Overview
Investors searching BUIDL vs WLD usually want a clear market-cap and momentum snapshot. BUIDL prints $1,880.40 (+0.00%) while WLD is at $0.315700 (+4.85%), with volume edge currently on WLD.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | BUIDL | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1,880.40 | $0.315700 |
| Market Cap | $2.70B | $1.13B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $0.000000 | $9.97M |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 35.00 | 61.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.50% | +3.50% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | BUIDL | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +0.00% | +4.85% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | BUIDL | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 54.31 | 54.31 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 66.45 | 66.45 |
| ADX | 20.44 | 20.44 |
| 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
Relative technical health favors reading both charts side by side. AI scores (56.80 vs 56.80) summarize PEPS modules, but supports and resistances still decide invalidation.
Fundamentals
| Metric | BUIDL | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| 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
BUIDL
WLD
Pros and cons
Pros of BUIDL
- BUIDL has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
- Higher ranking for BUIDL can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- Market-cap scale on BUIDL may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
- Composite PEPS readings for BUIDL can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
Cons of BUIDL
- Large-cap status for BUIDL can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- When dominance narratives fade, BUIDL can lag hotter rotation names.
- Crowded positioning around BUIDL sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
Pros of WLD
- Diversifying versus BUIDL with WLD can change portfolio factor exposure.
- PEPS tracking for WLD still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- Narrative optionality around WLD can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
Cons of WLD
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave WLD more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for WLD.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
Which looks stronger right now?
If you weight capitalization and liquidity, BUIDL looks sturdier; if you weight 24h tape, WLD is ahead. A balanced view treats both as incomplete signals.
AI summary
PEPS synthesizes module output into a readable pair brief. Headline stats put BUIDL at $1,880.40 and WLD at $0.315700. Relative performance over 24h (WLD) 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, BUIDL or WLD?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. BUIDL leads on market cap today, while WLD leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, BUIDL or WLD?
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 BUIDL and WLD.
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. WLD 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 WLD, but longer windows can disagree.