HostGNS vs LINK — price, size and safety, side by side
GNS (Arbitrum) vs LINK (Ethereum) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-27 / 2026-09-26.
GNS vs LINK — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-09-26T18:07:24
| GNS | LINK | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.4887 | $14.30 |
| Market cap | $11.60M | $9.76B |
| 24h volume | $21.37K | $2.58M |
| Liquidity | $213.78K | $24.03M |
| FDV | $8.18M | $13.05B |
| Holders | 14,134 | 919,439 |
| Age (days) | 832 | 1,727 |
| Safety grade | D | A |
Where they differ
- LINK measures ~841× the market cap of GNS
- LINK measures ~112× the liquidity of GNS
- LINK measures ~121× the 24h volume of GNS
- LINK measures ~65× the holder count of GNS
What the data says
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.
LINK
LINK is Chainlink's token — the asset that pays the oracle network most of DeFi runs on, making it one of the few crypto tokens tied to infrastructure the market actually uses every block. The deployment 0x514910771af9ca656af840dff83e8264ecf986ca is the canonical mint; our September 26, 2026 snapshot reads $24.0 million of tracked pool liquidity on this pair set — a fraction of a float spread across every venue that lists it.
The honest shape: LINK's value thesis is payment for oracle services plus stake in the network's security model, so it carries a real-usage floor most tokens lack — and a valuation that has always run ahead of the fees the network actually collects. It is infrastructure exposure, not a cashflow claim, and the gap between "most-used oracle" and "token captures that usage" is the open question its holders are betting on.
FAQ
Which is bigger, GNS or LINK?
By tracked market cap: GNS (Arbitrum) measures $11.60M and LINK (Ethereum) measures $9.76B — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GNS or LINK?
On the contract checks we publish: GNS (Arbitrum) grades D and LINK (Ethereum) grades A. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GNS and LINK performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-09-26T18:07:24, the measured snapshots show GNS at +9.30% and LINK at +10.3%.
More comparisons
GNS vs CBZECGNS vs NESTGNS vs DRAMARB vs GNSLINK vs USD1ETH vs LINKSUSDE vs LINKLINK vs AAVE
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.