HostRNT vs CCV — price, size and safety, side by side
RNT (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.
RNT vs CCV — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T23:42:29
| RNT | CCV | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.000984 | $2.01K |
| Market cap | $927.53K | — |
| 24h volume | $9.71K | $2.74B |
| Liquidity | $193.60K | $1.69B |
| FDV | $927.53K | — |
| Holders | 16,201 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | A | B |
Where they differ
- CCV measures ~8,752× the liquidity of RNT
- CCV measures ~282,376× the 24h volume of RNT
- over the shared window RNT moved −13.6% while CCV moved 0.00%
What the data says
RNT
On the two things that matter most in a token contract, RNT looks great. The mint key is burned, so the supply is capped and stays that way, and freeze is gone as well, so nothing can lock up your balance when you want out. Clearing both of those in one go is a strong sign, and it's what puts RNT at 92/100 as of the 2026-09-16 snapshot.
Market-wise, RNT carries workable liquidity of $193.60K and 16,201 wallets holding as of 2026-09-16. Encouragingly, that $193.60K pool is deep relative to a market cap of about $927.53K — the kind of ratio that lets real size move in and out without much slippage. 16,201 holders is a decent base; just remember the number alone doesn't reveal how much the top wallets control, so weigh it with the concentration figure. The creator's own position is small — 1.76% of supply as of 2026-09-16, comfortably under the 5% line the scanners flag — which is what you want to see.
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, RNT or CCV?
By tracked market cap: RNT (Solana) measures $927.53K and CCV (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, RNT or CCV?
On the contract checks we publish: RNT (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 RNT and CCV performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T23:42:29, the measured snapshots show RNT at −13.6% and CCV at 0.00%.
More comparisons
RNT vs RYYRNT vs FKBRNT vs CRDRNT 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.