Overview
PEPS ranks this pair inside the Top 300 market-cap universe. That means GNO and RUNE are liquid enough for an indexable comparison, with metrics refreshed on the hourly coin pipeline.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | GNO | RUNE |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $104.04 | $0.442000 |
| Market Cap | $274.67M | $149.28M |
| FDV | — | — |
| Volume 24h | $99,194.36 | $678,823.86 |
| Circulating Supply | — | — |
| Total Supply | — | — |
| Max Supply | — | — |
| Rank | 129.00 | 198.00 |
| Dominance | — | — |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| Volatility | +3.64% | +3.64% |
| ATH | — | — |
| ATL | — | — |
| ROI | — | — |
Performance
| Timeframe | GNO | RUNE |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | — | — |
| 24H | -0.90% | +0.46% |
| 7D | — | — |
| 30D | — | — |
| 90D | — | — |
| 1Y | — | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | — | — |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | GNO | RUNE |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 67.00 | 67.00 |
| Signal | neutral | neutral |
Automatic technical analysis
Indicator stacks for GNO/RUNE currently lean on separate regimes: bearish versus bearish. Treat MACD and RSI as context, not as standalone entry triggers.
Fundamentals
| Metric | GNO | RUNE |
|---|---|---|
| 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
RUNE
Pros and cons
Pros of GNO
- GNO has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
- 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.
- Indicator stacks on GNO may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
Pros of RUNE
- Active volume bursts on RUNE sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- Diversifying versus GNO with RUNE can change portfolio factor exposure.
- PEPS tracking for RUNE still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
Cons of RUNE
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave RUNE more exposed to liquidity droughts.
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for RUNE.
- Higher volatility on RUNE cuts both ways and demands stricter risk limits.
Which looks stronger right now?
Data currently points to a probabilistic edge for GNO on size and RUNE on activity. Neither reading guarantees future returns.
AI summary
PEPS synthesizes module output into a readable pair brief. Headline stats put GNO at $104.04 and RUNE at $0.442000. Relative performance over 24h (RUNE) is a short window. Pair it with 30d/1y rows before inferring regime change. Return to related comparisons and individual coin intelligence pages to validate whether the relative story still holds after fresh prints.
FAQ
Which is better, GNO or RUNE?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. GNO leads on market cap today, while RUNE leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, GNO or RUNE?
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 RUNE.
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. RUNE 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 RUNE, but longer windows can disagree.