MakerDAO in 2025: DeFi’s Backbone or a Governance Time Bomb?
MKR’s sitting at $2,450 today, giving MakerDAO a market cap of $2.3 billion (CoinGecko, June 5, 2025). Not bad—but not thrilling, either. Down 61% from its $6,292 high in 2021. Meanwhile, DAI—the stablecoin it governs—holds steady at a $5.4 billion circulating supply (DefiLlama), still one of the most trusted names in the space. That stability’s earned Maker some serious cred through chaos: crashes, hacks, regulatory pressure. DAI never flinched.
But look under the hood, and it gets more complicated. Trading volume has slowed—$90 million a day now, far from its DeFi Summer glory. MKR isn’t moving like it used to. And while the protocol’s pivot to real-world assets (RWAs) has boosted revenue, it’s also drawn fire from DeFi purists who see it as a step toward centralization.
The question isn’t whether DAI works. It does. The real question: is MKR still worth its premium?
Maker’s Core Still Holds
Let’s be clear: DAI is a beast.
It’s overcollateralized. Transparent. Not pegged to some shadowy offshore treasury. When the market tanked after the FTX collapse, DAI slipped 0.2% from its $1 peg—then snapped back. That’s rare.
MKR holders decide what backs it—ETH, stETH, USDC, even U.S. Treasuries now. They vote on risk parameters, stability fees, and everything in between. It’s real governance. Not just vibes.
And it works. TVL across protocols like Aave and Compound sits north of $5.4 billion, with DAI deeply embedded in lending, trading, and yield strategies. According to Dune Analytics (2025), DAI is DeFi’s second most-used stablecoin—behind only USDC.
That RWA shift? Controversial, but effective. Maker now holds $1.2 billion in Treasuries. Annual yield? Around 5%. That’s $120 million in protocol revenue, per Messari. Not theoretical yield—actual dollars.
But the Tradeoffs Are Getting Louder
Not everyone’s sold on the new direction.
Roughly 30% of DAI’s collateral now comes from RWAs. That means trusting TradFi custodians—Coinbase Custody, in many cases—to hold and manage assets. It’s safe-ish. But it’s also… centralized-ish.
And governance? It’s getting top-heavy. MKR’s total supply sits at 977,631. Yes, 20% has been burned since 2021. But proposals that pass often do so with just a few large wallets voting. “It’s a whale game,” said one ETHGlobal attendee bluntly. Hard to argue.
The market sees it too. MKR’s price hasn’t moved much—even though DeFi TVL is up 15% in Q1 2025. Traders are bullish on DAI. But MKR? Not so much.
Meanwhile, competition is catching up. Aave’s GHO stablecoin is gaining ground. It’s cheaper to mint. Curve’s crvUSD is picking up liquidity in AMM-heavy environments. Maker still leads, but the gap’s narrowing.
The Numbers Paint a Mixed Picture
Let’s look at the core data:
| Protocol | TVL | Stablecoin Circulation | Notable Highlight |
| MakerDAO | $5.4B | $5.4B (DAI) | Revenue from Treasuries |
| Aave | $3B | $500M (GHO) | Lower minting costs |
| Curve | $2B | $1B (crvUSD) | AMM-focused utility |
MKR trades $90 million daily—solid, but far behind UNI’s $200 million. Whale wallets over 1,000 MKR are thinning out. Etherscan shows slow, steady distribution. Nothing dramatic, but telling. And funding rates on Binance went negative last month. Not exactly a confidence signal.
Even so, protocol revenue is strong. $120 million in annualized income from stability fees is no joke. That’s real value creation.
Still, traders seem unconvinced MKR will capture it long-term. Maybe because most of that value doesn’t flow back to token holders directly. Maybe because governance fatigue is real. Or maybe because they just don’t trust RWAs.
What Happens If Maker Goes All-In?
Maker’s “Endgame” plan is ambitious: spin off the DAO into smaller, autonomous units—“SubDAOs”—to manage different collateral types, asset classes, and strategies. It’s either genius or chaos. Possibly both.
If it works? The protocol decentralizes further, governance gets more modular, and MKR becomes the brain of a much bigger machine. If it flops? Fragmented focus, messy execution, and even weaker voter participation.
Centrifuge is another variable. Maker’s partnered with them to tokenize real-world assets like invoices and credit portfolios. That could unlock trillions in value—if demand materializes.
But risk runs high. If one TradFi partner folds—say, a Coinbase Custody breach or a compliance miss—it could trigger a massive loss of faith. DAI’s peg might hold, but MKR would likely tank.
Regulators are watching too. RWA-backed crypto? It’s a gray zone. After the 2024 ETF crackdowns, SEC eyes are on anything tied to U.S. Treasuries. If that hammer drops, it could reshape the whole model.
Big Picture: DAI Holds Strong, MKR Walks a Tightrope
MKR isn’t just a governance token. It’s a proxy bet on DeFi’s maturity—and whether governance matters long-term.
If RWAs scale as expected—say, $3 billion by 2026—protocol revenue could touch $200 million. That could justify MKR trading at $4,000, per CryptoPredictions. That’s the upside case. A clean scaling story. Solid fundamentals. Blue-chip vibes.
But if GHO and crvUSD undercut fees or outscale integrations? If MKR governance keeps tilting toward whales? Or if users bail for more agile protocols? Then MKR sits on a shrinking island, even as DAI remains useful.
In other words: the protocol might thrive, but the token might not.
Final Take: DAI Is Solid. MKR’s Future Isn’t Guaranteed.
MakerDAO deserves credit. It built the most resilient decentralized stablecoin in crypto. It survived where others folded. It found yield when rates went negative. And it kept DAI on peg through every major panic.
But MKR’s value now rides on more than just tech. It’s tied to governance dynamics, TradFi relationships, and a rapidly shifting regulatory climate.
There’s room for upside—especially if Endgame delivers, or if RWAs open floodgates to real-world yield. But there’s also fragility.
DAI is staying. MKR still has to prove it should.
Steve Gregory is a lawyer in the United States who specializes in licensing for cryptocurrency companies and products. Steve began his career as an attorney in 2015 but made the switch to working in cryptocurrency full time shortly after joining the original team at Gemini Trust Company, an early cryptocurrency exchange based in New York City. Steve then joined CEX.io and was able to launch their regulated US-based cryptocurrency. Steve then went on to become the CEO at currency.com when he ran for four years and was able to lead currency.com to being fully acquired in 2025.
