Overview
Investors searching GNO vs TKX usually want a clear market-cap and momentum snapshot. GNO prints $104.93 (+0.96%) while TKX is at $1,874.22 (+0.50%), with volume edge currently on GNO.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | GNO | TKX |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $104.93 | $1,874.22 |
| Market Cap | $276.84M | $102.22M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $90,149.78 | $1,421.01 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 130.00 | 252.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | GNO | TKX |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +0.96% | +0.50% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | GNO | TKX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 63.00 | 63.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Relative technical health favors reading both charts side by side. AI scores (58.40 vs 58.40) summarize PEPS modules, but supports and resistances still decide invalidation.
Fundamentals
| Metric | GNO | TKX |
|---|---|---|
| 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
TKX
Pros and cons
Pros of GNO
- Composite PEPS readings for GNO can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
- Higher ranking for GNO can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- GNO typically benefits from deeper liquidity and broader market recognition inside the Top 300 set.
Cons of GNO
- When dominance narratives fade, GNO can lag hotter rotation names.
- Regulatory or macro headlines can hit GNO harder simply because it is more visible.
- Crowded positioning around GNO sometimes amplifies squeeze or flush risk.
Pros of TKX
- Diversifying versus GNO with TKX can change portfolio factor exposure.
- Narrative optionality around TKX can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
- PEPS tracking for TKX still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
Cons of TKX
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave TKX more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Higher volatility on TKX cuts both ways and demands stricter risk limits.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for TKX.
Which looks stronger right now?
If you weight capitalization and liquidity, GNO looks sturdier; if you weight 24h tape, GNO is ahead. A balanced view treats both as incomplete signals.
AI summary
Comparing GNO and TKX begins with structure: capitalization, volume and rank. Present prints are $104.93 versus $1,874.22. 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 TKX-vs-GNO pages, keeping SEO equity on one comparison. Keep monitoring winners as data updates.
FAQ
Which is better, GNO or TKX?
“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 TKX?
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 TKX.
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.