Overview
Investors searching QNT vs ATOM usually want a clear market-cap and momentum snapshot. QNT prints $60.74 (-1.75%) while Cosmos Hub is at $1.25 (+1.21%), with volume edge currently on Cosmos Hub.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | QNT | ATOM |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $60.74 | $1.25 |
| Market Cap | $883.34M | $723.29M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $529,183.76 | $1.36M |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 72.00 | 85.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +4.22% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | QNT | ATOM |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | -1.75% | +1.21% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | QNT | ATOM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 49.02 | 18.97 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 67.35 | 0.05 |
| ADX | 21.33 | 51.19 |
| Support | 1,827.82 | — |
| Resistance | 1,960.30 | 1.61 |
| Trend | bearish | bearish |
| Momentum | 67.00 | — |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Technically, QNT shows RSI 49.02 with trend bias bearish, while Cosmos Hub sits at RSI 18.97 (bearish). Divergences between momentum and price should be confirmed on higher timeframes.
Fundamentals
| Metric | QNT | ATOM |
|---|---|---|
| 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
QNT
Cosmos Hub
Pros and cons
Pros of QNT
- Higher ranking for QNT can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- QNT often anchors narratives that attract sustained media and analyst coverage.
Cons of QNT
- When dominance narratives fade, QNT can lag hotter rotation names.
- Large-cap status for QNT can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- Data gaps in niche fundamentals still apply — absence of a field is not confirmation.
- Regulatory or macro headlines can hit QNT harder simply because it is more visible.
Pros of Cosmos Hub
- Diversifying versus QNT with Cosmos Hub can change portfolio factor exposure.
- Active volume bursts on ATOM sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- Cosmos Hub can offer higher relative beta when market attention rotates toward its niche.
Cons of Cosmos Hub
- Trend failures on Cosmos Hub often travel faster than on more established assets.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for Cosmos Hub.
- Relative underperformance versus QNT can persist through entire market regimes.
Which looks stronger right now?
On the latest snapshot, market-cap leadership belongs to QNT, while short-term performance leans toward Cosmos Hub. That mix suggests relative strength can flip quickly, so size risk accordingly.
AI summary
In about three hundred words of context: QNT (QNT) trades near $60.74 with a -1.75% day move, while Cosmos Hub (ATOM) is around $1.25 (+1.21%). Volume leadership currently sits with Cosmos Hub, and market-cap leadership with QNT. Technical trend labels read bearish vs bearish, with RSI near 49.02/18.97. 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, QNT or Cosmos Hub?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. QNT leads on market cap today, while Cosmos Hub leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, QNT or ATOM?
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 QNT and Cosmos Hub.
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.