A new Aave Request for Final Comment proposes adding mWIN to Aave Horizon as collateral, extending the platform’s real-world asset offering beyond tokenized Treasury and fund exposures. The token represents a multi-sector, actively managed fixed-income portfolio managed by Wellington Management and issued by Midas.

The proposal says mWIN is already live on Ethereum mainnet and reached $15 million in total value locked shortly after launch. Backers argue the asset could support both leveraged carry strategies and simpler treasury-style yield use cases on Horizon, subject to risk review and governance approval.

What the proposal would add

According to the ARFC, mWIN is a tokenized securitized credit product designed to offer yield, liquidity, and relatively low volatility. The underlying mandate focuses on investment-grade fixed income with no portfolio leverage, a duration target of zero to two years, and USD currency hedging.

The portfolio is managed by Wellington Management’s FRM team and is described as diversified across CLOs, CMBS, RMBS, ABS, and investment-grade corporate bonds. The model allocation included in the proposal assigns 40% to CLOs, 25% to investment-grade corporates, 15% to ABS, 10% to agency MBS, and 5% each to non-agency RMBS and CMBS. The stated average credit rating is A+, with single issuer exposure capped at 5%.

Why Aave Horizon proponents see a fit

The proposal frames mWIN as a match for Horizon’s goal of offering around-the-clock liquidity against tokenized real-world assets while remaining compatible with issuer compliance requirements. It also points to Wellington’s scale, citing more than $1.3 trillion in assets under management, and to the fund’s Luxembourg securitization structure, which is presented as legally segregated and bankruptcy remote.

Supporters also emphasize the borrowing strategy. The ARFC says demand exists for looping trades, where users repeatedly borrow against collateral to increase exposure. It claims that if Horizon borrowing costs sit 150 to 200 basis points below the strategy’s yield to maturity, borrowers could target double-digit returns at 4x leverage. The same structure, the proposal says, may also suit unlevered treasury management.

Liquidity, redemptions, and market structure

A key part of the listing case is liquidity. Midas says it can provide up to $30 million of atomic onchain liquidity through its MSL facility, with $10 million specifically dedicated to mWIN. The proposal also states that 5% of total value locked is held in onchain Treasuries and that liquidity capacity can expand as the product grows.

For standard flows, subscriptions are limited to whitelisted investors and can be minted atomically at NAV, potentially with a holdback. Redemptions are described as daily at 100% NAV with one-business-day settlement for requests submitted before 1 p.m. CET, and payable in USDC, PYUSD, RLUSD, and other stablecoins. The proposal adds that standard redemptions can cover up to 100% of TVL, although Midas may pause instant redemptions during market disruption. It also states there have been no rejected or delayed settlements so far.

Token design, oracle setup, and disclosed risks

mWIN is an ERC-20 token on Ethereum mainnet with 18 decimals and a contract address of 0x4E72025984424E52838cf8953E2863eFf036B67A. Minting and burning are issuer-controlled, with a stated mint cap of $20 million per day. Transfers require a greenlist and must result in either a zero balance or at least one full token held. The setup uses an OpenZeppelin proxy with timelock, multisig, and other role-based controls.

The proposal says net asset value comes from Northern Trust and is published daily, with an onchain feed delivered through Chainlink and validated by LlamaGuard. It also lists external audits, bug bounty programs, and no notable incident history, with the latest audit dated June 7, 2026 and no critical or high-severity findings. At the same time, the document notes that the strategy has no realized track record yet and instead relies on backtested performance figures, including a simulated maximum one-day drawdown of 2.7% and a largest modeled drawdown of 7.79% from September 2021 to October 2022.

What happens next

No listing parameters have been finalized yet. The ARFC says an independent review by LlamaRisk will define recommended risk settings before the proposal can move forward.

The stated process is to gather delegate and community feedback, publish the LlamaRisk report, complete a technical review of the listing payload, and then escalate the matter to a Snapshot vote. If approved there, the final step could be an Aave Improvement Proposal for onchain execution.

Source: governance.aave.com