HostGMT vs CRD — price, size and safety, side by side
GMT (Solana) vs CRD (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-09-17 / 2026-09-17T20:24:07.
GMT vs CRD — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| GMT | CRD | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.007237 | $2.13K |
| Market cap | $10.99M | — |
| 24h volume | $18.05K | $4.03B |
| Liquidity | $1.89K | $1.99B |
| FDV | $10.99M | — |
| Holders | 418,712 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | A | B |
Where they differ
- CRD measures ~1,049,731× the liquidity of GMT
- CRD measures ~223,162× the 24h volume of GMT
What the data says
GMT
GMT is the half of STEPN that was supposed to be scarce. Where GST (also in our corpus) was the freely-minted earn token, GMT was the governance asset — capped supply, staged unlocks, the token that briefly commanded a multi-billion-dollar valuation in 2022 when move-to-earn looked like the future of fitness. The Solana deployment at mint 7i5KKsX2weiTkry7jA4ZwSuXGhs5eJBEjY8vVxR4pfRx now reads, in HostDeFi's September 16, 2026 snapshot: 418,712 holders, roughly $11.0 million of market capitalization — and $1.9 thousand of tracked on-chain liquidity, the thinnest pool depth of any token this site grades.
That last figure demands its explanation, because it's less damning than it looks and more instructive: GMT is a multi-chain token (it lives on BNB Chain and Ethereum too) whose real trading migrated to centralized exchanges years ago. The Solana pools our read samples are an abandoned side door, not the market. But the practical consequence for a Solana-wallet holder is identical either way — swapping GMT on-chain at any size means catastrophic slippage, and the honest route out runs through a CEX deposit.
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, GMT or CRD?
By tracked market cap: GMT (Solana) measures $10.99M and CRD (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, GMT or CRD?
On the contract checks we publish: GMT (Solana) grades A and CRD (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have GMT and CRD performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show GMT at −3.81% and CRD at 0.00%.
More comparisons
GMT vs RYYGMT vs FKBGMT vs RDKGMT 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, 2026-09-08→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.