Host牛来 vs LONG — price, size and safety, side by side
牛来 (Base) vs LONG (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-02 / 2026-10-05.
牛来 vs LONG — normalized performance, 2026-09-26 to 2026-10-02
| 牛来 | LONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.000004513 | $0.0000003079 |
| Market cap | $276.67K | $232.77K |
| 24h volume | $16.30M DEX | $36.60M DEX |
| Liquidity | $1.98M | $1.83M |
| FDV | $276.67K | $232.77K |
| Holders | 5,108 | 6,140 |
| Age (days) | 12 | 0 |
| Safety grade | A | A |
Where they differ
- LONG measures ~2.2× the 24h volume of 牛来
- over the shared window 牛来 moved −77.6% while LONG moved −99.7%
What the data says
牛来
牛来 on Base — 0x96594709ee85e343ad0be181b0f1a68a9b4ebb07 — is the third and smallest of the three same-named contracts: $2.0 million of liquidity and roughly $16.3 million of daily volume in the October 6, 2026 snapshot.
Where the two larger clones price within a whisker of each other at ~$0.0001, this one trades at a fifth of that — same name, different unit scale, and 8x daily turnover. A smaller clone diverging in price from the mirrored pair reads as the runt of the deployment: whether it is an earlier deployment, a failed clone left running, or a deliberate third book, it is not interchangeable with its siblings and the address is the only identity that matters.
LONG
This is the second LONG row on Base — the shallower sibling at 0x4a72d6f1fd7582f1246ce9e5b248083d938b2b07, where our October 6, 2026 snapshot reads $1.8 million of tracked pool liquidity against the deeper row's ~$5 million.
The honest note is the same one every sibling pair earns: same ticker, different contract, and the depth split says the market mostly chose the other one — which doesn't make this one illegitimate, just the less-liquid venue for the name. The mint above is the identity this page's figures describe.
FAQ
Which is bigger, 牛来 or LONG?
By tracked market cap: 牛来 (Base) measures $276.67K and LONG (Base) measures $232.77K — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, 牛来 or LONG?
On the contract checks we publish: 牛来 (Base) grades A and LONG (Base) grades A. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have 牛来 and LONG performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-26 and 2026-10-02, the measured snapshots show 牛来 at −77.6% and LONG at −99.7%.
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, 2026-09-26→2026-10-02; 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 HostDeFi product.