Overview
This page compares GNO and USDA with live PEPS metrics. Rankings (#129 vs #262) and liquidity profiles differ, so traders often use them for distinct roles rather than as perfect substitutes.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | GNO | USDA |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $104.16 | $1,867.53 |
| Market Cap | $274.90M | $96.18M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $99,497.98 | $1.92 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 129.00 | 262.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | GNO | USDA |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | -0.55% | +0.00% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | GNO | USDA |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 65.00 | 65.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Use the indicator table as a checklist: if momentum and trend align on one asset while the other diverges, relative-value setups become more interesting — still without certainty.
Fundamentals
| Metric | GNO | USDA |
|---|---|---|
| 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
GNO
USDA
Pros and cons
Pros of GNO
- GNO typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
- GNO has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
Cons of GNO
- Crowded positioning around GNO sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
- Indicator stacks on GNO may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
- Large-cap status for GNO can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
Pros of USDA
- PEPS tracking for USDA still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- If technical momentum aligns, USDA may outperform on medium-term windows.
- Diversifying versus GNO with USDA can change portfolio factor exposure.
Cons of USDA
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Higher volatility on USDA cuts both ways and demands stricter risk limits.
- Trend failures on USDA often travel faster than on more established assets.
- Relative underperformance versus GNO can persist through entire market regimes.
Which looks stronger right now?
Statistically, higher market cap (GNO) often correlates with deeper books, while hotter 24h prints (USDA) can fade. Position sizing should reflect that uncertainty.
AI summary
This AI-assisted summary starts from live PEPS fields. GNO holds market-cap $274.90M and rank #129; USDA shows $96.18M and #262. Where liquidity and flow matter, watch GNO. Where durability matters, watch GNO. AI composite scores (57.90/57.90) compress those tensions into a single lens. In probabilistic terms, the side winning more columns may have a nearer-term edge, but tails remain fat. Revisit after the next hourly refresh.
FAQ
Which is better, GNO or USDA?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. GNO leads on market cap today, while USDA leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, GNO or USDA?
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 GNO and USDA.
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. GNO 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 USDA, but longer windows can disagree.