BADGER vs FORTH
BadgerDAO and Ampleforth Governance scored on the same 25 variables, ranked against the same 251 tokens, with every gap between them shown.
Scoring pass 18 Sept 2026. Market snapshot 7 Oct 2026.
What separates them
BADGER scores 100 of 250 and ranks 144th of 251. FORTH scores 84 and ranks 213th. BADGER leads by 16 points, which is a real gap, though small enough that one variable moving would close much of it. BADGER takes 17 of the 25 variables, FORTH takes 1, and 7 are level.
The framework rates BADGER WATCH and FORTH PASS. Two tokens close enough to compare do not have to land in the same band, and where they do not, the divergence table below is where the split comes from.
No single variable separates BADGER and FORTH by as much as 3 points. The lead is broad rather than concentrated: BADGER is ahead on 17 of 25 variables by one or two points each, which is what produces the composite gap without any one variable carrying it.
Both score 3 or below on Protocol Revenue, Revenue Trend, Buyback and Burn, TVL Trend, Active Users, Network Growth and 4 more. A weakness both sides share is not a reason to prefer either. It is a reason to check whether the category itself carries the problem.
FORTH still has 28.7% of its eventual supply to enter circulation against 7.1% for BADGER. On the same market capitalisation, a buyer of FORTH is taking the 1.4x dilution path and a buyer of BADGER the 1.08x one.
BADGER is valued at $6.4M against $3.0M for FORTH, a 2.1x difference. The larger of the two also scores higher, so the market and the framework agree on the ordering here.
All 25 variables, head to head
Both tokens were scored by the same framework in the same pass, so the numbers are directly comparable. What a comparison adds over two separate pages is the gap: a 6 against a 6 is a non-event, a 9 against a 3 is the reason to hold one and not the other.
Cash flow
| Protocol Revenue | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| Revenue Trend | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| P/S Multiple | 5 | 5 | level | |
| Real Staking Yield | 4 | 3 | BADGER +1 |
Supply
| Supply Inflation | 5 | 6 | FORTH +1 | |
| Vesting Schedule | 6 | 6 | level | |
| Circulating / FDV Ratio | 7 | 6 | BADGER +1 | |
| Buyback and Burn | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 |
Ownership
| Smart Money Flows | 4 | 3 | BADGER +1 | |
| Insider Selling | 5 | 5 | level | |
| Holder Concentration | 4 | 4 | level |
Traction
| TVL Trend | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| Active Users | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| Developer Activity | 4 | 4 | level | |
| Network Growth | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 |
Position
| Market Share | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| Competitive Moat | 4 | 3 | BADGER +1 | |
| Institutional Adoption | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| Exchange Depth | 4 | 3 | BADGER +1 | |
| Social Mindshare | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 |
Risk
| Regulatory Safety | 5 | 5 | level | |
| Catalyst Calendar | 3 | 2 | BADGER +1 | |
| BTC Alpha Potential | 4 | 3 | BADGER +1 | |
| Team Execution | 4 | 4 | level | |
| Treasury Runway | 5 | 4 | BADGER +1 |
Bars read outward from the centre: BADGER to the left, FORTH to the right. The side that leads a variable is filled. Each score is 1 to 10 against the same definition applied to all 251 rated tokens.
Market and supply
| BADGER | FORTH | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.3292 | $0.2746 |
| Market cap | $6.4M | $3.0M |
| Circulating | 92.9% | 71.3% |
| Dilution to full supply | 1.08x | 1.4x |
| Off all-time high | -99.63% | -99.85% |
| To recover the high | 270.3x | 666.7x |
| Total value locked | not published | not published |
| Network | Ethereum | Ethereum |
Price, market cap and all-time high from the CoinGecko snapshot fetched 7 Oct 2026. Supply shares are derived from circulating and eventual supply counts, which do not move with price. The 25 scores come from the research pass dated 18 Sept 2026.
Catalyst and risk on each side
BADGER · WATCH
Bitcoin DeFi expansion via eBTC and ibBTC; growing TVL in BTC-pegged yield strategies.
Dependence on Bitcoin L2 adoption; competition from Rootstock and Stacks for BTC DeFi.
FORTH · PASS
Governance of Ampleforth's elastic supply protocol and potential rebasing yield.
Elastic supply model creates unpredictable token supply and user adoption challenges.
Common questions
- Is BADGER or FORTH the better investment?
- On this framework BADGER scores higher: 100 against 84 of 250, and it is rated WATCH against PASS. That is a ranking of fundamentals as recorded at the last scoring pass, not a price forecast, and BADGER still wins 17 of the 25 individual variables against FORTH.
- What is the biggest difference between BADGER and FORTH?
- Nothing separates them by more than 2 points on any of the 25 variables, which is unusual and means the two are close substitutes on fundamentals.
- Which is bigger, BADGER or FORTH?
- BADGER is valued at $6.4M and FORTH at $3.0M on the latest market snapshot.
Related comparisons
Keep reading
Research and analysis, not investment advice. A higher score is one framework applied consistently to 251 tokens, not a prediction that one asset will outperform the other.