HostCRVUSD vs GNS — price, size and safety, side by side
CRVUSD (Ethereum) vs GNS (Arbitrum) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-26 / 2026-09-27.
CRVUSD vs GNS — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-09-26T18:07:24
| CRVUSD | GNS | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1.00 | $0.4887 |
| Market cap | $217.72M | $11.60M |
| 24h volume | $7.74M | $21.37K |
| Liquidity | $198.17M | $213.78K |
| FDV | $2.10B | $8.18M |
| Holders | 95,213 | 14,134 |
| Age (days) | 1,222 | 832 |
| Safety grade | B | D |
Where they differ
- CRVUSD measures ~19× the market cap of GNS
- CRVUSD measures ~927× the liquidity of GNS
- CRVUSD measures ~362× the 24h volume of GNS
- CRVUSD measures ~6.7× the holder count of GNS
- over the shared window CRVUSD moved −0.10% while GNS moved +9.30%
What the data says
CRVUSD
CRVUSD is Curve's own stablecoin — minted against collateral deposited into Curve's LLAMMA system, which liquidates gradually across a price band instead of in a single cliff, the design that made it the DeFi stable built for volatile collateral. The deployment 0xf939e0a03fb07f59a73314e73794be0e57ac1b4e is the Ethereum mint; our September 26, 2026 snapshot reads $198.2 million of tracked pool liquidity.
The honest mechanics: LLAMMA's soft-liquidation is genuinely novel — collateral converts to crvUSD gradually as price falls, cushioning the cliff-edge failure mode other CDP systems have. The trade-off is that the peg's quality is a function of Curve's collateral book and liquidation engine rather than a fiat reserve — verifiable on-chain, never guaranteed.
GNS
GNS at 0x18c11fd286c5ec11c3b683caa813b77f5163a122 is the Gains Network token on Arbitrum — the asset of a decentralized leverage-trading platform, 832 days into its record at the September 27, 2026 snapshot. 14,134 holders share the book around a $11.6 million market cap, against a $8.2 million fully-diluted figure that sits below the cap — an unusual inversion reflecting a circulating float larger than the measured local supply basis of 16.7 million units.
The D grade is earned on the contract side: mint authority is still active and new supply can be minted. Freeze authority is revoked, and it is not a proxy. The ten largest wallets hold 56.7% of supply. $213.8 thousand of workable tracked depth sees $22.6 thousand of daily volume.
FAQ
Which is bigger, CRVUSD or GNS?
By tracked market cap: CRVUSD (Ethereum) measures $217.72M and GNS (Arbitrum) measures $11.60M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, CRVUSD or GNS?
On the contract checks we publish: CRVUSD (Ethereum) grades B and GNS (Arbitrum) grades D. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have CRVUSD and GNS performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-09-26T18:07:24, the measured snapshots show CRVUSD at −0.10% and GNS at +9.30%.
More comparisons
FWWETH vs CRVUSDCRVUSD vs SASHIMIWBTC vs CRVUSDUSDC vs CRVUSDGNS vs CBZECGNS vs NESTGNS vs DRAMARB vs GNS
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→2026-09-26T18:07:24; 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.