Five-year price · 20 complete calendar quarters · BTC-relative

Gaming Crypto Coins

Is Gaming outperforming Bitcoin, and is leadership broad?

Bottom line

Capybobo ranks first for research priority in Gaming crypto at 62/100, and its native activity proof is incomplete. The theme's 13-week excess versus Bitcoin is -8.2% on 9% breadth, which is what decides whether that lead is isolated or broad. 3 of the 36 assets here carry enough native evidence to move past a tape-led label.

These Gaming coins are part of the cryptocurrency universe this site tracks daily — 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap, priced from exchange closes and matched to protocol fees and revenue where a protocol publishes them.

The theme itself · before any single company

How has Gaming moved against Bitcoin?

The line below covers up to 5 years and opens on the 5Y view; the buttons cut it shorter. Over the most recent two of them this theme is 55% behind Bitcoin. Protocol revenue across its protocols fell 35% on average over the last four reported quarters.

ASLEEP · 1y −11.6%·Price down, no fundamental support11 of 25 coins ahead of Bitcoin by 5% or more over three months

RS — · 2/25 >200d (−1) · 11/25 lead (+1) · EPS —

Gaming, equal-weighted, based at 200 Bitcoin, same base, same start trailing 12-month protocol revenue rising falling

Both lines start at 200 in the same week, so the distance between them is the whole story: the theme line is an equal-weighted index of its 25 coins. The bars underneath are trailing 12-month protocol revenue, one bar per reported quarter, each member rebased to 100 at the start and the theme taking the median — so a price line pulling away from flat bars is a re-rating, not earnings. A bar turns red when that figure is lower than the quarter before. Rules are fixed and applied identically everywhere on this site: ahead by 5% or more over three months, or behind by 20% or more over a year while protocol revenue grew 20% or more. Hover any point to read both values and the gap. This is a description of what the numbers did, not advice.

RISK OFF market context

Gaming vs Bitcoin — Relative Strength & Breadth

Gaming crypto has underperformed Bitcoin by 40.6% over 52 weeks on an equal-weight index of current members. Over 13 weeks the figure is -8.2%. 3 of 33 covered assets are above their own 200-day average. B3 (Base) leads Bitcoin-relative strength at +77.4%. Price readings are as of 2026-07-31.

-8.2%13w vs BTC

-41%52w vs BTC

3/33Above 200-DMA

B3RS leader · +77%

Assets

canonical functional membership

Activity-covered

3/36

enough native evidence

Top score

62.0/100

Capybobo

Calendar quarters

complete; missing stays missing

Global asset selection · top 20 shown

Showing 20 of 36 assets

00 · exact additive research priority

4-Factor Crypto Evidence Score

A within-theme research-priority score for the 36 assets in Gaming, out of 100. The four displayed point contributions add exactly to the total, and the market regime changes the action label, never the arithmetic. Capybobo is highest at 62/100 on 43% evidence. It ranks research attention, not portfolio action.

Market leadership · 35Network & economic traction · 30Value capture · 20Liquidity & downside risk · 15

Capybobo leads the current research queue at 62/100 with 43% evidence.

3/36 assets have enough native activity evidence to move beyond a tape-led label.

7 of the 43 Gaming coins are not rated this week: 6 have no price within 7 days, 1 reports no traded volume. They are listed in full below the ranking.

Missing native metrics are not scored as zero and are not silently reweighted. They pull only the affected factor toward neutral and lower its visible evidence percentage. An asset with nothing measurable at all is not scored at 50 either — it is listed as not rated.

1. Capybobo · PYBOBO

62.0/100 · Illiquid · research only · 43% evidence

Exact sum: 30.1 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.9 = 62.0

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

30.1/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 25.2 pp · RS-sector 14.8 pp · 200-DMA below

80% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $609,459 · vol 35.8%

100% evidence

2. GoMining Token · GOMINING

61.7/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 23.8 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 12.9 = 61.7

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

23.8/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 15.3 pp · RS-sector 10.5 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

12.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $8,824,287 · vol 32.3%

100% evidence

3. Alien Worlds · TLM

59.8/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 28.2 + 12.5 + 10.0 + 9.1 = 59.8

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

28.2/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 17.8 pp · RS-sector 24.9 pp · 200-DMA above

100% evidence

12.5/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

9.1/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $27,914,857 · vol 280.2%

100% evidence

4. Metaplex · MPLX

57.2/100 · Illiquid · research only · 86% evidence

Exact sum: 22.3 + 11.0 + 18.6 + 5.3 = 57.2

Decision use: Cheap on network economics while activity contracts: investigate value-capture trap risk.

22.3/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 13.6 pp · RS-sector 18.5 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

11.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees -52.8% · revenue -52.8% · users —

53% evidence

18.6/20Value capture

Fee yield 51.28% · revenue yield 51.28%

100% evidence

5.3/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,426,028 · vol 264.4%

100% evidence

5. Rollbit Coin · RLB

57.1/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 24.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 57.1

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

24.6/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 22 pp · RS-sector 7.6 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

7.5/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $204,583 · vol 31.1%

100% evidence

6. CROSS · CROSS

56.9/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 25.0 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.9 = 56.9

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

25.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 6.5 pp · RS-sector 17.3 pp · 200-DMA above

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $2,988,753 · vol 135.4%

100% evidence

7. B3 (Base) · B3

55.2/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 23.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.6 = 55.2

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

23.6/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 77.4 pp · RS-sector 0 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $5,377,438 · vol 129.3%

100% evidence

8. Hamster Kombat · HMSTR

54.4/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 20.7 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 8.7 = 54.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

20.7/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 27.8 pp · RS-sector -4.1 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

8.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $11,301,589 · vol 251.4%

100% evidence

9. Incrypt · INC

52.4/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 20.9 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.5 = 52.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

