According to @stonecoldpat0, traders are asking why Aave has dominated on-chain lending; as of October 2024, Aave’s TVL was over $10B versus roughly $2B for Compound, highlighting a persistent market share gap, source: DeFiLlama. A key driver is Aave v3’s E-Mode, which raises LTVs for highly correlated assets like stETH/ETH to boost capital efficiency and borrowing activity, source: Aave v3 documentation (E-Mode). Aave’s Isolation Mode enables listing of more collateral while capping risk per asset, attracting broader integrations and deposits without compromising systemic safety, source: Aave v3 documentation (Isolation Mode). Multi-chain expansion across major L2s and the Portal feature for cross-chain liquidity have widened Aave’s liquidity funnel relative to Compound, source: Aave v3 documentation and Aave Portal documentation. Additional fee lines from flash loans and the GHO stablecoin strengthen Aave DAO revenues and liquidity stickiness, supporting utilization and market depth, source: Aave Flash Loans documentation and Aave GHO documentation. By contrast, Compound v3 concentrates each market on a single borrow asset (commonly USDC) with slimmer collateral menus, reducing strategy surface area and cross-asset leverage relative to Aave, which has limited TVL expansion despite efficiency gains, source: Compound v3 documentation. For trading, track Aave fee flows, Safety Module staking, and GHO circulation as activity proxies, and watch Compound’s USDC utilization and reserves as gauges for parameter-driven dynamics affecting COMP governance outcomes, source: Aave Safety Module documentation, Aave GHO documentation, and Compound Protocol documentation.