather than by market fashion. This page tracks 14 such coins by market cap, price and Bitcoin-relative strength, with protocol fees and revenue where a project publishes them. Readings are as of 2026-07-24.

### What is the total market cap of Lending crypto coins?

The Lending coins on this page are tracked against a universe of 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04, separately from the price series, and each coin's own figure is in the table on this page.

### Are Lending crypto coins outperforming Bitcoin?

Lending has returned -7.4% versus Bitcoin over 52 weeks and +31.3% over 13 weeks on an equal-weight current-member index. 3/7 covered assets are above their 200-day averages as of 2026-07-24.

### Which Lending asset has the strongest research score?

Aave ranks first at 37.6/100: 18.3 + 4.5 + 4.3 + 10.5 = 37.6. It is labelled “Lagging · market gate closed” with 87% overall evidence and 74% native-economics evidence.

### How is the Lending 4-factor score calculated?

The exact sum is Market leadership /35 + Network and economic traction /30 + Value capture /20 + Liquidity and downside risk /15. Missing data pulls only the affected factor toward neutral and lowers evidence; it is never silently reweighted.

### Why can a Lending asset be labelled tape-led?

Tape-led means price and relative-strength evidence exists but less than half of the native traction and value-capture evidence is available. Such assets remain visible but rank below fully evidenced assets.

### Does protocol revenue accrue to the token?

Not necessarily. Protocol fees and revenue measure network economics; token-holder value depends on the protocol’s burn, buyback, staking, distribution and governance rules. This page never assumes accrual merely because revenue exists.

### Does crypto have a P/E or PEG ratio?

No comparable company-style P/E or PEG is used. Where coverage permits, the page shows network fee yield and protocol-revenue yield against a dated market-cap snapshot, with an explicit token-accrual caveat.

### How much history is shown for Lending?

The page shows five years of weekly price and relative-strength history and 20 complete calendar quarters of on-chain activity where available. Missing periods remain gaps.

### Why do the crypto data dates differ?

Prices and technical metrics run through 2026-07-24; protocol activity through 2026-07-24; chain users and transactions through the latest available chain date; chain TVL through the latest available chain-TVL date; market capitalisation is a separate snapshot dated 2026-07-04.

### Are stablecoins and wrapped tokens included in Lending?

No. Pegged, wrapped, liquid-staking receipt and tokenized-asset instruments are excluded because they do not have independent price discovery.

### Can one token appear in multiple raw crypto categories?

Yes, but public MLA pages assign each asset to exactly one functional theme using a specific-to-general first-match taxonomy. Lending therefore has one canonical membership list.

### What would invalidate the current Lending theme read?

The read weakens if the sector’s 13-week relative return versus Bitcoin falls below zero, fewer than one-third of covered assets remain above the 200-day average, and the leading asset’s native activity also contracts.

### Does this page include funding rates, open interest or token unlocks?

No. Those datasets are not held in the current research store, so the page names them as unavailable rather than inferring them from price.

### Which projects are generating the most network fees?

Olympus leads Lending crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $2.8M, 80% ahead of Aave. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

### Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

Olympus leads Lending crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $2.8M, 111% ahead of Aave. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

### Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

Aave leads Lending crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $103.9M. 0 of 1 asset with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 2 of the 14 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

### Which Lending project has the largest fee base?

Olympus leads covered trailing-12-month fees at $2.8M. Coverage is 2/14; this is network activity, not automatically token-holder income.

### Which are the biggest Lending crypto coins by market cap?

Aave is the largest Lending crypto coin by market capitalisation at $1.3B, ahead of Morpho at $1.3B and Olympus at $254.4M. The 14 Lending coins on this page carry $3.4B between them, with a market-cap figure on file for 14 of them. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04.