The paper addresses the relationship between nancial instability and wealth inequality in a twofold perspective. First it is an attempt to explain why the two phenomena, despite being nowadays equally relevant as empirical concerns, do not attract equal attention from researchers and are usually studied separately or conceived as independent levers aecting cycles or growth. We suggest the adoption of implicit methodological paradigms, instead of historical momentum as likely reason. Second, we present a theoretical framework grounded on Ferri (2016) with a medium-run dynamic demand-led model set for a monetary economy of production, where corporate debt is introduced into the nancial account of rms. Minsky and Piketty come instrumentally to support the two perspectives: on one side they become our opposite representatives of heterodox and orthodox method; on the other side, as the model specication makes Piketty (2014) and Financial Instability Hypothesis directly comparable, our exercise sheds light on the dynamic role of retention rates and capital share during the cycle phases, qualifying the conditions under which nancial instability may lead inequality. Connecting the implications of the two argumentative lines, the call emerges for a signicant rethinking in macroeconomics studies.