HostFLING vs SMON — price, size and safety, side by side
FLING (Monad) vs SMON (Monad) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-16 / 2026-10-17.
FLING vs SMON — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-10-16T21:15:32
| FLING | SMON | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.000065 | $0.02539 |
| Market cap | — | $2.23M |
| 24h volume | $8.27K DEX | $159.50 DEX |
| Liquidity | $14.78K | $1.80K |
| FDV | $113.67K | $2.23M |
| Holders | 496 | 4,846 |
| Age (days) | 28 | 301 |
| Safety grade | C | B |
Where they differ
- FLING measures ~8.2× the liquidity of SMON
- FLING measures ~52× the 24h volume of SMON
- SMON measures ~9.8× the holder count of FLING
- over the shared window FLING moved −70.0% while SMON moved −13.1%
What the data says
FLING
FLING is an early-stage token on Monad — the new high-throughput EVM chain whose token economy is still young. The contract 0xa9da3c77ec7cdc4dfaa1fe142af583543d1c540f is what our scan tracks: $15 thousand of pool liquidity as of October 9, 2026.
The honest frame for early Monad tokens generally: the chain itself is new, so every asset on it is early-stage by definition — thin pools, fast narratives, and a market that has not sorted winners from launch-week noise yet. Twenty-seven thousand dollars of liquidity is the practical fact: size any position against the pool, not the storyline.
SMON
Kintsu Staked Monad is a liquid staking token — sMON is Kintsu's receipt for staked MON, meant to accrue staking yield while staying tradable. That makes it structurally different from the memes around it on Monad: its market cap of $2.2 million represents staked principal, and its 4,846 holders are yield positions, not speculation.
Two caveats earn the B at 77/100. First, the contract is an upgradeable proxy — the code behind the address can be swapped — which is standard for LSTs (the protocol must manage staking logic) but means you are trusting Kintsu's upgrade governance. Second, contract-level controls were not fully assessed in this snapshot. The market side is thin for the size: $2 thousand of tracked pool against a $2.2M cap, so secondary-market exits are shallow — meaningful size unwinds through the protocol's redemption path, not the pool.
FAQ
Which is bigger, FLING or SMON?
By tracked market cap: FLING (Monad) measures — and SMON (Monad) measures $2.23M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, FLING or SMON?
On the contract checks we publish: FLING (Monad) grades C and SMON (Monad) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have FLING and SMON performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-10-16T21:15:32, the measured snapshots show FLING at −70.0% and SMON at −13.1%.
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→2026-10-16T21:15:32; 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.