Overview
PEPS ranks this pair inside the Top 300 market-cap universe. That means Ethereum Name Service and 1INCH are liquid enough for an indexable comparison, with metrics refreshed on the hourly coin pipeline.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | ENS | 1INCH |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $4.22 | $0.080662 |
| Market Cap | $173.07M | $113.35M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $8.68M | $8.37M |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 174.00 | 238.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.50% | +3.50% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | ENS | 1INCH |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +0.00% | -0.80% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | ENS | 1INCH |
|---|---|---|
| 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
Indicator stacks for ENS/1INCH currently lean on separate regimes: bearish versus bearish. Treat MACD and RSI as context, not as standalone entry triggers.
Fundamentals
| Metric | ENS | 1INCH |
|---|---|---|
| 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
Ethereum Name Service
1INCH
Pros and cons
Pros of Ethereum Name Service
- Higher ranking for Ethereum Name Service can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- Ethereum Name Service has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
- ENS often anchors narratives that attract sustained media and analyst coverage.
Cons of Ethereum Name Service
- Regulatory or macro headlines can hit Ethereum Name Service harder simply because it is more visible.
- Indicator stacks on Ethereum Name Service may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
- Large-cap status for Ethereum Name Service can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
Pros of 1INCH
- Active volume bursts on 1INCH sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- Narrative optionality around 1INCH can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
- PEPS tracking for 1INCH still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
Cons of 1INCH
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for 1INCH.
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave 1INCH more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Relative underperformance versus Ethereum Name Service can persist through entire market regimes.
Which looks stronger right now?
Data currently points to a probabilistic edge for Ethereum Name Service on size and Ethereum Name Service on activity. Neither reading guarantees future returns.
AI summary
This AI-assisted summary starts from live PEPS fields. Ethereum Name Service holds market-cap $173.07M and rank #174; 1INCH shows $113.35M and #238. Where liquidity and flow matter, watch Ethereum Name Service. Where durability matters, watch Ethereum Name Service. AI composite scores (58.20/58.20) compress those tensions into a single lens. In probabilistic terms, the side winning more columns may have a nearer-term edge, but tails remain fat. Revisit after the next hourly refresh.
FAQ
Which is better, Ethereum Name Service or 1INCH?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. Ethereum Name Service leads on market cap today, while Ethereum Name Service leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, ENS or 1INCH?
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 Ethereum Name Service and 1INCH.
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. Ethereum Name Service 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 Ethereum Name Service, but longer windows can disagree.