Understanding FDV vs market cap and how both relate to TVL helps investors read a token’s true valuation without being misled by any single metric.
Core Definitions of the Three Metrics
Fully diluted valuation multiplies the current token price by total supply or maximum supply. CoinGecko generally uses total supply for its FDV calculations, while other providers may reference maximum supply; the result highlights the hypothetical valuation if every token that will ever exist were already circulating, thereby revealing potential future dilution from unlocks or emissions.
Total value locked measures the USD value of assets deposited in a protocol’s smart contracts, including liquidity pools and lending markets. DefiLlama defines TVL strictly as the value of coins held in those contracts and treats it as an analogue to assets under management rather than a direct proxy for token price or holder value.
The three metrics therefore answer distinct questions. Market cap reflects today’s tradable float, FDV incorporates future supply, and TVL tracks protocol deposits and usage. They are not interchangeable because each relies on a different supply input and serves a separate analytical purpose.
Market Cap: Today's Tradable Float
Market capitalization equals the current token price multiplied by circulating supply. Circulating supply counts only tokens that trade freely on exchanges and excludes those held in vesting contracts, team wallets, or other lockups.
The figure updates continuously because token prices move with every trade and because supply figures shift when scheduled unlocks release new tokens into the market. Traders therefore see a live snapshot of the portion of supply actually available for buying or selling at that moment.
When every token that will ever exist already circulates, market cap and fully diluted valuation become identical. Dogwifhat (WIF) reached this state with roughly 999 million tokens in each of its circulating, total, and maximum supply categories as of October 2026 data, so the two valuations matched exactly.
Limitations appear whenever large allocations remain locked. Protocols that still hold significant portions in vesting or treasury contracts show a market cap that reflects only the present float. Future unlocks can increase supply and exert downward pressure on price even if current trading volume stays steady. Investors therefore review unlock schedules separately rather than treating market cap as a complete picture of long-term dilution risk.
FDV: Accounting for Future Dilution
Fully diluted valuation multiplies current token price by total supply or maximum supply, depending on the data provider. This figure reveals the hypothetical valuation if every token scheduled to exist were already circulating, exposing dilution potential from unlocks, emissions, and vesting that market cap ignores.
CoinGecko generally calculates FDV using total supply. Other providers sometimes apply maximum supply instead, producing material differences. One 2026 BNB case demonstrated an approximately $39 billion gap between the two approaches.
In 2026 CoinGecko launched Outstanding Token Value to refine the picture. OTV uses outstanding supply—total supply minus unallocated or unplanned tokens—rather than raw totals, delivering a narrower and more realistic valuation lens.
October 2026 CoinGecko data for Jupiter illustrated the impact: 3.32 billion tokens circulating, 6.86 billion total supply, and 10 billion maximum. FDV reached roughly 2.07 times market cap on total supply or about three times on maximum supply.
Token unlock calendars therefore remain central to valuation analysis. Large scheduled releases can widen the FDV-to-market-cap spread and create downward pressure if demand fails to absorb new supply.
TVL: Protocol Deposits, Not Token Value
Total value locked, or TVL, is defined by DefiLlama as the USD value of assets deposited directly into a protocol’s smart contracts. For an entire chain this figure is simply the sum of TVL across all protocols operating on that chain. It captures capital committed to lending markets, liquidity pools, staking contracts and similar DeFi primitives.
October 20, 2026 data from Sharpe Terminal show Ethereum holding $49.58 billion in TVL, Solana $5.87 billion, Base $6.18 billion and the Bitcoin ecosystem $4.39 billion. These numbers reflect actual deposits rather than token prices or circulating supply.
Because TVL measures usage and capital committed to a protocol, it functions more like assets under management than a valuation metric. A high TVL indicates strong product-market fit and real activity, yet it does not translate one-to-one into token holder value. Protocols can attract large deposits while their native tokens remain subject to separate supply schedules and market dynamics. Traders therefore treat TVL as a usage signal that complements, but never replaces, market-cap and FDV analysis.
Side-by-Side Comparison with 2026 Data
As of October 20 2026 data from Sharpe Terminal, Ethereum posted $49.58 billion in TVL against a $370.84 billion market cap, while Solana recorded $5.87 billion TVL versus $71.49 billion market cap. Base showed $6.18 billion TVL on a much smaller $3.35 billion market cap, illustrating how chain-level market caps can diverge sharply from locked capital. Bitcoin ecosystem figures were more extreme: $4.39 billion TVL against a $1.64 trillion market cap.
| Token / Chain | Market Cap | FDV | FDV / MC Ratio | TVL | Key Insight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jupiter (JUP) | — | — | 2.07× (total supply) / ~3× (max) | — | High ratio flags dilution from 6.86 B total versus 3.32 B circulating supply |
| dogwifhat (WIF) | — | — | 1.0× | — | Identical supplies mean FDV adds no new information |
| Pyth (PYTH) | — | — | 1.27× | — | Moderate gap from 7.87 B circulating out of 10 B maximum |
| Ethereum | $370.84 B | — | — | $49.58 B | TVL understates usage relative to market cap |
| Solana | $71.49 B | — | — | $5.87 B | Lower TVL-to-MC ratio than Base |
Growthepie reported an Ethereum Mainnet FDV of $293.17 billion within a $314.17 billion ecosystem total as of October 19. Market cap misleads when large unlocks loom, as Jupiter’s 2.07× ratio demonstrates. FDV misleads when maximum supply remains theoretical or when providers disagree on total versus max supply inputs. TVL misleads as a valuation proxy because it measures deposits, not token holder claims; Base’s high TVL relative to its $3.35 billion market cap shows the metric can exceed market cap on newer chains without implying overvaluation of the native token.
FAQ
How is market cap calculated differently from FDV?
Market cap multiplies current price by circulating supply. FDV multiplies the same price by total or maximum supply, depending on the provider, to show potential dilution from future unlocks.
What is Outstanding Token Value (OTV)?
CoinGecko introduced OTV in 2026. It multiplies price by outstanding supply, which excludes unallocated or unplanned tokens, offering a narrower view than standard FDV.
When should traders prefer FDV over market cap?
Use FDV when evaluating tokens with large upcoming unlocks or high inflation schedules, as it reveals the valuation once all planned supply enters circulation.
Does TVL directly reflect token price or holder value?
No. TVL measures USD value of assets deposited in smart contracts and tracks protocol usage, similar to assets under management, not token valuation itself.
Why do FDV numbers differ across data providers?
Providers disagree on supply inputs. CoinGecko typically uses total supply, while others apply maximum supply, creating gaps such as the roughly $39 billion variance reported for BNB in 2026 examples.
What edge cases affect TVL calculations?
TVL can vary when protocols include governance tokens, borrowed funds, or re-deposited liquid staking tokens. DefiLlama excludes these under its documented methodology.
How do supply schedules influence metric gaps?
Tokens like Jupiter showed FDV roughly 2.07 times market cap using total supply in October 2026 data, while dogwifhat maintained identical figures because all supplies matched circulating supply.