HostMNGO vs CCV — price, size and safety, side by side
MNGO (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.
MNGO vs CCV — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T23:42:29
| MNGO | CCV | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.0322 | $2.01K |
| Market cap | $33.78M | — |
| 24h volume | $51.19 | $2.74B |
| Liquidity | $56.03K | $1.69B |
| FDV | $33.78M | — |
| Holders | 13,606 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | A | B |
Where they differ
- CCV measures ~30,237× the liquidity of MNGO
- CCV measures ~53,551,603× the 24h volume of MNGO
What the data says
MNGO
MNGO is Mango Markets' token — the Solana perp/lending DEX that survived one of the most famous exploits in DeFi history (a $114M market-manipulation incident that became a landmark crypto-fraud conviction) and kept operating through the aftermath. The mint MangoCzJ36AjZyKwVj3VnYU4GTonjfVEnJmvvWaxLac is what our scan tracks: $33.8 million market cap, $56 thousand of pool liquidity, 13,606 holders as of September 16, 2026.
The honest read: the exploit is the headline and also the lesson — oracle-manipulable collateral is what let it happen, and "protocol survived a nine-figure manipulation" is a strange kind of track record that cuts both ways. The venue still runs; the token carries the history in its discount.
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, MNGO or CCV?
By tracked market cap: MNGO (Solana) measures $33.78M and CCV (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, MNGO or CCV?
On the contract checks we publish: MNGO (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 MNGO and CCV performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T23:42:29, the measured snapshots show MNGO at +1.16% and CCV at 0.00%.
More comparisons
MNGO vs RYYMNGO vs FKBMNGO vs CRDMNGO 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.