HostTBTC vs WM — price, size and safety, side by side
TBTC (Ethereum) vs WM (Ethereum) — 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.
TBTC vs WM — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| TBTC | WM | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $78.83K | $0.9998 |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $2.16M | $4.05M |
| Liquidity | $4.23M | $5.00M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 864 | 711 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- WM measures ~1.9× the 24h volume of TBTC
What the data says
TBTC
tBTC is Threshold Network's trust-minimized wrapped Bitcoin — the decentralized-custody answer to WBTC, where a rotating set of node operators secures the BTC rather than a single custodian. The deployment 0x18084fba666a33d37592fa2633fd49a74dd93a88 is the v2 mint; our September 14, 2026 snapshot reads $4.2 million of tracked pool liquidity.
The honest contrast is the whole point of the asset: tBTC trades BitGo's institutional custody for a threshold-signature committee — no single company can lose or freeze the coins, but the security model is cryptographic-economic (operator collateral) rather than legal, which is a different risk shape, not a strictly smaller one. Its depth vs WBTC's billions is the market's honest verdict on how much that trade matters to people.
WM
Wrapped M is M^0's portable institutional dollar — the bridged representation of the M stablecoin, which is itself issued against T-bill collateral under a framework designed for institutional minters. The deployment 0x437cc33344a0b27a429f795ff6b469c72698b291 is the wrapped mint on Ethereum; our August 19, 2026 snapshot reads $5.0 million of tracked pool liquidity.
The honest framing: wM is a claim on M, and M is a claim on a collateral book operated under M^0's rules — so the holder sits two layers from the T-bills, one more than a USDC holder does. The design's pitch is interoperability (M is meant to power bespoke stablecoins); the cost is that the custody chain is longer than the marketing implies.
FAQ
Which is bigger, TBTC or WM?
By tracked market cap: TBTC (Ethereum) measures — and WM (Ethereum) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, TBTC or WM?
On the contract checks we publish: TBTC (Ethereum) grades B and WM (Ethereum) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have TBTC and WM performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show TBTC at +1.31% and WM at 0.00%.
More comparisons
TBTC vs RYYTBTC vs FKBTBTC vs CRDTBTC vs RDKWM vs RYYWM vs FKBWM vs CRDWM 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→2026-09-17T20:24:07; 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.