HostGHO vs ZAMA — price, size and safety, side by side
GHO (Monad) vs ZAMA (Ethereum) — 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 ZAMA — normalized performance, 2026-09-15 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| GHO | ZAMA | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.9984 | $0.04771 |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $200.80K | $812.02K |
| Liquidity | $3.99M | $501.74K |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 77 | 224 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- GHO measures ~7.9× the liquidity of ZAMA
- ZAMA measures ~4.0× 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.
ZAMA
ZAMA is the token of Zama — the cryptography company building fully homomorphic encryption tooling for blockchains, one of the few serious attempts at confidential on-chain computation. The contract 0xa12cc123ba206d4031d1c7f6223d1c2ec249f4f3 is what our scan tracks: $502 thousand of pool liquidity as of September 14, 2026.
The honest read: this is an infrastructure bet on a hard problem — FHE has been "almost practical" for years, and Zama is among the credible teams actually shipping it — but the token's value depends on whether confidential-compute demand materializes on-chain at the scale the pitch implies. Real team, real tech, early-stage adoption risk.
FAQ
Which is bigger, GHO or ZAMA?
By tracked market cap: GHO (Monad) measures — and ZAMA (Ethereum) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GHO or ZAMA?
On the contract checks we publish: GHO (Monad) grades B and ZAMA (Ethereum) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GHO and ZAMA performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-15 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show GHO at −0.14% and ZAMA at 0.00%.
More comparisons
GHO vs RYYGHO vs FKBGHO vs CRDGHO vs RDKZAMA vs RYYZAMA vs FKBZAMA vs CRDZAMA 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, 2026-09-15→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.