Curve Finance enters late 2025 as a mature, systemically important DeFi protocol that has grown from a stablecoin AMM into a broader liquidity and credit stack. 2025 brought a clear inflection in protocol revenue, renewed TVL growth, and the rise of crvUSD and LlamaLend as core pillars. Alongside that progress, Curve is dealing with concentrated governance, persistent CRV tokenomics pressure, security incidents, and an unsettled regulatory outlook for decentralized stablecoins.

This piece reviews Curve’s 2025 metrics, the health of its key products (DEX, crvUSD, LlamaLend, Yield Basis), its position versus DeFi peers, and outlines bull, base, and bear scenarios from here.

1. Curve in Context: From Stablecoin AMM to Multi‑Product DeFi Stack

Curve began as a specialized AMM for low‑slippage swaps between like‑priced assets, especially stablecoins. The StableSwap invariant enabled:

  • Very efficient stablecoin swaps with minimal price impact.
  • Higher capital efficiency than constant‑product AMMs.
  • Deep, institutional‑grade stablecoin liquidity.

By 2025, that AMM design is just one layer of a wider stack:

  • DEX layer: Multi‑chain pools for stablecoins, LSTs, and other correlated assets.
  • Stablecoin layer: crvUSD, a collateralized, over‑secured stablecoin with LLAMMA‑based liquidation smoothing.
  • Lending layer: LlamaLend, a lending protocol built around LLAMMA and crvUSD.
  • Yield and basis layer: Yield Basis, a new AMM targeting impermanent‑loss‑free Bitcoin yield.
  • Governance and incentives: CRV and veCRV, coordinating emissions and fee flows across products and chains.

The strategic direction is straightforward: use Curve’s AMM expertise and veCRV incentive system to operate as a neutral liquidity layer for stablecoins and yield‑bearing assets across multiple chains.

2. Core Metrics: TVL, Volume, and Revenue in 2025

2.1 Ecosystem TVL and Growth

As of Week 49, 2025:

  • Total TVL:
    • $2.528 billion (+6.7% week‑over‑week).
  • DEX TVL:
    • $2.51 billion (+7.3% WoW).
  • LlamaLend TVL:
    • $214 million (+6.8% WoW).

Earlier in 2025, TVL climbed from about $2.1 billion at the start of Q3 to $2.3 billion by quarter end, and has continued upward. The late‑year WoW gains point to:

  • Restored user confidence after prior market and security shocks.
  • Steady demand for stablecoin swaps and leverage via crvUSD and LlamaLend.
  • New products (e.g., Yield Basis) and cross‑chain deployments feeding liquidity into the Curve ecosystem.

2.2 Trading Volume and Activity

2025 trading volumes show Curve’s continued role as a routing hub for stablecoins and correlated assets:

  • Q3 2025 trading volume: $29 billion,
    • Up from $25.5 billion in Q2.
  • October 2025 DEX volume: ~ $11 billion.

In a year with intermittent volatility and risk‑off stretches, this growth suggests:

  • Curve remains a preferred venue for large stablecoin and LST trades where slippage and depth matter.
  • Aggregators and institutional routers continue to route size through Curve.

2.3 Revenue and Cash Flow

Revenue is where the shift in 2025 is most visible:

  • Q3 2025 revenue: $7.3 million,
    • Up from $3.9 million in Q2 (~87% QoQ growth).
  • Revenue is fully redistributed to veCRV holders.

Implications:

  • The fee model is doing its job: higher utilization converts directly into higher cash flows.
  • veCRV is increasingly backed by protocol earnings, not just CRV emissions.
  • The rebound from 2023 lows (described as approaching tenfold improvements) highlights both the cyclicality and the resilience of the protocol.

