On March 27, 2026, East 8 Time, the Lido ecosystem operations team presented a controversial governance proposal to the community: it aims to authorize the growth committee to use up to 10,000 stETH to repurchase the protocol governance token LDO through batch trading. This is not a done deal but is still in the discussion and proposal stage; whether it can be implemented will need to be decided by a vote from the Lido DAO community. From a numerical standpoint, the current LDO/ETH exchange rate is approximately 0.00016, and compared to the median level over the past two years, the discount is calculated to be about 63%, and this "60% off" pricing has refocused the market on whether LDO is severely undervalued. This repurchase initiated by the DAO treasury is not just a simple secondary market operation but a potential turning point test of the treasury's asset management approach and token economic expectations.

High Protocol Revenue Yet Token Price at a Discount

To understand the tension behind this proposal, one must first return to the scale and fundamentals of the Lido protocol itself. As one of the largest staking protocols in the Ethereum ecosystem, Lido has long occupied a leading position in the Ethereum staking market, with a massive cumulative scale of staked assets, and the fee income at the protocol level has also surged. Against this backdrop, the mainstream narrative generally holds that Lido's business and cash flow are still on a relatively robust growth trajectory, with no apparent signals of a "fundamental collapse."

However, in stark contrast to the protocol's income and TVL scale is the weak performance of LDO in the secondary market. According to estimates provided in the briefing, the current LDO/ETH exchange rate is only 0.00016, showing a discount of about 63% compared to the median level of the past two years. This means that while maintaining its industry-leading position and substantial protocol income, the market is pricing LDO at a significantly discounted rate, reflecting changes in investor sentiment and risk expectations.

This disconnect between fundamentals and token price is difficult to explain with a single factor. For some participants, Lido, as a systemically important protocol, has been under the spotlight regarding its degree of decentralization, governance risk, and regulatory risk; combined with the continuous unlocking of LDO itself and potential inflationary pressure, uncertainty in governance decisions, shadows from the regulatory environment, and various doubts about how future cash flows will genuinely benefit token holders contribute to a "risk narrative." The result is that even if the protocol is "profitable," the token may still be assigned a higher risk discount in the market.

DAO Offers 10,000 stETH...

In such a valuation environment, the core terms of this repurchase proposal have been designed to be relatively restrained and specific. According to the proposal, Lido DAO intends to authorize the growth committee to use up to 10,000 stETH as repurchase ammunition, but it will not flood the market all at once; instead, it will gradually buy LDO through batch execution. The upper limit for each use is set at not more than 1,000 stETH, and it is required that each transaction's slippage be controlled within 3% to lower the impact on market price and depth, while also retaining a certain buffer for the treasury itself.

In terms of execution, the proposal clearly states that it will rely on Lido's existing Easy Track process to advance in batches. This means the repurchase will not come in a one-size-fits-all large order but will be accomplished through a series of small-scale operations. More importantly, the proposal does not directly link this repurchase with "burning"; instead, it emphasizes that all LDO obtained from the repurchase will be returned to the DAO treasury rather than immediately used to reduce supply or distribute to specific participants. This determines that the flow of funds resembles an adjustment of the treasury's internal asset structure rather than a simple "benefit the bulls" burning narrative.

From an asset allocation perspective, this arrangement is more like the DAO using its income-generating asset stETH to exchange for LDO, which is considered to be undervalued in the current price range, completing a rebalancing from “yield-generating staked assets” to “governance and potential valuation repair chips.” For the treasury, this is not only an action to increase exposure to its tokens at the current valuation level but also an attempt to use valuation misalignment for asset replacement, rather than just the linear logic of "repurchase = good news + burning" as understood in the market.

Treasury Takes Proactive Action: Signal or Price Support

As the proposal was disclosed, a discussion quickly emerged in the market around it, indicating "this proposal signals that LDO is undervalued." For the bullish, when the DAO is willing to deploy over 10,000 stETH to reverse buy at 0.00016 LDO/ETH, at a discount of about 63%, it is seen as a form of endorsement by the team and the community for the long-term value of LDO: on one hand, signaling "we believe the current price is unreasonable," and on the other, increasing the market's imagination for potential future valuation repair.

