Most lending protocols express liquidation risk as a single ratio, but they do not all call it health factor, and the thresholds are not comparable across protocols. Aave V3, Morpho and HyperLend use the term and liquidate below 1.0. Euler V2 calls the same idea a health score. Compound V2 and Compound III do not use the term anywhere in their documentation, and work with collateral factors and account liquidity instead. Revert Lend and Folks Finance each describe the gap between collateral and debt in their own vocabulary.
The comparison table
Every protocol below answers the same question, how far is this position from liquidation. Each answers it with a different name, a different formula, and a different screen.
| Protocol | What the metric is called | What it is a ratio of | Liquidation trigger | Where you see it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aave V3 | Health Factor | (Total collateral value x weighted average liquidation threshold) / total borrow value | Below 1.0 | Aave app dashboard, one number per account across the shared pool |
| Morpho | Health Factor, derived from the market LLTV. The liquidation rule itself is LTV against LLTV | (Collateral value in loan token x LLTV) / borrowed amount | Below 1.0, equivalently LTV at or above LLTV | Morpho app, one number per isolated market position |
| Euler V2 | Health Score | Risk-adjusted collateral value over liabilities, using the liquidation LTV of each collateral and vault pair | At or below 1 | Euler app, Portfolio under Positions and on each position detail page |
| Compound V2 | No health factor. Account liquidity, expressed as a surplus or a shortfall | Sum of (supplied balances x collateral factors) minus borrow balances | Account liquidity turns negative, which the docs call a shortfall | Compound V2 interface, as borrow limit and borrow limit used |
| Compound III (Comet) | No health factor. Borrow collateral factor and liquidate collateral factor | Borrow balance against collateral values weighted by each asset collateral factor | isLiquidatable returns true once liquidity is negative under the liquidation collateral factors | Compound III app, as borrowing capacity and liquidation point |
| HyperLend | Health Factor (HF) | (Sum of collateral in $ x liquidation threshold) / sum of debt in $ | Below 1.0. Withdrawals are blocked earlier: 1.25 standard, 1.06 E-Mode, 1.00 Danger Zone | HyperLend app per position, plus the HyperTrack bot health factor function |
| Revert Lend | No named health factor. Collateral value after collateral factors, against debt | LP collateral value after per-token collateral factors, against outstanding debt | When the debt crosses above the collateral value | Revert app, as available to borrow and the gap between collateral value and debt |
| Folks Finance | Algorand app: Liquidation Margin. xChain protocol: total borrowed against borrowable amount | Liquidation margin is the remaining buffer, 0% to 100%. xChain compares TB(t) with BA(t) | Liquidation margin at or below 0. On xChain, TB(t) greater than BA(t) | Folks app loan page. On Polygon this is the xChain app |
What the metric actually measures
Strip the naming away and each of these numbers is built from three ingredients: the value of your collateral, a risk weight applied to each collateral asset, and the value of your debt. The risk weight is what stops a protocol lending against the full market value of collateral that can fall before a liquidator gets there.
Aave publishes the canonical form: Health Factor = (Total Collateral Value x Weighted Average Liquidation Threshold) / Total Borrow Value. Dividing one by the other normalises the result, so 1.0 is always the liquidation line whatever you hold. The health factor and liquidation entries cover that on their own. What follows is what changes protocol to protocol.
Aave V3: health factor, computed account-wide
Aave V3 uses the term directly, and below 1.0 a position is eligible for liquidation. The liquidation threshold in the numerator is a governance-set parameter per collateral asset, and Aave's help page works an example at 80%.
Two details matter for anyone watching the number. It is account-wide: all of your collateral in that market backs all of your debt, blended into one weighted average threshold. And how much a liquidator can repay in a single transaction depends on how far you have already fallen, up to 50% of the debt when the health factor is above 0.95 and both collateral and debt exceed $2,000, and up to 100% when it is at or below 0.95, or when either collateral or debt sits under $2,000.
