GNS vs VELA
Gains Network and Vela Exchange 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
GNS scores 116 of 250 and ranks 81st of 251. VELA scores 107 and ranks 106th. GNS leads by 9 points, which is inside the range where the individual variables matter more than the total. GNS takes 12 of the 25 variables, VELA takes 8, and 5 are level.
3 variables separate them by 3 points or more. GNS is clear on Buyback and Burn (8 against 4), P/S Multiple (8 against 5) and Vesting Schedule (8 against 5).
Both score 3 or below on Market Share, Institutional Adoption, Exchange Depth, Social Mindshare. 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.
VELA still has 50% of its eventual supply to enter circulation against 0% for GNS. On the same market capitalisation, a buyer of VELA is taking the 2x dilution path and a buyer of GNS the 1x one.
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 | 4 | 4 | level | |
| Revenue Trend | 3 | 5 | VELA +2 | |
| P/S Multiple | 8 | 5 | GNS +3 | |
| Real Staking Yield | 4 | 5 | VELA +1 |
Supply
| Supply Inflation | 7 | 5 | GNS +2 | |
| Vesting Schedule | 8 | 5 | GNS +3 | |
| Circulating / FDV Ratio | 3 | 5 | VELA +2 | |
| Buyback and Burn | 8 | 4 | GNS +4 |
Ownership
| Smart Money Flows | 5 | 4 | GNS +1 | |
| Insider Selling | 7 | 5 | GNS +2 | |
| Holder Concentration | 4 | 4 | level |
Traction
| TVL Trend | 4 | 5 | VELA +1 | |
| Active Users | 3 | 4 | VELA +1 | |
| Developer Activity | 6 | 5 | GNS +1 | |
| Network Growth | 5 | 4 | GNS +1 |
Position
| Market Share | 2 | 3 | VELA +1 | |
| Competitive Moat | 5 | 4 | GNS +1 | |
| Institutional Adoption | 3 | 2 | GNS +1 | |
| Exchange Depth | 3 | 3 | level | |
| Social Mindshare | 3 | 3 | level |
Risk
| Regulatory Safety | 3 | 5 | VELA +2 | |
| Catalyst Calendar | 5 | 4 | GNS +1 | |
| BTC Alpha Potential | 2 | 4 | VELA +2 | |
| Team Execution | 6 | 5 | GNS +1 | |
| Treasury Runway | 5 | 5 | level |
Bars read outward from the centre: GNS to the left, VELA 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
| GNS | VELA | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0.3987 | not published |
| Market cap | $9.5M | not published |
| Circulating | 100% | 50% |
| Dilution to full supply | 1x | 2x |
| Off all-time high | -96.8% | n/a |
| To recover the high | 31.2x | n/a |
| Total value locked | $50.0M | not published |
| Network | Arbitrum | 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
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
VELA · WATCH
Vela Exchange perp DEX on Arbitrum; token buyback and burn mechanism.
Low trading volumes vs. GMX; reliance on Arbitrum network; token dilution.
Common questions
- Is GNS or VELA the better investment?
- On this framework GNS scores higher: 116 against 107 of 250, and it is rated WATCH against WATCH. That is a ranking of fundamentals as recorded at the last scoring pass, not a price forecast, and GNS still wins 12 of the 25 individual variables against VELA.
- What is the biggest difference between GNS and VELA?
- Buyback and Burn. GNS scores 8 of 10 there and VELA scores 4, a gap of 4 points on a single variable.
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.