HostESP vs CRD — price, size and safety, side by side
ESP (Arbitrum) vs CRD (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-17T23:42:29 / 2026-09-17T23:42:29.
ESP vs CRD — normalized performance, 2026-09-15T19:06:11 to 2026-09-17T23:42:29
| ESP | CRD | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.07395 | $2.13K |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $420.51K | $4.03B |
| Liquidity | $514.49K | $1.99B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 187 | 1 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- CRD measures ~3,858× the liquidity of ESP
- CRD measures ~9,578× the 24h volume of ESP
What the data says
ESP
ESP is the token of Espresso Systems — the shared-sequencing and confirmation network built for rollups, launched with a live technical product rather than a roadmap. The contract 0x3b8db18e69d6686ad9371a423afe3dd1065c94f1 is what our scan tracks: $514 thousand of pool liquidity as of August 17, 2026 on Arbitrum.
The honest thesis: Espresso sells fast confirmations and decentralized sequencing to a rollup economy that mostly still runs centralized sequencers — a real product pointed at a real problem. The caution is that the market it serves is still forming: rollup teams have to choose to integrate, and the token's value case rides on that adoption curve more than on present cash flows.
CRD
Four billion dollars is what CRD's venue feed claimed the token traded in a single day — on August 19, 2026, when Cirudu was approximately one day old. Put that figure next to the rest of the same snapshot: about $1.99 billion in claimed liquidity, a recorded market capitalization of zero, and no holder count at all. For scale, four billion dollars of daily turnover is what entire major exchanges do; a nameless day-old Base token reporting it while having no measurable owners is describing something that cannot exist. The parsimonious explanation is reported-figure inflation — trading volume manufactured against the token's own pools so that listing feeds repeat impressive numbers.
This page's honest scope: HostDeFi's EVM snapshot grades market structure from those very venue feeds, which is why the incoherence above is the most valuable output the capture produced. The contract itself — mint powers, owner functions, transfer taxes, honeypot mechanics at 0x95735d3f68d045c942afb9ea1090f6b03150bfab — was not assessed in this snapshot, and with a token in this category, the contract is where the actual answer lives. Run the live scan above; it reads the chain, not the feed.
FAQ
Which is bigger, ESP or CRD?
By tracked market cap: ESP (Arbitrum) measures — and CRD (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, ESP or CRD?
On the contract checks we publish: ESP (Arbitrum) grades B and CRD (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have ESP and CRD performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-15T19:06:11 and 2026-09-17T23:42:29, the measured snapshots show ESP at 0.00% and CRD at 0.00%.
More comparisons
ESP vs RYYESP vs FKBESP vs RDKESP vs CCVCRD vs RYYCRD vs FKBCRD vs RDKCRD vs CCV
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, 2026-09-15T19:06:11→2026-09-17T23:42:29; 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.