Aave's parameters are also mutable: reserve settings vary between markets and change over time as governance adjusts them. A vote on a liquidation threshold moves your health factor without you touching the position. More in the Aave health factor entry and the Aave health factor alert page.
Morpho: a health factor derived from a fixed LLTV
Morpho uses both vocabularies. The liquidation rule is written against LLTV: if LTV is at or above LLTV, the position can be liquidated. The docs then define a health factor on top of it, healthy above 1.0.
The structural difference with Aave is the denominator. A Morpho market holds exactly one collateral asset and one loan asset, so there is no weighted average to compute. The market carries a single LLTV, fixed and immutable from creation, chosen from a governance-approved list of 0%, 38.5%, 62.5%, 77.0%, 86.0%, 91.5%, 94.5%, 96.5% and 98.0%.
So you get one number per market, not one per account. Borrow in three isolated markets and you have three independent numbers, and trouble in one does not move the other two. Depositors supplying through curated vaults are exposed to the markets the vault allocates to rather than to a health factor of their own.
Euler V2: health score, not health factor
Euler V2 calls its metric a health score, documented as the buffer between an account's risk-adjusted collateral value and its liabilities. An account can enter liquidation when, at raw on-chain values, its risk-adjusted collateral is not greater than its liability: the same line, a different name.
Euler splits the risk weight in two. A borrow LTV limits new borrowing for a collateral and vault pair, and a separate liquidation LTV determines liquidation eligibility. The gap between them is the buffer a fresh position opens with. Euler also warns that the displayed value is rounded, so a screen reading exactly 1 may already be under it, and liquidation runs as a reverse Dutch auction whose discount grows as the account gets less healthy, capped per vault.
Compound: does it use the term health factor?
No. The term does not appear in the Compound V2 documentation, and it does not appear in the Compound III (Comet) documentation either. Compound expresses the same risk with different primitives, which is why searching for a health factor on Compound turns up nothing.
On Compound V2 the vocabulary is:
- Collateral factor: the proportionate increase in borrow limit an account receives by minting the cToken, ranging from 0% to 90%
- Account liquidity: supplied balances multiplied by their collateral factors, minus borrow balances, returned as a surplus or a shortfall
- Shortfall: negative account liquidity, meaning the borrower is below the collateral requirement and subject to liquidation, and cannot borrow or withdraw until liquidity is positive again
- Close factor and liquidation incentive: how much of a liquidatable borrow can be repaid in one transaction, and the extra collateral handed to the liquidator
Compound III replaces the single collateral factor with two. Each asset has a borrowCollateralFactor setting borrowing capacity, so at 85% on WBTC an account can borrow up to 85% of the USD value of its supplied WBTC in the base asset. Each asset also has a separate, higher liquidateCollateralFactor used for liquidation eligibility, and two helper functions read the state directly: isBorrowCollateralized and isLiquidatable.
Practical translation for a Compound user hunting for a health factor: read borrow limit used, and treat the gap between the borrow and liquidate collateral factors as the headroom a health factor would otherwise show you above 1.0.
HyperLend: Aave's shape, plus withdrawal gates
HyperLend on HyperEVM uses Health Factor, liquidatable below 1.0, and its close factor tiers mirror Aave's: the entire debt is liquidatable when the position is under $2,000 or HF is below 0.95, and at most 50% above $2,000 with HF between 0.95 and 1.0.
It adds something Aave does not document the same way, levels at which the protocol blocks further withdrawals: HF below 1.25 in standard pools, 1.06 in E-Mode and 1.00 in Danger Zone Mode. These are not liquidation points. They are where your ability to take collateral out disappears, which in practice is the number that decides whether you can still act.
Revert Lend: loan health without a health factor
Revert Lend publishes no metric called health factor. Loan health is a direct comparison, the gap between your collateral value after collateral factors and your debt, and when the debt crosses above the collateral value the loan becomes liquidatable.