2.4 Summary of Key Metrics

| Metric                    | Value (late 2025)      | Change / Context                          |
|---------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| Total TVL                | $2.528B                | +6.7% WoW (Week 49, 2025)                 |
| DEX TVL                  | $2.51B                 | +7.3% WoW                                 |
| LlamaLend TVL            | $214M                  | +6.8% WoW                                 |
| Q3 2025 Trading Volume   | $29B                   | vs $25.5B in Q2                           |
| Q3 2025 Revenue          | $7.3M                  | +87% QoQ from $3.9M                       |
| October 2025 DEX Volume  | ~$11B                  | High monthly activity                     |

Collectively, these show a protocol that has stabilized after the bear market and is back in a growth phase, with multiple product lines contributing to volume and revenue.

3. crvUSD: Design, Metrics, and Ecosystem Role

crvUSD sits at the center of Curve’s 2025 story. It is tightly integrated with the AMM and lending stack, and its health is a proxy for the robustness of the broader ecosystem.

3.1 Supply, Market Cap, and Velocity

Key crvUSD datapoints in 2025:

  • Minted supply: $61.7 million (late November 2025),
    • +12.6% in a week, aided by near‑zero borrowing rates.
  • Market cap: roughly $112–124 million through 2025.
  • Positioning:
    • 3rd largest decentralized stablecoin by market cap after DAI and GHO (within the decentralized subset).
  • Daily trading volume:
    • Around $124 million on November 17, 2025,
    • 3rd among all stablecoins that day, behind USDT and USDC.

A market cap around $112–124M versus $124M in daily volume on a peak day implies high velocity:

  • crvUSD is actively used for trading and routing rather than sitting idle.
  • Market participants are comfortable using it as a transactional asset despite its smaller absolute size.

3.2 Peg Stability and Reserves

Peg stability is where crvUSD stands out:

  • Price: around $1.0001 in late November 2025.
  • Peg stability reserves: $93.8 million,
    • Close to 150% of minted supply ($61.7M).

Supporting mechanisms:

  • PegKeepers that arbitrage deviations via on‑chain minting and burning.
  • LLAMMA (Lending‑Liquidating AMM Algorithm), which:
    • Gradually converts collateral to stablecoins as prices fall, avoiding sharp, cascading liquidations.

The combination of over‑collateralization, substantial reserves, and LLAMMA liquidation smoothing has kept the peg extremely tight in the observed period.

3.3 scrvUSD: Savings Layer and Yield

On top of crvUSD, Curve offers a savings wrapper:

  • scrvUSD deposits: about $42.6 million (late November 2025).
  • APY: around 7.3%, down slightly (~0.2%) but still competitive.

This creates a coherent loop:

  • Users borrow crvUSD against collateral.
  • Savers deposit crvUSD into scrvUSD for yield.
  • That yield is funded by protocol revenue and lending spreads, tying scrvUSD performance to curve‑wide earnings.

3.4 Concentration Risks

crvUSD’s structure carries clear concentration risks:

  • Top 3 holders control about 50% of supply (per the research summary).

This raises the possibility of:

  • Liquidity shocks if large holders redeem or unwind aggressively.
  • Outsize influence over markets or governance decisions.

These risks have not materialized in 2025, but they matter more as crvUSD scales and becomes more embedded in DeFi.

4. LlamaLend and LLAMMA: Lending and Liquidation Design

LlamaLend is Curve’s lending arm, built directly on the LLAMMA mechanism and tightly wired into crvUSD.

4.1 LlamaLend Metrics and Market Structure

As of late November 2025:

  • TVL: $214 million (+6.8% WoW).
  • Supplied assets: $83.6 million.
  • Borrowed assets: $133 million.
  • Collateral value: $201 million (+8.4% WoW).
  • Active loans: 1,169.

This indicates:

  • Strong borrowing demand (borrowed > supplied, bridged via crvUSD mechanics).
  • Healthy utilization without obvious systemic stress.
  • A reasonably broad user base rather than only a few dominant borrowers.

Example largest market:

  • crvUSD/sDOLA:
    • $25.6 million supplied, $20.8 million borrowed.

LlamaLend is thus a cross‑stablecoin credit venue, not only an ETH‑collateralized borrowing platform.

