Overview
PEPS ranks this pair inside the Top 300 market-cap universe. That means BUIDL and GNO are liquid enough for an indexable comparison, with metrics refreshed on the hourly coin pipeline.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | BUIDL | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1,861.76 | $104.16 |
| Market Cap | $2.70B | $275.06M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $0.000000 | $71,425.61 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 35.00 | 130.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.50% | +3.50% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | BUIDL | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +0.00% | -0.93% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | BUIDL | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 60.00 | 60.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
When RSI and trend disagree across BUIDL and GNO, expect choppy relative performance until one side reclaims a clear structure.
Fundamentals
| Metric | BUIDL | GNO |
|---|---|---|
| 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
GNO
Pros and cons
Pros of BUIDL
- BUIDL often anchors narratives that attract sustained media and analyst coverage.
- BUIDL typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
- BUIDL has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
Cons of BUIDL
- Data gaps in niche fundamentals still apply — absence of a field is not confirmation.
- Large-cap status for BUIDL can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- Crowded positioning around BUIDL sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
Pros of GNO
- If technical momentum aligns, GNO may outperform on medium-term windows.
- PEPS tracking for GNO still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- Diversifying versus BUIDL with GNO can change portfolio factor exposure.
- GNO can offer higher relative beta when market attention rotates toward its niche.
Cons of GNO
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Relative underperformance versus BUIDL can persist through entire market regimes.
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave GNO more exposed to liquidity droughts.
Which looks stronger right now?
The “stronger” label here is descriptive, not predictive. BUIDL and GNO can alternate leadership as macro liquidity and narrative rotate.
AI summary
In about three hundred words of context: BUIDL (BUIDL) trades near $1,861.76 with a +0.00% day move, while GNO (GNO) is around $104.16 (-0.93%). Volume leadership currently sits with GNO, and market-cap leadership with BUIDL. Technical trend labels read bearish vs bearish, with RSI near 54.31/54.31. Bottom line: use this page as a structured checklist, then open each coin page and related PEPS tools before acting. Nothing here is financial advice.
FAQ
Which is better, BUIDL or GNO?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. BUIDL leads on market cap today, while BUIDL leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, BUIDL or GNO?
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 GNO.
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 BUIDL, but longer windows can disagree.