What makes it different is the collateral: a Uniswap V3 or Aerodrome LP position, used as collateral for a USDC loan while it keeps earning. Because an LP holds two tokens, the protocol applies the lower collateral factor of the two. Published factors are 85.0% for USDC, USDC.e, USDT and DAI, 77.5% for WETH and WBTC, 72.5% for wstETH and 60% for ARB, with a further 95% safety buffer so a fresh loan does not open on the line. The liquidation penalty scales with depth, from 2% to 10% of the debt value.
Which is why this one needs watching more than most. The collateral is a liquidity position, so its value moves with the pool and with impermanent loss while interest accrues on the debt. A Revert Lend loan can walk into liquidation range with the borrower doing nothing at all.
Folks Finance: liquidation margin on Algorand, borrowable amount on Polygon
Folks Finance is the case where the answer depends on which deployment you are on. On the Algorand app the FAQ names the metric Liquidation Margin, varying between 0% and 100%, where the closer the value is to zero the closer the liquidation, and a negative margin means the loan can be liquidated.
On the xChain protocol, the deployment covering Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Polygon, Avalanche, BNB Chain, Sei and Monad, the docs state the condition as a comparison rather than a named metric: when total borrowed TB(t) exceeds the borrowable amount BA(t), the loan can be liquidated. Collateral factors run 30% to 90% by asset and mode, stablecoins at 80% to 90% and altcoins at 45% to 75%. The borrow factor is 100% uniformly, and the liquidation bonus runs 4% to 10% by asset with a 10% protocol fee taken out of it.
Why the numbers are not comparable across protocols
Two positions both showing 1.3 are not carrying the same risk. Three things differ underneath.
- Collateral is weighted differently. Aave blends every collateral asset in the account into one weighted average threshold. Morpho applies a single fixed LLTV belonging to one market. Euler applies a liquidation LTV per collateral and vault pair. Compound applies a collateral factor per asset and never normalises the result into a ratio at all.
- Isolated and pooled markets have different blast radii. On Aave all of your collateral backs all of your debt, so one asset falling drags the whole account down. On Morpho exposure is scoped to one collateral asset against one loan asset. On Revert Lend the collateral is an LP position moving with a pool rather than a single price.
- Crossing the line costs different amounts. Aave caps a single liquidation at 50% of the debt above 0.95 and lifts it to 100% below. HyperLend mirrors those tiers. Revert Lend charges 2% to 10% scaling with depth. Folks Finance pays a 4% to 10% bonus.
Add that Aave's parameters can move by governance vote while a Morpho market's LLTV never changes, and that Euler warns its displayed value is rounded, and the conclusion is plain: the safe buffer you learned on one protocol does not transfer to the next. To test a number against real prices, the liquidation calculator runs the move backwards, from a price to the point where a position breaks.
Watching all of them from one place
Seven protocols, six names for the same idea, six screens to open. A borrower holding positions on three of them has no single number to watch and no shared threshold to remember, which is exactly where something gets missed.
Otomato is built for that. Paste a wallet address and it detects your positions automatically across 11 EVM chains, lending positions, tokens, perps and NFTs included, then alerts on every event linked to them, delivered on Telegram or in the mobile app. It is read-only: no wallet connect, no signatures, and it cannot move funds.
For lending specifically, the thresholds we watch are listed on the Aave health factor alert page, and the concept itself is broken down in Aave health factor.
Watch every lending position you hold
Otomato detects your Aave, Morpho, Euler, Compound and HyperLend positions from a wallet address and alerts on every event linked to them.
Clément Hecquet
Co-founder and CEO of Otomato. Engineer turned product leader, building the portfolio-aware alerts layer for on-chain users.
Related articles
What is Health Factor in DeFi Lending?
Health factor determines how close your lending position is to liquidation. Learn how it works on AAVE, Morpho, and Euler.
Morpho vs Aave V3: Rates, Risk Model and Liquidations Compared
Aave is one shared pool with governance-set risk parameters. Morpho is many isolated immutable markets with curated vaults on top. That single difference explains every other one.
Understanding Liquidation Risk in DeFi
What triggers a liquidation, how to monitor your risk, and why timely alerts matter for protecting your collateral.