Overview
GNO vs STAC is one of the most watched crypto matchups. Beyond headline prices, this comparison blends market structure, technical readings and probabilistic context without promising outcomes.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | GNO | STAC |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $104.70 | $1,882.65 |
| Market Cap | $276.67M | $102.71M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $77,992.64 | $0.000000 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 130.00 | 252.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.50% | +3.50% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | GNO | STAC |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +1.40% | +0.00% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | GNO | STAC |
|---|---|---|
| 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
When RSI and trend disagree across GNO and STAC, expect choppy relative performance until one side reclaims a clear structure.
Fundamentals
| Metric | GNO | STAC |
|---|---|---|
| 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
STAC
Pros and cons
Pros of GNO
- Market-cap scale on GNO may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
- Composite PEPS readings for GNO can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
Cons of GNO
- 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.
- Crowded positioning around GNO sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
Pros of STAC
- STAC can offer higher relative beta when market attention rotates toward its niche.
- Narrative optionality around STAC can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
- If technical momentum aligns, STAC may outperform on medium-term windows.
Cons of STAC
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Higher volatility on STAC cuts both ways and demands stricter risk limits.
- Trend failures on STAC often travel faster than on more established assets.
Which looks stronger right now?
The “stronger” label here is descriptive, not predictive. GNO and STAC can alternate leadership as macro liquidity and narrative rotate.
AI summary
PEPS synthesizes module output into a readable pair brief. Headline stats put GNO at $104.70 and STAC at $1,882.65. Relative performance over 24h (GNO) 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, GNO or STAC?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. GNO leads on market cap today, while GNO leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, GNO or STAC?
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 STAC.
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 GNO, but longer windows can disagree.