Overview
PEPS ranks this pair inside the Top 300 market-cap universe. That means BUIDL and US are liquid enough for an indexable comparison, with metrics refreshed on the hourly coin pipeline.
Quick winners
Full comparison
| Metric | BUIDL | US |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1,841.41 | $1,841.41 |
| Market Cap | $2.70B | $490.25M |
| FDV | $2.70B | $513.17M |
| Volume 24h | $0.000000 | $6.58M |
| Circulating Supply | 2,702,712,403 | 10,000,000,000 |
| Total Supply | 2,702,712,403 | 10,000,000,000 |
| Max Supply | — | 10,000,000,000 |
| Rank | 34 | 199 |
| Dominance | 0.12% | 0.02% |
| Liquidity | 100.0/100 | 100.0/100 |
| Volatility | 3.50% | 3.50% |
| ATH | $1.00 | $0.060254 |
| ATL | $1.00 | $0.002679 |
| ROI | +0.00% | -14.57% |
Performance
| Timeframe | BUIDL | US |
|---|---|---|
| 1H | +0.00% | -2.00% |
| 24H | +0.00% | +5.40% |
| 7D | +0.00% | +1.40% |
| 30D | +0.00% | +184.30% |
| 90D | +0.00% | +658.80% |
| 1Y | +0.00% | — |
| YTD | — | — |
| ALL | +0.00% | -14.57% |
Comparative chart
Technical indicators
| Indicator | BUIDL | US |
|---|---|---|
| RSI | 54.31 | 54.31 |
| MACD histogram | — | — |
| EMA20 | 1,850.66 | 1,850.66 |
| EMA50 | 2,164.66 | 2,164.66 |
| EMA100 | — | — |
| EMA200 | — | — |
| SMA50 | — | — |
| SMA200 | — | — |
| ATR | 66.45 | 66.45 |
| ADX | 20.44 | 20.44 |
| Support | 1,827.82 | 1,827.82 |
| Resistance | 1,853.40 | 1,853.40 |
| Trend | SHORT | SHORT |
| Momentum | 63.00 | 63.00 |
| Signal | BUY | BUY |
Automatic technical analysis
Indicator stacks for BUIDL/US currently lean on separate regimes: SHORT versus SHORT. Treat MACD and RSI as context, not as standalone entry triggers.
Fundamentals
| Metric | BUIDL | US |
|---|---|---|
| Whale activity | $0.000000 | $0.000000 |
Ecosystem
BUIDL
US
Pros and cons
Pros of BUIDL
- BUIDL has an established coin page footprint on PEPS for continuous monitoring.
- Composite PEPS readings for BUIDL can surface clearer module agreement during trend phases.
- Market-cap scale on BUIDL may dampen some idiosyncratic shocks versus smaller peers.
Cons of BUIDL
- Large-cap status for BUIDL can mean slower percentage upside versus high-beta alternatives.
- Indicator stacks on BUIDL may stay stretched longer than expected in strong trends.
- When dominance narratives fade, BUIDL can lag hotter rotation names.
Pros of US
- Active volume bursts on US sometimes precede sharper tactical moves.
- Diversifying versus BUIDL with US can change portfolio factor exposure.
- PEPS tracking for US still includes AI score and level context for monitoring.
- Narrative optionality around US can reprice quickly when catalysts appear.
Cons of US
- Smaller book depth versus large caps can increase slippage for US.
- Trend failures on US often travel faster than on more established assets.
- Incomplete fundamental coverage can hide operational or tokenomic risks.
- Weaker market-cap standing may leave US more exposed to liquidity droughts.
Which looks stronger right now?
Data currently points to a probabilistic edge for BUIDL on size and US on activity. Neither reading guarantees future returns.
AI summary
PEPS synthesizes module output into a readable pair brief. Headline stats put BUIDL at $1,841.41 and US at $1,841.41. Relative performance over 24h (US) 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, BUIDL or US?
“Better” depends on horizon and risk. BUIDL leads on market cap today, while US leads the 24h move — neither is a guarantee.
Which has more upside potential, BUIDL or US?
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 BUIDL and US.
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. US 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 US, but longer windows can disagree.