COW vs GNS
CoW Protocol and Gains Network 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
COW scores 167 of 250 and ranks 9th of 251. GNS scores 116 and ranks 81st. COW leads by 51 points, which is a wide enough margin that the framework is not ambivalent. COW takes 21 of the 25 variables, GNS takes 1, and 3 are level.
The framework rates COW HOLD and GNS WATCH. 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.
5 variables separate them by 3 points or more. COW is clear on Revenue Trend (7 against 3), Circulating / FDV Ratio (7 against 3) and Active Users (7 against 3).
Both score 3 or below on BTC Alpha Potential. 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.
COW still has 42.6% of its eventual supply to enter circulation against 0% for GNS. On the same market capitalisation, a buyer of COW is taking the 1.74x dilution path and a buyer of GNS the 1x one.
COW is valued at $82.3M against $9.5M for GNS, a 8.7x 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 | 7 | 4 | COW +3 | |
| Revenue Trend | 7 | 3 | COW +4 | |
| P/S Multiple | 8 | 8 | level | |
| Real Staking Yield | 4 | 4 | level |
Supply
| Supply Inflation | 8 | 7 | COW +1 | |
| Vesting Schedule | 9 | 8 | COW +1 | |
| Circulating / FDV Ratio | 7 | 3 | COW +4 | |
| Buyback and Burn | 7 | 8 | GNS +1 |
Ownership
| Smart Money Flows | 7 | 5 | COW +2 | |
| Insider Selling | 7 | 7 | level | |
| Holder Concentration | 6 | 4 | COW +2 |
Traction
| TVL Trend | 5 | 4 | COW +1 | |
| Active Users | 7 | 3 | COW +4 | |
| Developer Activity | 7 | 6 | COW +1 | |
| Network Growth | 7 | 5 | COW +2 |
Position
| Market Share | 6 | 2 | COW +4 | |
| Competitive Moat | 8 | 5 | COW +3 | |
| Institutional Adoption | 7 | 3 | COW +4 | |
| Exchange Depth | 5 | 3 | COW +2 | |
| Social Mindshare | 5 | 3 | COW +2 |
Risk
| Regulatory Safety | 7 | 3 | COW +4 | |
| Catalyst Calendar | 7 | 5 | COW +2 | |
| BTC Alpha Potential | 3 | 2 | COW +1 | |
| Team Execution | 8 | 6 | COW +2 | |
| Treasury Runway | 8 | 5 | COW +3 |
Bars read outward from the centre: COW to the left, GNS 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
| COW | GNS | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.1433 | $0.3987 |
| Market cap | $82.3M | $9.5M |
| Circulating | 57.4% | 100% |
| Dilution to full supply | 1.74x | 1x |
| Off all-time high | -93.5% | -96.8% |
| To recover the high | 15.4x | 31.2x |
| Total value locked | $367.3K | $50.0M |
| Network | Ethereum | Arbitrum |
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
COW · HOLD
Burn proposal (60-85M COW), chain expansion (10 chains), Aave integration, xStocks tokenized equities
CoW AMM collapsed (-98% TVL), thin exchange volume (about $1.3M to $1.7M a day), market share declining from peak, DNS hijack Apr 2026
GNS · WATCH
GTrade v10, RWA/forex expansion (270+ markets), DEGEN markets, staking v2
Hyperliquid 73% share vs GNS declining, Bitget delisted, $113K daily volume = liquidity risk
Common questions
- Is COW or GNS the better investment?
- On this framework COW scores higher: 167 against 116 of 250, and it is rated HOLD against WATCH. That is a ranking of fundamentals as recorded at the last scoring pass, not a price forecast, and COW still wins 21 of the 25 individual variables against GNS.
- What is the biggest difference between COW and GNS?
- Revenue Trend. COW scores 7 of 10 there and GNS scores 3, a gap of 4 points on a single variable.
- Which is bigger, COW or GNS?
- COW is valued at $82.3M and GNS at $9.5M 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.