UNI and AAVE are the first to be hit! Analyst: The CLARITY Act could seriously damage the DeFi yield myth

The “Digital Assets Market Clarity Act (CLARITY Act),” which is tied to the U.S. cryptocurrency market structure, has recently become a focus of attention due to stablecoin regulatory rules. However, research firm 10x Research warns that if the bill is passed, the hardest hit will actually be DeFi protocols and related tokens—especially those that use “yield” as a selling point.

The core controversy of the “CLARITY Act” is that it would ban platforms from providing any form of yield or rewards on “stablecoin balances.” In other words, going forward, stablecoins would no longer be allowed to be used as on-chain savings or yield products, but instead be reclassified as payment and settlement tools.

10x Research founder Markus Thielen pointed out: “This effectively means a re-centralization of yield.”

He explained that if the bill is implemented smoothly, opportunities for yield would inevitably be re-concentrated in traditional banks, money market funds (MMF), and regulated financial products, which would shrink the competitive space for crypto platforms on yield.

Markus Thielen analyzed that the market’s original optimistic interpretation was: if centralized platforms are banned from offering stablecoin yield, users will turn to on-chain DeFi protocols. But he cautioned that this conclusion depends on the premise that “DeFi can be exempted from the same regulatory framework.”

He believes that the regulatory scope of the “CLARITY Act” is very likely to extend to front-end interfaces and token economic models—especially once the protocol’s fee generation or governance mechanisms begin to operate like equity, they are bound to be brought under regulation.

This means that a large number of DeFi projects will face heightened scrutiny. The report names decentralized exchanges Uniswap (UNI), SushiSwap (SUSHI), dYdX (DYDX), as well as lending protocols Aave (AAVE) and Compound (COMP). In the future, their operating models and value distribution may face tighter restrictions. The outcome could be: declining trading volume, shrinking liquidity, and weaker token demand.