HostTQQQX vs CRD — price, size and safety, side by side
TQQQX (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.
TQQQX vs CRD — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| TQQQX | CRD | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $71.33 | $2.13K |
| Market cap | $40.22M | — |
| 24h volume | $11.63K | $4.03B |
| Liquidity | $53.67K | $1.99B |
| FDV | $40.22M | — |
| Holders | 704 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | C | B |
Where they differ
- CRD measures ~36,987× the liquidity of TQQQX
- CRD measures ~346,391× the 24h volume of TQQQX
What the data says
TQQQX
TQQQX is the xStock for TQQQ — a tokenized claim on a 3x daily-leveraged Nasdaq-100 ETF, which makes it the most aggressive instrument in the xStock family. The mint XsjQP3iMAaQ3kQScQKthQpx9ALRbjKAjQtHg6TFomoc is what our scan tracks: $40.2 million market cap, $54 thousand of liquidity and 704 holders as of September 16, 2026.
Two honest warnings stack here. The family one: issuer custody plus after-hours quoting. The product one is bigger: TQQQ resets its leverage daily, so the tokenized claim inherits volatility decay — over choppy multi-week stretches it can underperform naive 3x expectations even when the index ends flat. A tokenized leveraged ETF is a trading instrument, not a hold; the cap figures describe supply, not suitability.
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, TQQQX or CRD?
By tracked market cap: TQQQX (Solana) measures $40.22M and CRD (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, TQQQX or CRD?
On the contract checks we publish: TQQQX (Solana) grades C and CRD (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have TQQQX and CRD performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show TQQQX at −1.53% and CRD at 0.00%.
More comparisons
TQQQX vs RYYTQQQX vs FKBTQQQX vs RDKTQQQX 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.