HostSQD vs GNS — price, size and safety, side by side
SQD (Arbitrum) vs GNS (Arbitrum) — 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.
SQD vs GNS — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-09-27T15:10:18
| SQD | GNS | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.03036 | $0.4887 |
| Market cap | $39.68M | $11.60M |
| 24h volume | $3.38K | $21.37K |
| Liquidity | $226.13K | $213.78K |
| FDV | $40.29M | $8.18M |
| Holders | 17,095 | 14,134 |
| Age (days) | 809 | 832 |
| Safety grade | D | D |
Where they differ
- SQD measures ~3.4× the market cap of GNS
- GNS measures ~6.3× the 24h volume of SQD
What the data says
SQD
SQD at 0x1337420ded5adb9980cfc35f8f2b054ea86f8ab1 — Subsquid — is the Arbitrum deployment of the blockchain data-network token, 809 days into its record at the September 27, 2026 snapshot. The $39.7 million market cap prices nearly all of the $40.3 million fully-diluted figure on 1.3 billion units — the float is essentially out.
The book is thin for the cap: $226.1 thousand of tracked depth on $14.9 thousand of 24-hour volume — a held-token profile. Contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot.
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, SQD or GNS?
By tracked market cap: SQD (Arbitrum) measures $39.68M and GNS (Arbitrum) measures $11.60M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, SQD or GNS?
On the contract checks we publish: SQD (Arbitrum) grades D and GNS (Arbitrum) grades D. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have SQD and GNS performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-09-27T15:10:18, the measured snapshots show SQD at +9.22% and GNS at +10.7%.
More comparisons
UNIBTC vs SQDLASO vs SQDSQD vs CRVSQD vs RHEAGNS 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→2026-09-27T15:10:18; 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.