4.2 LLAMMA in Practice: Liquidation Protection

A November 2025 case study illustrates LLAMMA’s behavior:

  • A large ETH‑backed position faced a week of high volatility.
  • ETH fell from around $3,200 to ~$2,900, dipping below the position’s liquidation band.
  • LLAMMA gradually converted collateral rather than triggering a hard liquidation.
  • The borrower closed voluntarily with ~8.9% loss versus a 9.9% move in ETH.

Key takeaways:

  • LLAMMA trims the “cliff” associated with traditional liquidations.
  • A large trade routed through the LLAMMA pool temporarily improved the position’s health (from 0.64 to 1.9), as the position essentially participated in market‑making at favorable levels.

This shows LLAMMA can reduce liquidation cascades and allow borrowers to run larger, longer‑term positions through more volatile conditions.

4.3 LlamaLend V2: Beyond crvUSD‑Only Markets

In 2025, LlamaLend upgraded to V2:

  • Non‑crvUSD markets:
    • Support for lending and borrowing in assets beyond crvUSD.
  • Admin fees on non‑crvUSD markets:
    • A new revenue line for Curve DAO.
  • Expanded collateral:
    • Includes staked ETH derivatives and altcoins.

LlamaLend V2 shifts the protocol toward:

  • A general‑purpose lending platform with a differentiated liquidation model.
  • A broader revenue engine for Curve DAO, not solely tethered to crvUSD.
  • A complementary, rather than purely dependent, relationship between crvUSD and LlamaLend.

5. Yield Basis: A New Approach to Bitcoin Yield

Yield Basis is one of the most meaningful 2025 additions to the Curve ecosystem.

5.1 Design and Objectives

Yield Basis targets the classic AMM problem of impermanent loss in volatile pairs, focusing on BTC/stablecoin pools.

Core design elements:

  • A new AMM that uses constant leverage to neutralize impermanent loss for LPs in BTC‑stablecoin pairs.
  • Initial rollout:
    • Three BTC pools, each capped at $1 million deposits.
    • Backed by $60 million in pre‑minted crvUSD provided by Curve DAO.
  • Token and governance:
    • YB token with a fee‑switch.
    • 25% of YB allocated to the Curve ecosystem, linking incentives back to veCRV holders and Curve governance.

The caps and pre‑minted crvUSD reflect a cautious rollout of a novel design, limiting systemic risk while testing demand and mechanics.

5.2 Early Adoption and Revenue

Within roughly three months:

  • BTC deposits: over $130 million.
  • Fees paid out: more than 17 BTC (~$1.6 million equivalent at the time).
  • Fee switch activation: December 5, 2025, starting revenue sharing with YB holders.

These early numbers show:

  • Strong appetite from users seeking BTC yield without standard impermanent loss.
  • Sufficient trading to generate material fees quickly.
  • A clear path for Yield Basis to become a meaningful revenue contributor as caps are raised and markets broaden.

5.3 Strategic Relevance for Curve

Yield Basis matters for several reasons:

  • Product diversification: moves Curve deeper into volatile‑asset markets, especially BTC.
  • Additional fee stream: with 25% of YB reserved for Curve, veCRV holders gain indirect exposure to YB growth.
  • crvUSD integration: pre‑minted crvUSD liquidity ties Yield Basis success back into crvUSD usage and demand.

If adoption continues, Yield Basis can pull in large BTC holders and funds seeking on‑chain yield, broadening Curve’s identity beyond “the stablecoin DEX” toward a more general yield and liquidity infrastructure layer.

6. CRV and veCRV: Tokenomics, Governance, and Incentives

CRV and its locked form, veCRV, remain the backbone of Curve’s governance and incentive design.

6.1 Supply, Locking, and Emissions

As of late 2025:

  • CRV price: about $0.38–0.45.
  • Circulating supply: ~ 1.43 billion CRV.
  • Locked CRV (veCRV): 861 million CRV.
  • Total veCRV: 793 million units of voting power.
  • Weekly CRV emissions:
    • ~ 2.22 million CRV (~$917,000 per week at prevailing prices).
  • Annual inflation: around 4.965%.

