Open app

COQ vs 格陵兰岛 — price, size and safety, side by side

COQ (Avalanche) vs 格陵兰岛 (BNB Chain) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-27 / 2026-09-26T06:07:05.

COQB

$0.0000001349
COQINU on Avalanche
Trade COQ
vs

格陵兰岛B

$0.000008357
神圣格陵兰岛 on BNB Chain
Trade 格陵兰岛

COQ vs 格陵兰岛 — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-09-26T06:07:05

100 — shared start
COQ 0.00%  ·  格陵兰岛 0.00% — both series rebased to 100 at the first measured point in the shared window; not a raw-price chart.
COQ格陵兰岛
Price$0.0000001349$0.000008357
Market cap$9.37M—
24h volume$13.40K$1.36M
Liquidity$373.97K$370.65K
FDV$9.36M$8.36M
Holders110,3531,960
Age (days)1,0192
Safety gradeBB

Where they differ

What the data says

COQ

COQ at 0x420fca0121dc28039145009570975747295f2329 is Avalanche's original large memecoin, 1,019 days into its record at the September 27, 2026 snapshot and priced at a $9.4 million market cap on a supply that runs into the tens of trillions — the joke denomination is the point.

The book is workable for the cap and the tape is genuinely alive: $374.0 thousand of tracked depth on $197.4 thousand of 24-hour volume — the pool cycling half itself daily nearly three years in, unusual persistence for a meme book. Contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot.

Full COQ safety read →

格陵兰岛

神圣格陵兰岛 — "Sacred Greenland," a geopolitics-flavored name — is a two-day-old BNB Chain token at 0x452d4c2971471736f8e840a6f9b0f4789243a08a, priced at a fully diluted $8.4 million across 1,960 wallets on the September 27, 2026 snapshot.

The market side is healthy for a debut: $370.7 thousand of tracked liquidity with $1.4 million of two-day volume, and the top ten hold about 54.4% — a fairly concentrated but not extreme float. The unmeasured side is the caveat: contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot.

Full 格陵兰岛 safety read →

FAQ

Which is bigger, COQ or 格陵兰岛?

By tracked market cap: COQ (Avalanche) measures $9.37M and 格陵兰岛 (BNB Chain) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.

Which is safer, COQ or 格陵兰岛?

On the contract checks we publish: COQ (Avalanche) grades B and 格陵兰岛 (BNB Chain) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.

How have COQ and 格陵兰岛 performed over the shared window?

Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-09-26T06:07:05, the measured snapshots show COQ at 0.00% and 格陵兰岛 at 0.00%.

More comparisons

Q vs COQCOQ vs GOHOMEAUSD vs COQKLED vs COQGOHOME vs 格陵兰岛格陵兰岛 vs HAROLDQ vs 格陵兰岛格陵兰岛 vs MORPHO

The grade column is the one CMC's compare page cannot print — our grade is computed from the contract itself (mint/freeze authority, liquidity, holder concentration). Changes are measured over the shared window stated on the chart, 2026-09-21→2026-09-26T06:07:05; a token with fewer measured points measures a shorter span inside it.

Figures are dated on-chain snapshots, not a live feed. Safety grades are structural checks — not investment advice. Free · no signup · a NexFlow product.