HostGHO vs CRD — price, size and safety, side by side
GHO (Monad) vs CRD (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-17T20:24:07 / 2026-09-17T20:24:07.
GHO vs CRD — normalized performance, 2026-09-15 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| GHO | CRD | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.9984 | $2.13K |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $200.80K | $4.03B |
| Liquidity | $3.99M | $1.99B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 77 | 1 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- CRD measures ~498× the liquidity of GHO
- CRD measures ~20,059× the 24h volume of GHO
What the data says
GHO
GHO is Aave's answer to the question every lending market eventually asks: why should our own stablecoin pay someone else? Deposited collateral on Aave mints GHO against it, interest on GHO borrows flows back to Aave's DAO rather than a stablecoin issuer, and the peg is held by arbitrage against the lending market rather than a redemption window. The deployment at 0xfc421ad3c883bf9e7c4f42de845c4e4405799e73 is on Monad — new territory for a token that lives or dies by integration depth, and one of the first assets our index tracks there.
Our September 16, 2026 snapshot shows $4.0 million of tracked pool liquidity — real depth for a chain this young. The honest caveat: a stablecoin's worth is its peg history plus the health of the lending market behind it, and on a new chain both are short records so far. Our snapshot also did not assess this deployment's contract-level controls — the live scan is the check for that.
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, GHO or CRD?
By tracked market cap: GHO (Monad) measures — and CRD (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GHO or CRD?
On the contract checks we publish: GHO (Monad) grades B and CRD (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GHO and CRD performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-15 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show GHO at −0.14% and CRD at 0.00%.
More comparisons
GHO vs RYYGHO vs FKBGHO vs RDKGHO 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, 2026-09-15→2026-09-17T20:24:07; 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.