HostGITLAWB vs LONG — price, size and safety, side by side
GITLAWB (Base) vs LONG (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-15 / 2026-10-05.
GITLAWB vs LONG — normalized performance, 2026-09-21 to 2026-10-05
| GITLAWB | LONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.0000163 | $0.0000003079 |
| Market cap | $6.09M | $232.77K |
| 24h volume | $1.50M DEX | $36.60M DEX |
| Liquidity | $1.90M | $1.83M |
| FDV | $6.05M | $232.77K |
| Holders | 11,544 | 6,140 |
| Age (days) | 194 | 0 |
| Safety grade | B | A |
Where they differ
- GITLAWB measures ~26× the market cap of LONG
- LONG measures ~24× the 24h volume of GITLAWB
- GITLAWB measures ~1.9× the holder count of LONG
- over the shared window GITLAWB moved −63.9% while LONG moved −99.7%
What the data says
GITLAWB
GITLAWB at 0x5f980dcfc4c0fa3911554cf5ab288ed0eb13dba3 is a Base asset 194 days into its record at the October 6, 2026 snapshot, priced at a $6.1 million market cap across a 100.0 billion supply.
The book is unusually liquid for the cap: $1.9 million of tracked depth is deep — nearly a third of the valuation — and the $1.5 million daily volume nearly cycles the whole pool every day, a genuinely active tape rather than a dormant holding. Contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot, so authority posture is a live-scan question, not an assumption here.
LONG
This is the second LONG row on Base — the shallower sibling at 0x4a72d6f1fd7582f1246ce9e5b248083d938b2b07, where our October 6, 2026 snapshot reads $1.8 million of tracked pool liquidity against the deeper row's ~$5 million.
The honest note is the same one every sibling pair earns: same ticker, different contract, and the depth split says the market mostly chose the other one — which doesn't make this one illegitimate, just the less-liquid venue for the name. The mint above is the identity this page's figures describe.
FAQ
Which is bigger, GITLAWB or LONG?
By tracked market cap: GITLAWB (Base) measures $6.09M and LONG (Base) measures $232.77K — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GITLAWB or LONG?
On the contract checks we publish: GITLAWB (Base) grades B and LONG (Base) grades A. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GITLAWB and LONG performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-21 and 2026-10-05, the measured snapshots show GITLAWB at −63.9% and LONG at −99.7%.
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→2026-10-05; 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.