HostWBTC vs CRVUSD — price, size and safety, side by side
WBTC (Ethereum) vs CRVUSD (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.
WBTC vs CRVUSD — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-26T18:07:24
| WBTC | CRVUSD | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $84.65K | $1.00 |
| Market cap | $9.83B | $217.72M |
| 24h volume | $30.16M | $7.74M |
| Liquidity | $224.32M | $198.17M |
| FDV | $9.83B | $2.10B |
| Holders | 196,306 | 95,213 |
| Age (days) | 1,583 | 1,222 |
| Safety grade | C | B |
Where they differ
- WBTC measures ~45× the market cap of CRVUSD
- WBTC measures ~3.9× the 24h volume of CRVUSD
- WBTC measures ~2.1× the holder count of CRVUSD
- over the shared window WBTC moved +8.05% while CRVUSD moved +0.05%
What the data says
WBTC
WBTC is the original wrapped Bitcoin — the ERC-20 that put BTC on Ethereum's DeFi rails in 2019, custodied by BitGo with a mint-and-burn pipeline run through KYC'd merchants. The deployment 0x2260fac5e5542a773aa44fbcfedf7c193bc2c599 is the canonical mint, one of the oldest contract addresses in DeFi; our September 27, 2026 snapshot reads $224.3 million of tracked pool liquidity on this pair set — a slice of a float that spans every major venue.
The honest frame is unchanged since launch: holding WBTC means trusting BitGo's custody — the reserve is attested and the mint pipeline is transparent, but the claim is institutional, not cryptographic. Coinbase's cbBTC arrived as the regulated-competitor answer; the two trade the same BTC exposure with different custodians, and the depth split between them is the market's live verdict on whose custody it prefers.
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.
FAQ
Which is bigger, WBTC or CRVUSD?
By tracked market cap: WBTC (Ethereum) measures $9.83B and CRVUSD (Ethereum) measures $217.72M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, WBTC or CRVUSD?
On the contract checks we publish: WBTC (Ethereum) grades C and CRVUSD (Ethereum) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have WBTC and CRVUSD performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-26T18:07:24, the measured snapshots show WBTC at +8.05% and CRVUSD at +0.05%.
More comparisons
WBTC vs FWWETHUSDC vs WBTCWETH vs WBTCWBTC vs SASHIMIFWWETH vs CRVUSDCRVUSD vs SASHIMIUSDC vs CRVUSDWETH vs CRVUSD
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, 2026-09-08→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.