HostNexFlow › Guides › Circulating vs total supply
Circulating vs total supply
A $20M 'market cap' as of a token's launch week, with 5% of supply trading, isn't a $20M project — it's a $400M valuation being price-discovered on crumbs. The gap between the two numbers is where the risk lives.
Three numbers get conflated into one: circulating supply (tokens tradable now), total supply (tokens that exist), and max supply (tokens that can ever exist). Market cap is price × circulating. FDV — fully diluted valuation — is price × total. When those two supplies are nearly equal, the distinction is bookkeeping. When circulating is a sliver of total, the gap is a minefield: the quoted "market cap" flatters the token by describing only the portion that's trading.
Why the thin float pumps so well
Thin float is a price amplifier with a countdown attached. When only 5% of a token's supply trades, every buy moves price hard — the same mechanism that makes early charts look vertical. Traders see a $20M market cap and read "cheap"; the FDV line reading $400M is the valuation they're actually paying, because the remaining 95% exists and belongs to someone — team, investors, treasury, unlocked-next-quarter reserves — with every incentive to sell into the price the sliver established.
The pump isn't an accident of the structure; for many launches it is the structure. The low-float/high-FDV playbook → is a launch design, not a bug: restrict circulating supply, let price discovery run on crumbs, and let the unlock schedule convert the paper valuation into insider exits over the following quarters.
The unlock wall — where the other 95% goes
Locked supply isn't dead supply; it's scheduled supply. Vesting contracts, investor cliffs, ecosystem-reserve allocations, and "team tokens locked for 12 months" all have dates — and the dates are verifiable on-chain rather than in the pitch deck. The question isn't whether the locked 95% sells; it's when, into how much liquidity, and who absorbs it. A token trading 5% float with a 40% cliff next quarter isn't an investment in a $20M cap — it's a front-row seat to 8× the float hitting the market.
Even "burned" supply deserves a second look — burn theater covers tokens whose "burn" sent supply to a wallet the team still controls, or that burned a token with a live mint authority, which makes the gesture decorative.
Reading supply honestly — the four questions
What's circulating, really?
Not the site's number — the derived one. Total supply minus provably locked/burned holdings (vesting contracts, dead addresses, verifiable lockups) minus team/treasury wallets. What's left is float, and it's often less flattering than the marketing version.
What's the FDV?
Price × total supply is the valuation you're being asked to endorse. Compare it to the token's actual liquidity and comparable projects — an FDV that's 50× the pool depth is a valuation gravity will find.
When does the rest unlock?
Vesting cliffs, linear unlocks, investor tranches — the schedule is the sell calendar. A big unlock into thin liquidity is a date with a price drop, and the date is public.
Who holds the locked part?
Supply locked in a reputable vesting contract is one thing; supply "locked" in a team wallet with a promise is another. The first is enforced by code; the second by the same people selling you the story. Multisig vs single-key treasuries →
The heuristic: never quote market cap without the float percentage attached. "8% circulating, FDV 20× the liquidity pool" is a complete sentence about risk; "$15M market cap" is half of one. The tokens that hurt buyers aren't overpriced at the top of the range — they're mispriced the whole way up, because the number everyone quoted described a sliver.
When the float is honest
Fair launches and memecoins with 100% circulating supply are the counterexample — no unlock wall because there's nothing locked. Their risk isn't the schedule; it's who already holds the float. Supply shape doesn't determine safety either direction — it determines which questions you have to answer before the size of your position is a decision instead of a bet.
Supply shape is one input — read the whole posture
The scan pulls circulating vs total, holder concentration, and liquidity depth into one dated read — the float question answered beside the rest.
Frequently asked
Market cap vs FDV?
Mcap = price × circulating; FDV = price × total. Thin float makes mcap flattering — FDV is the valuation you're actually paying.
Why do low-float launches pump?
Thin float amplifies every buy — vertical charts are the structure working as designed, and the unlock schedule later converts paper valuation into insider exits.
What is an unlock wall?
Scheduled release of locked supply — cliffs, tranches, reserves. Locked is dated, not dead; a big unlock into thin liquidity is a public sell calendar.
Is high circulating always safer?
It removes the unlock wall, not the holder problem — the question shifts to who holds the float.
Check real circulating supply?
Total minus provably locked/burned minus team/treasury wallets — the derived number, not the marketed one.