Overview
PEPS ranks this pair inside the Top 300 market-cap universe. That means Cosmos Hub and GT are liquid enough for an indexable comparison, with metrics refreshed on the hourly coin pipeline.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | ATOM | GT |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1.26 | $1,861.70 |
| Market Cap | $723.29M | $691.20M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $1.50M | $778,879.00 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 85.00 | 83.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +4.22% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | ATOM | GT |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +1.78% | -0.50% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | ATOM | GT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 18.97 | 49.02 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 0.05 | 67.35 |
| ADX | 51.19 | 21.33 |
| Support | — | 1,827.82 |
| Resistance | 1.61 | 1,960.30 |
| Trend | bearish | bearish |
| Momentum | — | 65.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
When RSI and trend disagree across Cosmos Hub and GT, expect choppy relative performance until one side reclaims a clear structure.
Fundamentals
| Metric | ATOM | GT |
|---|---|---|
| Consensus | — | — |
| Blockchain | — | — |
| TPS | — | — |
| Block time | — | — |
| Finality | — | — |
| Validators | — | — |
| Staking | — | — |
| TVL | — | — |
| Supply model | — | — |
| Inflation | — | — |
| Developer activity | 0.00 | — |
| Github activity | 1,299.00 | — |
| On-chain activity | — | — |
| Whale activity | — | — |
| Addresses | — | — |
| Gas fees | — | — |
Ecosystem
Cosmos Hub
GT
Pros and cons
Pros of Cosmos Hub
- Composite PEPS readings for Cosmos Hub can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
- Higher ranking for Cosmos Hub can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- Cosmos Hub typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
Cons of Cosmos Hub
- Large-cap status for Cosmos Hub can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- When dominance narratives fade, Cosmos Hub can lag hotter rotation names.
- Data gaps in niche fundamentals still apply — absence of a field is not confirmation.
Pros of GT
- Active volume bursts on GT sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- If technical momentum aligns, GT may outperform on medium-term windows.
- Diversifying versus Cosmos Hub with GT can change portfolio factor exposure.
Cons of GT
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave GT more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Trend failures on GT often travel faster than on more established assets.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
Which looks stronger right now?
The “stronger” label here is descriptive, not predictive. Cosmos Hub and GT can alternate leadership as macro liquidity and narrative rotate.
AI summary
In about three hundred words of context: Cosmos Hub (ATOM) trades near $1.26 with a +1.78% day move, while GT (GT) is around $1,861.70 (-0.50%). Volume leadership currently sits with Cosmos Hub, and market-cap leadership with Cosmos Hub. Technical trend labels read bearish vs bearish, with RSI near 18.97/49.02. 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, Cosmos Hub or GT?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. Cosmos Hub leads on market cap today, while Cosmos Hub leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, ATOM or GT?
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 Cosmos Hub and GT.
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. Cosmos Hub 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 Cosmos Hub, but longer windows can disagree.