Bitcoin (Via Wbtc) As Collateral In Overcollateralized Defi Lending On Aave: Risk Metrics, Liquidation Dynamics, And A Maqasid Al-Shariah Evaluation

Authors

  • Muhammad Dzulhilmi Yazid Universitas Muhammadiyah Kudus
  • Muhammad Adhitya Whardana University of Muhammadiyah Kudus
  • Nurani Puspa Ningrum University of Muhammadiyah Kudus

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21111/ibmj.v8i2.15761

Keywords:

Aave; decentralized finance; WBTC; overcollateralized lending; Maqasid al-Shariah; liquidation risk

Abstract

This study examines the use of Bitcoin exposure, represented by Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC), as collateral in overcollateralized borrowing on the Aave decentralized finance (DeFi) lending protocol. Using qualitative document analysis of protocol documentation, governance materials, and risk-parameter methodologies, the paper (i) maps Aave’s collateralized-debt mechanics, (ii) reconstructs the core risk metrics that govern leverage and liquidation (loan-to-value, liquidation threshold, and health factor), and (iii) evaluates the arrangement through a Maqasid al-Shariah and fiqh mu‘amalah lens. A scenario-based calculation illustrates how a borrower posting 1 WBTC faces rapid liquidation risk under plausible price declines, even when the position initially respects the maximum LTV. At the system level, explicit parameters, transparency, and overcollateralization can be interpreted as protective features for pool solvency and collective wealth. However, at the individual level the combination of interest-bearing debt, high volatility, automatic liquidation, and liquidation incentives can concentrate risk on borrowers, raising substantive concerns related to riba-like returns, severe gharar from uncertain total obligations, maysir-like behavior in leveraged speculation, and distributive justice. The paper concludes that Aave’s WBTC-collateralized borrowing achieves wealth protection only partially and tends to privilege structurally stronger parties, while proposing maqasid-oriented design directions for more risk-sharing and ethically aligned DeFi models.

References

Bibliography

Aave. (2023). Risk Framework and Risk Parameters [Online documentation]. https://docs.aave.com/risk

Aave. (2025). Aave Protocol V3 Overview. Aave Documentation. https://aave.com/docs/developers/aave-v3/overview

Caldarelli, G. (2021). Wrapping Trust for Interoperability: A Preliminary Study of Wrapped Tokens. Information, 13(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13010006

Chaos Labs. (2026, 24. January). Risk parameter methodology for Aave markets. https://Chaoslabs.Xyz.

Gadzinski, G. & Liuzzi, V. (2025). Do liquidations discourage lending in DeFi? Economics Letters, 255, 112537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2025.112537

Moallemi, C. & Patange, U. (2025). An Analysis of Fixed-Spread Liquidation Lending in DeFi (pp. 105–127). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-69231-4_8

Schär, F. (2021). Decentralized Finance: On Blockchain- and Smart Contract-Based Financial Markets. Review, 103(2). https://doi.org/10.20955/r.103.153-74

Wartoyo, W. & Haerisma, A. S. (2022). Cryptocurrency in The Perspective of Maqasid Al-Shariah. Afkaruna: Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Studies, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.18196/afkaruna.v18i1.14164

WBTC. (2019). Wrapped Tokens: A Multi-Institutional Framework for Tokenized BTC on Ethereum. https://wbtc.network

Zetzsche, D. A., Arner, D. W. & Buckley, R. P. (2020). Decentralized Finance. Journal of Financial Regulation, 6(2), 172–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaa010

Zhou, L., Xiong, X., Ernstberger, J., Chaliasos, S., Wang, Z., Wang, Y., Qin, K., Wattenhofer, R., Song, D. & Gervais, A. (2023). SoK: Decentralized Finance (DeFi) Attacks. 2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 2444–2461. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP46215.2023.10179435

Downloads

Published

2025-12-30

How to Cite

Yazid, M. D., Whardana, M. A. ., & Ningrum, N. P. . (2025). Bitcoin (Via Wbtc) As Collateral In Overcollateralized Defi Lending On Aave: Risk Metrics, Liquidation Dynamics, And A Maqasid Al-Shariah Evaluation. Islamic Business and Management Journal, 8(2), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.21111/ibmj.v8i2.15761