Overview
Whether you arrived from a “BEAT vs WLD” query or from PEPS coin pages, this hub aggregates ranks, performance and module-backed signals into one canonical URL.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | BEAT | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1,856.75 | $0.313300 |
| Market Cap | $1.19B | $1.11B |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $52.70M | $9.74M |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 59.00 | 62.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | BEAT | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | -20.10% | +2.42% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | BEAT | WLD |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 67.00 | 67.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
When RSI and trend disagree across BEAT and WLD, expect choppy relative performance until one side reclaims a clear structure.
Fundamentals
| Metric | BEAT | 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
BEAT
WLD
Pros and cons
Pros of BEAT
- Market-cap scale on BEAT may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
- BEAT often anchors narratives that attract sustained media and analyst coverage.
- Composite PEPS readings for BEAT can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
- BEAT typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
Cons of BEAT
- Crowded positioning around BEAT sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
- Large-cap status for BEAT can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- Indicator stacks on BEAT may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
Pros of WLD
- If technical momentum aligns, WLD may outperform on medium-term windows.
- PEPS tracking for WLD still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- Narrative optionality around WLD can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
- WLD can offer higher relative beta when market attention rotates toward its niche.
Cons of WLD
- Relative underperformance versus BEAT can persist through entire market regimes.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for WLD.
Which looks stronger right now?
The “stronger” label here is descriptive, not predictive. BEAT and WLD can alternate leadership as macro liquidity and narrative rotate.
AI summary
Comparing BEAT and WLD begins with structure: capitalization, volume and rank. Present prints are $1,856.75 versus $0.313300. Momentum and trend can disagree with market-cap hierarchy. That is normal in crypto rotations and should be stress-tested against supports and news flow. Canonical URLs prevent duplicate WLD-vs-BEAT pages, keeping SEO equity on one comparison. Keep monitoring winners as data updates.
FAQ
Which is better, BEAT or WLD?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. BEAT leads on market cap today, while WLD leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, BEAT 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 BEAT 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. BEAT 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.