Roughly 60% of circulating CRV is locked:

  • Aligning a majority of supply with long‑term governance and fee participation.
  • Reducing liquid float and moderating immediate sell pressure.

6.2 Fee Sharing and Governance Rewards

veCRV holders receive:

  • Fee share:
    • Q3 2025 revenue of $7.3M is fully paid out to veCRV.
  • Governance rewards:
    • Weekly veCRV distribution rewards around $97,700 at one late‑November snapshot, down ~62.5% from earlier weeks.

This gives veCRV:

  • A direct link to real protocol earnings (DEX fees, LlamaLend admin fees, Yield Basis, etc.).
  • Economic weight behind governance decisions.

6.3 Governance Concentration and veCRV Fragmentation

Despite the high lock ratio, governance is not evenly distributed:

  • veCRV is fragmented across liquid lockers and aggregators, which can centralize effective voting power.
  • A small number of entities can exert outsized influence on:
    • Gauge weights and emissions.
    • Fee distribution and other key parameters.

The research flags governance concentration as a major risk, even without detailed address‑level breakdowns. The mix of locked supply, liquid wrappers, and bribe markets creates a powerful but not fully decentralized governance landscape.

6.4 Tokenomics Pressure

CRV’s ~4.965% annual emissions cut both ways:

  • Upside:
    • Keeps liquidity incentives competitive.
    • Rewards long‑term lockers via boosts and fee share.
  • Downside:
    • Dilutes non‑locking holders.
    • Sustains structural sell pressure if emissions outpace organic demand.

The 2025 revenue surge improves the calculus for veCRV holders, but longer‑term sustainability depends on:

  • Continued revenue growth from the DEX, lending, and Yield Basis.
  • Calibrating emissions as Curve moves from growth into more mature phases.

7. Cross‑Chain Expansion and Integrations

Curve’s 2025 roadmap leans heavily into multi‑chain deployment.

7.1 New Chains and Ecosystems

New environments in 2025 include:

  • Monad:
    • A high‑performance EVM‑compatible L1, with Curve launching there around October/November 2025.
  • TAC:
    • Integration with the TON ecosystem, including a Curve Telegram Mini‑App for in‑Telegram swaps.
  • Etherlink:
    • Connecting Curve with the Tezos ecosystem.
  • Hyperliquid:
    • Providing stablecoin infrastructure to a high‑frequency trading chain.

These moves:

  • Extend Curve into new liquidity and user bases.
  • Provide early‑mover stakes on emerging L1s and app‑chains.
  • Lay groundwork for crvUSD and LlamaLend to appear across more environments over time.

7.2 Cross‑Chain Governance and Boosting

Governance tooling evolved as well:

  • Boost delegation:
    • veCRV holders can delegate boost to other addresses, raising capital efficiency.
  • Cross‑chain voting:
    • veCRV on Ethereum can influence gauge weights and incentives on other chains.

This maintains a unified governance center while deploying liquidity and products in a multi‑chain “hub‑and‑spoke” model.

8. Competitive Positioning: Curve vs. DeFi Peers

Curve operates alongside:

  • Generalized AMMs like Uniswap.
  • Lending giants like Aave.
  • Stablecoin issuers like MakerDAO (DAI) and Aave (GHO).

The research does not include full competitor metrics, but the qualitative landscape looks like this:

| Dimension             | Curve Finance (2025)                           | Key Competitors (Qualitative)                          |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Core Focus            | Stablecoin & correlated-asset AMM; crvUSD;    | Uniswap: generalized AMM;                             |
|                       | lending via LlamaLend; Yield Basis for BTC    | Aave: lending; MakerDAO: DAI stablecoin               |
| Stablecoin            | crvUSD (collateralized, LLAMMA-based)         | DAI (Maker), GHO (Aave), others                       |
| Liquidation Model     | LLAMMA (gradual, AMM-based)                   | Classic hard-liquidation lending models               |
| Governance Token      | CRV / veCRV with fee sharing                  | UNI (no main-protocol fee share), AAVE, MKR           |
| Revenue Distribution  | 100% protocol revenue to veCRV                | Mixed: some to tokens, some to treasuries             |
| Cross-Chain Footprint | Ethereum + Monad, TAC, Etherlink, Hyperliquid | Uniswap, Aave, Maker also active across chains        |
| 2025 Innovations      | Yield Basis, LlamaLend V2, cross-chain voting | Competitors focus on L2s, RWAs, new AMM designs       |

