HostUMBRA vs CCV — price, size and safety, side by side
UMBRA (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.
UMBRA vs CCV — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-17T23:42:29
| UMBRA | CCV | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.1985 | $2.01K |
| Market cap | $2.75M | — |
| 24h volume | $17.22K | $2.74B |
| Liquidity | $669.35K | $1.69B |
| FDV | $5.43M | — |
| Holders | 6,153 | — |
| Age (days) | — | 1 |
| Safety grade | A | B |
Where they differ
- CCV measures ~2,531× the liquidity of UMBRA
- CCV measures ~159,197× the 24h volume of UMBRA
- over the shared window UMBRA moved +16.1% while CCV moved 0.00%
What the data says
UMBRA
UMBRA is the token of Umbra — a Solana privacy protocol bringing shielded payments to the chain, launched through the MetaDAO futarchy system its mint's vanity suffix signals. The mint PRVT6TB7uss3FrUd2D9xs2zqDBsa3GbMJMwCQsgmeta is what our scan tracks: $2.7 million market cap, $669 thousand of liquidity and 6,153 holders as of September 16, 2026 — the deepest pool in this batch relative to cap.
The honest read: privacy on Solana is a real technical niche — Umbra's team includes known Solana builders, and MetaDAO-launched tokens carry the futarchy governance experiment on top of the usual protocol risk. The liquidity here is genuinely strong for this cap, but the regulatory posture around privacy protocols is the external risk no tokenomics can diversify away.
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, UMBRA or CCV?
By tracked market cap: UMBRA (Solana) measures $2.75M and CCV (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, UMBRA or CCV?
On the contract checks we publish: UMBRA (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 UMBRA and CCV performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-09-17T23:42:29, the measured snapshots show UMBRA at +16.1% and CCV at 0.00%.
More comparisons
UMBRA vs RYYUMBRA vs FKBUMBRA vs CRDUMBRA 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.