HostXAUG vs MUC — price, size and safety, side by side
XAUG (Base) vs MUC (Base) — every figure is the freshest dated measurement we hold for that token, never a live-feed guess. Prices stamped 2026-10-17 / 2026-10-15.
XAUG vs MUC — normalized performance, 2026-10-06 to 2026-10-15T21:43:45
| XAUG | MUC | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $3.96K | $874.83 |
| Market cap | — | $959.97K |
| 24h volume | $5.58M DEX | $5.43M DEX |
| Liquidity | $586.85K | $498.38K |
| FDV | $12.45M | $946.79K |
| Holders | — | — |
| Age (days) | 28 | 14 |
| Safety grade | B | B |
Where they differ
- over the shared window XAUG moved −4.83% while MUC moved −18.0%
What the data says
XAUG
XAUG on Base — 0x08c5dd8b64ec620aa31914bba13984b57e40c30b — trades as "Lydia Gold" at $4,319.45, a price that tracks the spot ounce of gold almost exactly. Three days old in the October 9, 2026 snapshot: $587 thousand of liquidity, roughly $2.2 million of daily volume.
The XAU-prefixed ticker borrows the commodity code for gold, and the comparison it invites is XAUT — Tether's established tokenized gold. Lydia Gold is not that. The name, the price-pegging to spot, and the XAU prefix describe a commodity wrapper claim; whether any vaulted gold backs it is, as with every tokenized commodity, an off-chain question of issuer attestations that no pool figure can verify. The three-day age is the load-bearing fact: this is a brand-new instrument asking for commodity-grade trust.
MUC
There's a small gap on this page — MUC's contract flags weren't fully confirmed as of 2026-10-09. So rather than assume anything either way, it's worth a direct check, and the scanner above reads it live in a couple of seconds before you trade.
Looking at the market data, MUC shows deep liquidity of $498.38K and a brand-new 14-day history as of 2026-10-09. Against roughly $959.97K in market cap, the $498.38K of liquidity is genuinely healthy: deep enough that ordinary trades clear cleanly, which is exactly what you want to see.
FAQ
Which is bigger, XAUG or MUC?
By tracked market cap: XAUG (Base) measures — and MUC (Base) measures $959.97K — dated snapshots, not a live feed.
Which is safer, XAUG or MUC?
On the contract checks we publish: XAUG (Base) grades B and MUC (Base) grades B. A grade is a structural check on the contract, not a promise about the asset.
How have XAUG and MUC performed over the shared window?
Between 2026-10-06 and 2026-10-15T21:43:45, the measured snapshots show XAUG at −4.83% and MUC at −18.0%.
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.