MC vs PRCL
Merit Circle (Beam) and Parcl 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
MC scores 101 of 250 and ranks 135th of 251. PRCL scores 80 and ranks 219th. MC leads by 21 points, which is a real gap, though small enough that one variable moving would close much of it. MC takes 21 of the 25 variables, PRCL takes 0, and 4 are level.
The framework rates MC WATCH and PRCL 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 MC and PRCL by as much as 3 points. The lead is broad rather than concentrated: MC is ahead on 21 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, Real Staking Yield, TVL Trend, Market Share and 1 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.
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 | MC +1 | |
| Revenue Trend | 3 | 3 | level | |
| P/S Multiple | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| Real Staking Yield | 3 | 2 | MC +1 |
Supply
| Supply Inflation | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Vesting Schedule | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Circulating / FDV Ratio | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Buyback and Burn | 3 | 2 | MC +1 |
Ownership
| Smart Money Flows | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| Insider Selling | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Holder Concentration | 4 | 4 | level |
Traction
| TVL Trend | 3 | 3 | level | |
| Active Users | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| Developer Activity | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Network Growth | 4 | 3 | MC +1 |
Position
| Market Share | 3 | 2 | MC +1 | |
| Competitive Moat | 4 | 4 | level | |
| Institutional Adoption | 3 | 2 | MC +1 | |
| Exchange Depth | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| Social Mindshare | 4 | 3 | MC +1 |
Risk
| Regulatory Safety | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Catalyst Calendar | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| BTC Alpha Potential | 4 | 3 | MC +1 | |
| Team Execution | 5 | 4 | MC +1 | |
| Treasury Runway | 5 | 4 | MC +1 |
Bars read outward from the centre: MC to the left, PRCL 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
| MC | PRCL | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | not published | $0.006049 |
| Market cap | not published | $5.5M |
| Circulating | 100% | 90.7% |
| Dilution to full supply | 1x | 1.1x |
| Off all-time high | n/a | -99.18% |
| To recover the high | n/a | 122x |
| Total value locked | not published | not published |
| Network | Beam | Solana |
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
MC · WATCH
Merit Circle/Beam gaming guild expansion and token utility in partner games and metaverse projects.
Dependence on volatile play-to-earn game economies and potential guild token devaluation.
PRCL · PASS
Real estate price index derivatives on Parcl for synthetic property trading.
Oracle reliability and low liquidity in niche real estate DeFi market.
Common questions
- Is MC or PRCL the better investment?
- On this framework MC scores higher: 101 against 80 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 MC still wins 21 of the 25 individual variables against PRCL.
- What is the biggest difference between MC and PRCL?
- 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.
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.