#baby A few days ago I was on Aave's governance forum and found Babylon's Temp Check, two new Aave V4 Spokes for native BTC collateral. What caught me wasn't the "no custodian" headline everyone repeats, it's that vaultBTC, the token representing locked Bitcoin, is transfer-restricted, it can only move between the Aave V4 Hub, the Babylon Core Lending Spoke, and the adapter contract, nowhere else. That's structurally different from WBTC or renBTC, which trade freely and get rehypothecated across protocols until nobody can price the real risk. Here the collateral can't leave its closed loop. The BTC Vault Swap Spoke handles the harder part, letting liquidators settle instantly in WBTC while permissioned arbitrageurs redeem the real BTC later on Bitcoin's own timing, so DeFi's need for speed doesn't collide with Bitcoin's slow settlement. The market's filing this as "another BTC wrapper," but a wrapper that can't circulate isn't really a wrapper. I'm genuinely unsure if that restriction limits composability long term, since vaultBTC can't be reused elsewhere once it's locked. This isn't about wrapping Bitcoin. It's about whether isolating each market keeps BTC lending safe without making it too rigid to use. Does splitting liquidity across Spokes end up safer, or just smaller? @BabylonLabs_io $BABY


$RIF $AKE

Question: Splitting liquidity across Aave V4 Spokes is...