Overview
Uniswap (UNI) and WM (WM) sit at different layers of the crypto stack. At current prices ($4.22 vs $1,880.52), market leadership still favors Uniswap on capitalization, while 24h tape is led by Uniswap.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | UNI | WM |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $4.22 | $1,880.52 |
| Market Cap | $2.43B | $83.05M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $12.79M | $30,272.00 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 36.00 | 283.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +6.35% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | UNI | WM |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | +4.05% | +0.00% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | UNI | WM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 60.59 | 49.02 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | — | — |
| EMA50 | — | — |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 0.26 | 67.35 |
| ADX | 41.11 | 21.33 |
| Support | 3.53 | 1,827.82 |
| Resistance | 5.75 | 1,960.30 |
| Trend | bearish | bearish |
| Momentum | — | 63.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Technically, Uniswap shows RSI 60.59 with trend bias bearish, while WM sits at RSI 49.02 (bearish). Divergences between momentum and price should be confirmed on higher timeframes.
Fundamentals
| Metric | UNI | WM |
|---|---|---|
| Consensus | — | — |
| Blockchain | — | — |
| TPS | — | — |
| Block time | — | — |
| Finality | — | — |
| Validators | — | — |
| Staking | — | — |
| TVL | — | — |
| Supply model | — | — |
| Inflation | — | — |
| Developer activity | 0.00 | — |
| Github activity | 5,019.00 | — |
| On-chain activity | — | — |
| Whale activity | — | — |
| Addresses | — | — |
| Gas fees | — | — |
Ecosystem
Uniswap
WM
Pros and cons
Pros of Uniswap
- Higher ranking for Uniswap can translate into tighter spreads on major venues.
- Market-cap scale on Uniswap may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
- Composite PEPS readings for Uniswap can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
Cons of Uniswap
- When dominance narratives fade, Uniswap can lag hotter rotation names.
- Indicator stacks on Uniswap may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
Pros of WM
- Diversifying versus Uniswap with WM can change portfolio factor exposure.
- PEPS tracking for WM still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
Cons of WM
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave WM more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for WM.
- Higher volatility on WM cuts both ways and demands stricter risk limits.
Which looks stronger right now?
On the latest snapshot, market-cap leadership belongs to Uniswap, while short-term performance leans toward Uniswap. That mix suggests relative strength can flip quickly, so size risk accordingly.
AI summary
This AI-assisted summary starts from live PEPS fields. Uniswap holds market-cap $2.43B and rank #36; WM shows $83.05M and #283. Where liquidity and flow matter, watch Uniswap. Where durability matters, watch Uniswap. AI composite scores (46.80/58.40) 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, Uniswap or WM?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. Uniswap leads on market cap today, while Uniswap leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, UNI or WM?
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 Uniswap and WM.
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. Uniswap 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 Uniswap, but longer windows can disagree.