HostPAXG vs RDK — price, size and safety, side by side
PAXG (Ethereum) vs RDK (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.
PAXG vs RDK — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| PAXG | RDK | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $4.30K | $2.07K |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $2.13M | $2.89B |
| Liquidity | $6.17M | $1.74B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 327 | 1 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- RDK measures ~283× the liquidity of PAXG
- RDK measures ~1,355× the 24h volume of PAXG
What the data says
PAXG
PAXG is Paxos's tokenized gold — each token a claim on one fine troy ounce held in LBMA vaults in London, making it the most direct on-chain gold exposure in this index. The deployment 0x45804880de22913dafe09f4980848ece6ecbaf78 is the canonical mint; our September 14, 2026 snapshot reads $6.2 million of tracked pool liquidity.
The honest frame is the custodial one: a PAXG is only as good as Paxos's vault attestations and redemption rails — Paxos is a NYDFS-regulated trust, which puts this in the "institutional-grade claim" bucket alongside USDC rather than the commodity-fantasy bucket — but it is still a claim, and redemption has minimums most wallets will never meet. The token tracks spot gold minus the custody premium; what it cannot track is the deep liquidity of actual gold markets.
RDK
Sometimes the read on a token is defined by what is missing, and Rudake is that case. HostDeFi's August 19, 2026 capture of RDK — taken when the token was about one day old — has no holder count, no market capitalization, no mint- or freeze-control assessment, and no identifying history. What it does have is a pair of claims from the listing venue: roughly $1.74 billion in pool liquidity and $2.89 billion in daily volume. When the only two numbers present are the two easiest to fabricate, and every number that is hard to fabricate is absent, the shape of the data is itself the disclosure.
Why those two, specifically? Because screeners and aggregators rank by them. An operator who cycles trades against their own pool manufactures "volume" for the cost of gas; reserve figures arrive via feeds that don't audit what they relay. Holder counts and contract state, by contrast, live on-chain where anyone can check — which is why they are the fields that go missing when the goal is to look large rather than be large.
FAQ
Which is bigger, PAXG or RDK?
By tracked market cap: PAXG (Ethereum) measures — and RDK (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, PAXG or RDK?
On the contract checks we publish: PAXG (Ethereum) grades B and RDK (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have PAXG and RDK performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show PAXG at −2.40% and RDK at 0.00%.
More comparisons
PAXG vs RYYPAXG vs FKBPAXG vs CRDPAXG vs CCVRDK vs RYYRDK vs FKBRDK vs CRDRDK 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.