HostGHIBLI vs CCV — price, size and safety, side by side
GHIBLI (Solana) vs CCV (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-17 / 2026-09-17T23:42:29.
GHIBLI vs CCV — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T23:42:29
| GHIBLI | CCV | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.0001078 | $2.01K |
| Market cap | $102.20K | — |
| 24h volume | $419.29 | $2.74B |
| Liquidity | $44.38K | $1.69B |
| FDV | $102.20K | — |
| Holders | 12,610 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | A | B |
Where they differ
- CCV measures ~38,176× the liquidity of GHIBLI
- CCV measures ~6,538,147× the 24h volume of GHIBLI
- over the shared window GHIBLI moved −17.4% while CCV moved 0.00%
What the data says
GHIBLI
Ghiblification — GHIBLI — the token born from the March 2025 "Ghibli-style" AI-image trend that flooded social feeds — on Solana at mint 4TBi66vi32S7J8X1A6eWfaLHYmUXu7CStcEmsJQdpump. The September 16, 2026 snapshot shows about $44 thousand of liquidity and roughly 12,610 holders.
Trend-born memes have a legible lifecycle: a cultural moment peaks, a coin launches into the peak, and the token's price becomes a derivative of whether the trend kept any cultural oxygen. GHIBLI survived its moment longer than most — the trend was genuinely enormous — but the honest label is event-meme economics.
CCV
Cucuvo belongs to a genre, and the genre is the story. Base's low fees make it one of the cheapest places in crypto to launch a token, and each week produces a wave of day-old tickers whose listing-feed numbers are tuned to catch screener sorts. CCV entered HostDeFi's records on August 19, 2026 — roughly one day after it began existing — carrying the wave's characteristic costume: about $1.69 billion in claimed liquidity and $2.74 billion in claimed daily volume, wrapped around a recorded market cap of zero and no holder count at all. Real markets earn numbers like those over years and show millions of holders doing it; this profile shows the numbers and nothing that would produce them.
The claimed figures come from venue feeds, and venue feeds report what pools tell them — including pools whose "volume" is an operator trading with themselves and whose "reserves" are valued against a price the same operator sets. Our capture graded the market shape those feeds described, which is why the grade on this page should be read as a grade of the costume, not the token. The contract at 0xedb2bbe57fe65de82039bed17d47d22c083e5609 — its mint powers, owner functions, and whether a buyer can actually sell — was not assessed in this snapshot.
FAQ
Which is bigger, GHIBLI or CCV?
By tracked market cap: GHIBLI (Solana) measures $102.20K and CCV (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GHIBLI or CCV?
On the contract checks we publish: GHIBLI (Solana) grades A and CCV (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GHIBLI and CCV performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T23:42:29, the measured snapshots show GHIBLI at −17.4% and CCV at 0.00%.
More comparisons
GHIBLI vs RYYGHIBLI vs FKBGHIBLI vs CRDGHIBLI vs RDKCCV vs RYYCCV vs FKBCCV vs CRDCCV vs RDK
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→2026-09-17T23:42:29; 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.