NexIBS vs 79AU — price, size and safety, side by side
IBS (BNB Chain) vs 79AU (BNB Chain) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-11-10 / 2026-11-15.
IBS vs 79AU — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-11-10T21:13:10
| IBS | 79AU | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $5.73 | $5.03 |
| Market cap | $5.23M | — |
| 24h volume | $325.02K all venues | $1.39M DEX |
| Liquidity | $7.20M | $5.03M |
| FDV | $22.90M | $1.18B |
| Holders | 227,215 | 41,285 |
| Age (days) | 152 | 132 |
| Safety grade | C | B |
Where they differ
- 79AU measures ~4.3× the 24h volume of IBS
- IBS measures ~5.5× the holder count of 79AU
- over the shared window IBS moved −38.7% while 79AU moved −2.16%
What the data says
IBS
IBS at 0x255e746abb8d9acac00d6d023e5e63e3b8dfa7cd is a young BNB Chain asset — 152 days into its record at the November 6, 2026 snapshot — priced at a $5.2 million market cap across a compact 2.6 million supply.
The pool is the standout read in this batch: $7.2 million of tracked depth is deep — a third of the entire market cap sits in the exit book, a ratio most mid-caps never approach. The $934.4 thousand of daily volume is proportionate rather than frenzied. Contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot, so the authority posture is a live-scan question rather than an assumption this page makes.
79AU
79AU at 0xc35ef0564751a27b468f791113c686c8eebaa9ca is a 114-day-old BNB Chain book priced at a $1.2 billion cap on $5.0 million of tracked liquidity, 41,285 wallets holding at the November 5, 2026 snapshot.
Three reads belong together here. The pool is workable — the deepest in this batch — but thin against the cap's own size. The contract takes a 2.99% tax on every sale, so a round trip costs close to 6% before slippage. And the ten largest wallets hold about 96.8% of supply: a float that concentrated means the cap's moves are steered by very few hands, whatever the holder count says.
FAQ
Which is bigger, IBS or 79AU?
By tracked market cap: IBS (BNB Chain) measures $5.23M and 79AU (BNB Chain) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, IBS or 79AU?
On the contract checks we publish: IBS (BNB Chain) grades C and 79AU (BNB Chain) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have IBS and 79AU performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-11-10T21:13:10, the measured snapshots show IBS at −38.7% and 79AU at −2.16%.
More comparisons
IBS vs KBTCIBS vs USDCSKY vs IBSIBS vs EUROC79AU vs JLP79AU vs LBTC79AU vs JUPSPX vs 79AU
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→2026-11-10T21:13:10; 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.