HostPENDLE vs WM — price, size and safety, side by side
PENDLE (Arbitrum) vs WM (Ethereum) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-27 / 2026-09-27.
PENDLE vs WM — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-09-27T18:22:06
| PENDLE | WM | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $2.64 | $1.00 |
| Market cap | $457.55M | $82.04M |
| 24h volume | $1.20M | $26.37K |
| Liquidity | $3.40M | $1.01M |
| FDV | $38.28M | $76.48M |
| Holders | 70,287 | 322 |
| Age (days) | 1,293 | 744 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- PENDLE measures ~5.6× the market cap of WM
- PENDLE measures ~3.4× the liquidity of WM
- PENDLE measures ~45× the 24h volume of WM
- PENDLE measures ~218× the holder count of WM
What the data says
PENDLE
PENDLE on Arbitrum at 0x0c880f6761f1af8d9aa9c466984b80dab9a8c9e8 is the bridged deployment of the yield-tokenization protocol's token — the asset behind the principal-and-yield-splitting market that turned fixed yield into a DeFi primitive. The September 27, 2026 snapshot prices the Arbitrum-local supply of 14.6 million units at $38.3 million fully diluted, against an asset-wide $457.6 million market cap.
$3.4 million of tracked pool depth on this chain is thin measured the way the depth flag measures — against the asset-wide figure — but functional: $632.8 thousand of 24-hour volume moves through it. The 1,293-day record belongs to a token whose liquidity genuinely spans chains, with Ethereum holding the canonical supply and Arbitrum holding the routed share, so the local book is a window on the market rather than the market itself.
WM
Wrapped M is M^0's portable institutional dollar — the bridged representation of the M stablecoin, which is itself issued against T-bill collateral under a framework designed for institutional minters. The deployment 0x437cc33344a0b27a429f795ff6b469c72698b291 is the wrapped mint on Ethereum; our September 27, 2026 snapshot reads $1.0 million of tracked pool liquidity.
The honest framing: wM is a claim on M, and M is a claim on a collateral book operated under M^0's rules — so the holder sits two layers from the T-bills, one more than a USDC holder does. The design's pitch is interoperability (M is meant to power bespoke stablecoins); the cost is that the custody chain is longer than the marketing implies.
FAQ
Which is bigger, PENDLE or WM?
By tracked market cap: PENDLE (Arbitrum) measures $457.55M and WM (Ethereum) measures $82.04M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, PENDLE or WM?
On the contract checks we publish: PENDLE (Arbitrum) grades B and WM (Ethereum) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have PENDLE and WM performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-09-27T18:22:06, the measured snapshots show PENDLE at −4.03% and WM at −0.04%.
More comparisons
PENDLE vs WBTCPENDLE vs GULDMSUSD vs PENDLEPOD vs PENDLEGIGA vs WMWM vs BIRBWXRP vs WMWM vs P2P
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→2026-09-27T18:22:06; 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.