However, from the perspective of governance and market structure, the DAO treasury’s shift from a "passive holding + risk reserve" traditional role to a "proactive management + secondary market operation" new posture inevitably raises controversy. Supporters view this as an asset management upgrade that a mature protocol should have — when the treasury size is large enough, dynamically adjusting the asset structure to improve capital efficiency is inherently a rational asset allocation behavior; opponents worry that such proactive "entry" may be seen as a form of indirect intervention in prices, blurring the boundaries between decentralized governance and traditional enterprise-style "price support," potentially opening the floodgates for more price intervention behaviors in the future.

The impact on the microstructure of the market also has dual sides. On one hand, the expectation of substantial buy orders may improve the liquidity and order depth of LDO in the short term, providing some price support and attracting arbitrage and trend funds to participate; on the other hand, if the market interprets this repurchase as a signal of "not being able to hold without it," or worries that the treasury may reverse sell after concentrating positions, it could amplify volatility, leading to a more intense game around the rhythm of the repurchase. The repurchase itself thus becomes the focal point of a new round of long-short game rather than merely a replacement of assets on the books.

How Far Can Decentralized Governance Intervene?

It should be emphasized that as of March 27, 2026, this is still just a proposal in the proposal stage; whether it will become a reality needs to undergo a complete DAO governance process and community voting. This process itself constitutes a collective vote on "where the boundaries of power lie": to what extent can the DAO represent all token holders in utilizing the public treasury to execute actions highly related to prices?

When the token price significantly diverges from the protocol's fundamentals, there is no ready-made standard answer for whether "treasury intervention" should be initiated. Proponents would emphasize that the treasury is jointly owned by the community, and when market sentiment is overly pessimistic and valuation is clearly distorted, utilizing treasury resources for counter-cyclical adjustments is both a way to protect the interests of long-term participants and a rational choice to improve the overall asset quality of the treasury. Skeptics worry that once a precedent is set for "repurchasing due to low valuation," the community may continuously demand the treasury to "step in to support" during price decline cycles, potentially evolving into a sort of "implicit price commitment" that undermines the self-regulating pricing mechanism of the market.

If this repurchase ultimately passes and is executed smoothly, it may become an important reference sample for other large protocols when considering treasury management and token economic interventions. On one hand, leading protocols publicly discuss through governance processes and cautiously design parameters (such as 10,000 stETH upper limit, single batch not exceeding 1,000, and slippage < 3%), providing a framework for "how to conduct a repurchase without distorting the market extensively"; on the other hand, it will also force a broader DeFi community to rethink: under the narrative emphasizing decentralization and marketization, what should the boundaries of the public treasury's use be revised to?

A Pressure Test Around Valuation and Governance

Overall, Lido’s proposal to use stETH to repurchase LDO reflects a core contradiction that goes beyond the simple question of "whether to buy when prices fall." It is about the gradually tearing structural tension between the protocol's real income, the treasury's asset strength, and secondary market pricing. On one end, there is a treasury that continues to generate income while holding a large reserve of stETH; on the other end, there is a governance token priced by the market at approximately 0.00016 LDO/ETH, representing a discount of about 63% with a high-risk label. This contrast forces the protocol to consider whether to actively repair this misalignment while maintaining decentralized governance.

The real suspense lies in whether the Lido DAO community is willing to publicly vote to endorse this treasury operation colored by "proactive price support," as well as how much the details of the subsequent execution — including timing, communication, and disclosure — will influence external evaluations of the protocol's governance transparency and credibility. If the repurchase is perceived as "black box operation" or excessively chasing short-term price effects during the execution process, it could damage long-term trust; conversely, if the process is open, the rhythm restrained, and established parameters strictly adhered to, it could be seen as a mature asset management upgrade rather than a simple price support action.

In a larger narrative context, as the landscape of Ethereum staking evolves and the regulatory environment continues to change, Lido's repurchase proposal may subtly reshape external perceptions of it: shifting from a simple staking infrastructure provider to a more proactive and complex financial protocol entity regarding treasury operation, token economics, and governance boundaries. Regardless of the outcome, this round of asset replacement around stETH and LDO is providing the market with a new valuation anchor — not only for LDO itself but also for a realistic pressure test of "to what extent can and should decentralized protocols intervene in their own token economics."

Join our community, let's discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX benefit group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefit group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。