HostCTR vs PLAY — price, size and safety, side by side
CTR (Base) vs PLAY (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-15 / 2026-10-15.
CTR vs PLAY — normalized performance, 2026-10-06 to 2026-10-15T21:43:45
| CTR | PLAY | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.01335 | $0.01763 |
| Market cap | $19.00M | $11.67M |
| 24h volume | $704.03K DEX | $1.06M DEX |
| Liquidity | $310.34K | $301.30K |
| FDV | $12.91M | $124.98M |
| Holders | 3,189 | 6,454 |
| Age (days) | 133 | 140 |
| Safety grade | A | A |
Where they differ
- CTR measures ~1.6× the market cap of PLAY
- PLAY measures ~1.5× the 24h volume of CTR
- PLAY measures ~2.0× the holder count of CTR
- over the shared window CTR moved +5.36% while PLAY moved −40.0%
What the data says
CTR
CTR passes the check that trips up most risky tokens — its contract controls. The contract holds no mint power, so the supply stays honest and predictable, and the contract can't pause or block transfers, leaving you free to trade on your own terms. Clearing both of those in one go is a strong sign, and it's what puts CTR at 100/100 as of the 2026-10-09 snapshot.
By the numbers, CTR is showing $310.34K of on-chain liquidity, 3,189 wallets holding and 133 days old as of 2026-10-09. Set the $310.34K of depth beside roughly $19.00M in market cap and it reads as moderate: comfortable for everyday trades, less so for size that begins to rival the pool itself. The 3,189-wallet base is a reasonable spread of ownership, though a headline count doesn't show whether a few wallets dominate — the concentration read on this page speaks to that. On concentration, the deployer wallet holds just <0.01% of CTR as of 2026-10-09, so the person who launched it isn't sitting on a dominant share.
PLAY
PLAY at 0x853a7c99227499dba9db8c3a02aa691afdebf841 is a Base asset 140 days into its record at the October 6, 2026 snapshot. The $11.7 million market cap prices under a tenth of the $125.0 million fully-diluted figure on 5.0 billion units — the emission overhang dominates this book's shape.
The book is workable and the tape is hot: $301.3 thousand of tracked depth on $1.1 million of 24-hour volume — the pool cycling itself several times daily. Contract-level controls were not assessed in this snapshot.
FAQ
Which is bigger, CTR or PLAY?
By tracked market cap: CTR (Base) measures $19.00M and PLAY (Base) measures $11.67M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, CTR or PLAY?
On the contract checks we publish: CTR (Base) grades A and PLAY (Base) grades A. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have CTR and PLAY performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-10-06 and 2026-10-15T21:43:45, the measured snapshots show CTR at +5.36% and PLAY at −40.0%.
The grade column is the one CMC's compare page cannot print — our grade is computed from the contract itself (mint/freeze authority, liquidity, holder concentration). Changes are measured over the shared window stated on the chart, 2026-10-06→2026-10-15T21:43:45; a token with fewer measured points measures a shorter span inside it.
Figures are dated on-chain snapshots, not a live feed. Safety grades are structural checks — not investment advice. Free · no signup · a HostDeFi product.