HostJLUSDC vs JUICED — price, size and safety, side by side
JLUSDC (Solana) vs JUICED (Solana) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-17 / 2026-10-17.
JLUSDC vs JUICED — normalized performance, 2026-09-08 to 2026-10-17T03:15:24
| JLUSDC | JUICED | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1.06 | $1.04 |
| Market cap | $458.81M | $51.57M |
| 24h volume | $19.92M DEX | $2.11M DEX |
| Liquidity | — | — |
| FDV | $458.81M | $51.57M |
| Holders | 13,503 | 3,660 |
| Safety grade | A | A |
Where they differ
- JLUSDC measures ~8.9× the market cap of JUICED
- JLUSDC measures ~9.5× the 24h volume of JUICED
- JLUSDC measures ~3.7× the holder count of JUICED
What the data says
JLUSDC
jlUSDC is the odd one out among this site's yield tokens: it isn't staked SOL at all. Deposit USDC into Jupiter Lend and you receive jlUSDC — mint 9BEcn9aPEmhSPbPQeFGjidRiEKki46fVQDyPpSQXPA2D — a receipt that appreciates as borrowers pay interest on the pooled dollars. The October 6, 2026 snapshot records roughly $458.8 million of deposits represented across 13,503 holders, which makes it one of the larger dollar-yield venues on Solana.
Reading a lending receipt correctly means stacking its layers. Layer one is USDC itself, with everything that implies — Circle's reserves, its compliance freeze powers, the fiat-backed model (our USDC guide covers that story). Layer two is the lending market: your yield exists because someone borrowed the pool's dollars against collateral, so the risks that matter are utilization crunches (in a panic, if the pool is heavily lent out, withdrawals queue until loans repay or liquidate) and bad debt (collateral crashing faster than liquidations can clear it). Layer three is the protocol's contract surface itself. None of these showed distress in this snapshot; all of them are the price of the yield.
JUICED
JUICED is the page in this cohort where honesty about limits matters most, so it leads with them: beyond the name its metadata carries, this token doesn't come with a public story our read can verify, and this page won't invent one. What the chain shows at mint 7GxATsNMnaC88vdwd2t3mwrFuQwwGvmYPrUQ4D6FotXk, per HostDeFi's October 6, 2026 snapshot: roughly $51.6 million of represented value held by 3,660 wallets, a freeze authority that reads revoked, and the value-equals-pool signature that characterizes receipt tokens — staking or yield-pool shares whose worth tracks deposits — rather than free-floating traded assets.
That signature shapes how to read everything else. A receipt token's supply expands and contracts with its pool by design, so "can supply grow?" has the same answer as for every liquid-staking token this site grades: yes, mechanically, as the product operating — with the freeze-authority check (passed here) being the one that actually protects holders. The nearly four thousand wallets holding it imply a real user base for whatever the underlying product is, not a treasury parked in a wrapper.
FAQ
Which is bigger, JLUSDC or JUICED?
By tracked market cap: JLUSDC (Solana) measures $458.81M and JUICED (Solana) measures $51.57M — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, JLUSDC or JUICED?
On the contract checks we publish: JLUSDC (Solana) grades A and JUICED (Solana) grades A. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have JLUSDC and JUICED performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-09-08 and 2026-10-17T03:15:24, the measured snapshots show JLUSDC at +0.52% and JUICED at +0.55%.
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, 2026-09-08→2026-10-17T03:15:24; 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.