Curve’s main advantages:

  • Capital‑efficient stablecoin and correlated‑asset trading.
  • Tight integration across DEX, stablecoin, and lending.
  • A fee‑sharing governance model that channels all protocol revenue to veCRV.

Its peers are strong, well‑funded, and also innovating, especially around new AMM curves, stablecoins, and L2 deployments.

9. Risk Landscape: Structural, Technical, and External

9.1 Governance and Concentration

Key structural risks:

  • veCRV concentration via liquid lockers and aggregators:
    • A small set of entities may effectively steer emissions and gauges.
  • crvUSD concentration:
    • Top 3 holders control ~50% of supply.
    • Large, coordinated moves could stress liquidity or destabilize markets.

These factors challenge how decentralized Curve’s governance and stablecoin actually are under stress.

9.2 Security Incidents in 2025

2025 saw several security‑adjacent events:

  • X (Twitter) account compromise.
  • DNS hijack targeting Curve’s web front end.

These did not become smart contract exploits in the data provided, but they underscore:

  • The importance of secure communications; compromised social channels can push users to malicious front‑ends.
  • The need for users to rely on verified contract addresses.

Given Curve’s systemic role, any future contract‑level exploit would be significantly more damaging.

9.3 Regulatory Uncertainty

Decentralized stablecoins and DeFi lending are under tightening scrutiny:

  • crvUSD, while over‑collateralized, is in a regulatory grey area in many places.
  • Governance tokens like CRV with direct fee share may draw attention where they resemble profit‑sharing instruments.

The research flags regulatory uncertainty as a key risk, with possible outcomes including:

  • Restrictions on centralized on‑ramps interacting with Curve.
  • Legal pressure on contributors or front‑end operators.
  • Constraints on institutional use.

9.4 Founder and Key‑Person Risk

The research references:

  • Concerns around founder Michael Egorov’s personal liquidity and its potential impact on the protocol.

Typical worries here include:

  • Large personal CRV or related holdings used as collateral elsewhere.
  • Forced liquidations that could affect CRV price and governance dynamics.

Even with a DAO in control on paper, key‑person risk is material when founders still hold significant influence and inventory.

9.5 Market and Liquidity Risks

Curve’s model remains tied to broader crypto conditions:

  • Bear cycles compress volume, TVL, and revenue.
  • Stablecoin competition can divert users away from crvUSD and Curve pools.
  • As Curve spreads across chains, liquidity can fragment, potentially worsening slippage and UX on individual deployments.

10. Scenario Analysis: Bull, Base, and Bear Paths

The following scenarios are qualitative and do not include price targets.

| Scenario | Key Drivers                                           | crvUSD & LlamaLend                     | CRV / veCRV Dynamics                   | Main Risks                             |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| Bull     | Strong DeFi cycle; Yield Basis success; multi-chain  | crvUSD scales; becomes a core routing  | veCRV demand rises with revenue;       | Regulatory clampdown; major exploit;   |
|          | adoption; institutional stablecoin usage              | asset; LlamaLend TVL and revenue grow  | emissions absorbed by fees and locking | governance capture                     |
| Base     | Moderate growth; steady but competitive DeFi         | crvUSD grows slower, remains niche     | veCRV yields stabilize; emissions      | Gradual market share loss;             |
|          | environment                                           | but important; LlamaLend steady        | gradually offset by fee growth         | innovation lag                         |
| Bear     | Deep downturn; regulatory hit; security or           | crvUSD growth stalls or reverses;      | CRV under pressure from emissions;     | Liquidity flight; peg stress;          |
|          | governance failure                                    | LlamaLend deleveraging and unwinds     | veCRV yields drop; weaker governance   | reputational damage                    |

10.1 Bull Case

In a bull path:

  • Environment:

    • Crypto enters a sustained uptrend with heavy on‑chain activity.
    • Institutions increasingly tap DeFi for stablecoin and collateral management.

