HostZAMA vs FKB — price, size and safety, side by side
ZAMA (Ethereum) vs FKB (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.
ZAMA vs FKB — normalized performance, 2026-09-06 to 2026-09-17T20:24:07
| ZAMA | FKB | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.04771 | $1.05 |
| Market cap | — | — |
| 24h volume | $812.02K | $2.45B |
| Liquidity | $501.74K | $2.19B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 224 | 1 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- FKB measures ~4,356× the liquidity of ZAMA
- FKB measures ~3,012× the 24h volume of ZAMA
- over the shared window ZAMA moved −18.2% while FKB moved 0.00%
What the data says
ZAMA
ZAMA is the token of Zama — the cryptography company building fully homomorphic encryption tooling for blockchains, one of the few serious attempts at confidential on-chain computation. The contract 0xa12cc123ba206d4031d1c7f6223d1c2ec249f4f3 is what our scan tracks: $502 thousand of pool liquidity as of September 14, 2026.
The honest read: this is an infrastructure bet on a hard problem — FHE has been "almost practical" for years, and Zama is among the credible teams actually shipping it — but the token's value depends on whether confidential-compute demand materializes on-chain at the scale the pitch implies. Real team, real tech, early-stage adoption risk.
FKB
Fukabu was one day old when HostDeFi's snapshot caught it on August 19, 2026, and age is the right place to start, because every other number on this page should be read through it. In its first day of existence, FKB's venue feed claimed roughly $2.19 billion of pool liquidity and $2.45 billion of daily volume — depth that would rank it among the largest markets in crypto — alongside a recorded market capitalization of zero and no holder count whatsoever. Genuine markets do not look like this at any age; brand-new ones only look like this when the reporting venue's figures are being inflated, usually by wash trading against self-provided reserves.
What our read did and didn't do here matters. On EVM chains, HostDeFi's snapshot grades market structure from venue data; it does not open the contract. So nothing on this page speaks to whether FKB at 0xe549920f83178586c8536400862f5349c0d2d883 can mint supply, tax transfers, block sells, or be drained by an owner key — the standard failure modes of fresh Base-chain tokens. The B grade reflects only the market inputs the capture carried, and those inputs are precisely what this essay is telling you not to trust.
FAQ
Which is bigger, ZAMA or FKB?
By tracked market cap: ZAMA (Ethereum) measures — and FKB (Base) measures — — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, ZAMA or FKB?
On the contract checks we publish: ZAMA (Ethereum) grades B and FKB (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have ZAMA and FKB performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-06 and 2026-09-17T20:24:07, the measured snapshots show ZAMA at −18.2% and FKB at 0.00%.
More comparisons
ZAMA vs RYYZAMA vs CRDZAMA vs RDKZAMA vs CCVFKB vs RYYFKB vs CRDFKB vs RDKFKB 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, 2026-09-06→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.