Overview
From a portfolio lens, QNT ($881.45M) and ATH ($78.39M) offer different beta to bitcoin cycles. The overview below keeps the facts first and the narrative second.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | QNT | ATH |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $60.64 | $1,887.28 |
| Market Cap | $881.45M | $78.39M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $720,413.09 | $5.17M |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 72.00 | 295.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | QNT | ATH |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | -1.16% | +0.50% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | QNT | ATH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 49.02 | 49.02 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 67.35 | 67.35 |
| ADX | 21.33 | 21.33 |
| Support | 1,827.82 | 1,827.82 |
| Resistance | 1,960.30 | 1,960.30 |
| Trend | bearish | bearish |
| Momentum | 59.00 | 59.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Automated technical notes for this pair highlight bearish conditions on QNT and bearish on ATH. Volatility differences can amplify short-term gaps.
Fundamentals
| Metric | QNT | ATH |
|---|---|---|
| Consensus | — | — |
| Blockchain | — | — |
| TPS | — | — |
| Block time | — | — |
| Finality | — | — |
| Validators | — | — |
| Staking | — | — |
| TVL | — | — |
| Supply model | — | — |
| Inflation | — | — |
| Developer activity | — | — |
| Github activity | — | — |
| On-chain activity | — | — |
| Whale activity | — | — |
| Addresses | — | — |
| Gas fees | — | — |
Ecosystem
QNT
ATH
Pros and cons
Pros of QNT
- QNT typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
- QNT often anchors narratives that attract sustained media and analyst coverage.
- Higher ranking for QNT can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- Market-cap scale on QNT may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
Cons of QNT
- Indicator stacks on QNT may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
- Data gaps in niche fundamentals still apply — absence of a field is not confirmation.
- Large-cap status for QNT can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
Pros of ATH
- PEPS tracking for ATH still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- If technical momentum aligns, ATH may outperform on medium-term windows.
- Narrative optionality around ATH can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
Cons of ATH
- Relative underperformance versus QNT can persist through entire market regimes.
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave ATH more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
Which looks stronger right now?
Across winners above, no single coin dominates every column. Prefer scenarios: trend continuation favors the side with aligned momentum; mean-reversion favors the side stretched on RSI.
AI summary
PEPS synthesizes module output into a readable pair brief. Headline stats put QNT at $60.64 and ATH at $1,887.28. Relative performance over 24h (ATH) is a short window. Pair it with 30d/1y rows before inferring regime change. Return to related comparisons and individual coin intelligence pages to validate whether the relative story still holds after fresh prints.
FAQ
Which is better, QNT or ATH?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. QNT leads on market cap today, while ATH leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, QNT or ATH?
Higher-beta assets can move more in both directions. Use performance tables and volatility, not headlines, to judge potential ranges.
Which is less risky right now?
Lower volatility and deeper liquidity usually imply milder path risk, but crypto tails remain large for both QNT and ATH.
Which has stronger developer activity?
Check the fundamentals table for developer/github fields when populated. Missing values mean the feed has no reliable reading yet.
Which looks more decentralized?
Decentralization is multi-dimensional (validators, client diversity, token distribution). This page surfaces available consensus/validator fields without over-claiming.
Which has lower fees?
Fee comparisons belong to each network’s fee market. Where gas/fee metrics exist in fundamentals, compare them; otherwise verify on explorers.
Which is better for investing?
Investing choices need personal constraints. Use this comparison as research input, then size positions with an explicit invalidation plan.
Which is better for staking?
If staking fields are present, compare yield mechanics and lockups off-platform. Staking returns are not risk-free.
Which is more used day to day?
Volume, on-chain activity and ecosystem links are practical usage proxies. ATH currently leads traded volume on this snapshot.
Which has the better recent performance?
See the performance table across 1h through 1y. The 24h leader is ATH, but longer windows can disagree.