  • Product trajectory:

    • crvUSD market cap climbs sharply while keeping a tight peg and high velocity.
    • LlamaLend becomes a leading venue for leveraged stablecoin and LST trades due to LLAMMA’s risk profile.
    • Yield Basis scales well beyond $130M in BTC, becoming a standard BTC yield primitive.

  • Token and governance:

    • veCRV demand increases with revenue per veCRV.
    • CRV emissions are comfortably absorbed by locking and protocol growth.
    • Curve’s share of sector TVL and revenue expands.

This path depends on a clean security record, managed concentration risk, and regulatory clarity that allows decentralized stablecoins and fee‑sharing governance to operate.

10.2 Base Case

In the base case:

  • Environment:

    • Markets remain choppy; DeFi usage grows, but gradually.
    • Competition from other AMMs, lenders, and stablecoins stays intense.

  • Product trajectory:

    • crvUSD grows but remains relatively small versus USDT/USDC and even DAI.
    • LlamaLend’s TVL oscillates with leverage cycles but keeps a meaningful footprint.
    • Yield Basis serves more sophisticated users but stays a niche product.

  • Token and governance:

    • veCRV yields settle at moderate levels; users rotate as yields change.
    • CRV inflation is a constant factor but not existential.
    • Governance stays concentrated but functional.

Curve in this case remains a core DeFi building block without decisively outgrowing the rest of the sector.

10.3 Bear Case

In a bear path:

  • Environment:

    • A sharp downturn suppresses DeFi TVL and activity.
    • Regulators target decentralized stablecoins, fee‑sharing tokens, or front‑ends.

  • Product stress:

    • crvUSD demand shrinks; large holders unwind, creating liquidity stress.
    • LlamaLend goes through painful deleveraging; LLAMMA softens but does not eliminate losses.
    • Yield Basis volumes and deposits fall as users de‑risk from BTC yield strategies.

  • Token and governance:

    • CRV price drops; emissions become more dilutive in dollar terms.
    • veCRV yields decline with revenue, weakening incentives to lock.
    • Governance participation falls, making capture by large actors easier.

Additional downside drivers include a major smart contract exploit affecting any core product, or a founder‑related event such as forced liquidations of large CRV positions.

11. Outlook

Curve in 2025 blends maturity with ongoing experimentation:

  • Mature pillars:

    • Billions in TVL and tens of billions in quarterly volume.
    • A revenue model yielding $7.3M in Q3, almost double Q2.
    • crvUSD with tight peg behavior and strong reserves.
    • LlamaLend with growing usage and a differentiated liquidation model.

  • New bets:

    • Yield Basis as a fresh AMM design for BTC yield.
    • Deployments on Monad, TAC, Etherlink, and Hyperliquid.
    • Governance upgrades like boost delegation, cross‑chain voting, and new fee switches.

The protocol looks fundamentally sound on TVL, volume, and revenue, but its trajectory will hinge on:

  • Scaling crvUSD while keeping peg strength and decentralization intact.
  • Turning LlamaLend V2 and Yield Basis into durable, non‑mercenary liquidity sinks.
  • Managing veCRV and crvUSD concentration and the governance risks that follow.
  • Withstanding security threats and adapting to shifting regulation.

Curve is likely to remain a foundational DeFi primitive. Whether it becomes the dominant multi‑product liquidity stack for stablecoins and yield‑bearing assets, or one of several major contenders, will depend on how effectively it scales these innovations without sacrificing the security and neutrality that anchored its early success.