20.9/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 5.7 pp · RS-sector 11.7 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.5/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $85,554 · vol 25.3%

100% evidence

10. Gama Token · GAMA

52.3/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 20.9 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.4 = 52.3

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

20.9/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 12.7 pp · RS-sector 0.8 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.4/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $6,396 · vol 27.8%

100% evidence

11. DEAPCOIN · DEP

52.1/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 20.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.6 = 52.1

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

20.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 8.4 pp · RS-sector 6.2 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $116,729 · vol 31.8%

100% evidence

12. Nexpace · NXPC

52.1/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 16.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 10.6 = 52.1

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

16.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 4.5 pp · RS-sector -1.8 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

10.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $7,561,806 · vol 49.8%

100% evidence

13. Decentraland · MANA

50.6/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 14.3 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 11.3 = 50.6

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

14.3/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -7.3 pp · RS-sector 9.1 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

11.3/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $10,789,328 · vol 63.7%

100% evidence

14. Four · FORM

48.4/100 · Illiquid · research only · 12% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.9 = 48.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

5.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $408,110 · vol —

80% evidence

15. GMT · GMT

48.1/100 · Illiquid · research only · 12% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.6 = 48.1

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

5.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $372,615 · vol —

80% evidence

16. SuperVerse · SUPER

47.5/100 · Illiquid · research only · 17% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 14.0 + 10.0 + 6.0 = 47.5

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

14.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.0/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $241,530 · vol —

80% evidence

17. Smooth Love Potion · SLP

46.3/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 15.0 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.3 = 46.3

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

15.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -5.6 pp · RS-sector 8.8 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.3/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,417,151 · vol 93.7%

100% evidence

18. ApeCoin · APE

45.7/100 · Illiquid · research only · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 19.1 + 13.0 + 10.0 + 3.6 = 45.7

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

19.1/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -3.6 pp · RS-sector 2 pp · 200-DMA above

100% evidence

13.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

3.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $3,814 · vol 77.5%

100% evidence

19. Hunt · HUNT

45.2/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 13.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.7 = 45.2

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

13.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -4.3 pp · RS-sector 3.3 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

6.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $147,432 · vol 29.3%

100% evidence

20. Axie Infinity · AXS

45.1/100 · Mixed · market gate closed · 86% evidence

Exact sum: 7.2 + 15.2 + 10.4 + 12.3 = 45.1

Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.

7.2/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -18.7 pp · RS-sector -11.5 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.2/30Network & economic traction

Fees -45.9% · revenue -49.5% · users —

53% evidence

10.4/20Value capture

Fee yield 1% · revenue yield 0.93%

100% evidence

12.3/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $13,748,692 · vol 34.6%

100% evidence

Showing 20 of 36 ranked assets

01 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Which projects are generating the most network fees?

LeaderMetaplex · $11.9M

Gap546% versus #2

Persistence0 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage4/36 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

Trailing 12-month fees is the sum of the latest four complete calendar quarters. Growth compares that sum with the prior four-quarter sum.

Trailing 12-month feestop five

1Metaplex MPLX$11.9M

2Axie Infinity AXS$1.8M

3Illuvium ILV$110.7K

4Beam BEAM$1.6K

Fee growthtop five

1Axie Infinity AXS-46%

2Metaplex MPLX-53%

3Illuvium ILV-89%

Network fees · asset comparison

4/36 level · 3/36 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Trailing 12-month fees	Fee growth
capybobo	—	—
gmt-token	—	—
alien-worlds	—	—
metaplex	$359.8K	-53%
rollbit-coin	—	—
cross-2	—	—
b3	—	—
hamster-kombat	—	—
incrypt	—	—
gama-token	—	—
deapcoin	—	—
nexpace	—	—
decentraland	—	—
four	—	—
stepn	—	—
superfarm	—	—
smooth-love-potion	—	—
apecoin	—	—
hunt-token	—	—
axie-infinity	$426.1K	-46%
wemix-token	—	—
skale	—	—
the-sandbox	—	—
adshares	—	—
hive	—	—
catizen	—	—
unipoly	—	—
gala	—	—
big-time	—	—
wax	—	—
somnia	—	—
enjincoin	—	—
yield-guild-games	—	—
bora	—	—
beam-2	$98	—
illuvium	$65.2K	-89%

Showing 20 of 36 assets

02 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

LeaderMetaplex · $11.9M

Gap595% versus #2

Persistence0 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage3/36 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

Trailing 12-month revenue is the sum of the latest four complete calendar quarters. Growth compares that sum with the prior four-quarter sum.

Trailing 12-month revenuetop five

1Metaplex MPLX$11.9M

2Axie Infinity AXS$1.7M

3Illuvium ILV$110.7K

Revenue growthtop five

1Axie Infinity AXS-50%

2Metaplex MPLX-53%

3Illuvium ILV-89%

Protocol revenue · asset comparison

3/36 level · 3/36 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Trailing 12-month revenue	Revenue growth
capybobo	—	—
gmt-token	—	—
alien-worlds	—	—
metaplex	$359.8K	-53%
rollbit-coin	—	—
cross-2	—	—
b3	—	—
hamster-kombat	—	—
incrypt	—	—
gama-token	—	—
deapcoin	—	—
nexpace	—	—
decentraland	—	—
four	—	—
stepn	—	—
superfarm	—	—
smooth-love-potion	—	—
apecoin	—	—
hunt-token	—	—
axie-infinity	$408.1K	-50%
wemix-token	—	—
skale	—	—
the-sandbox	—	—
adshares	—	—
hive	—	—
catizen	—	—
unipoly	—	—
gala	—	—
big-time	—	—
wax	—	—
somnia	—	—
enjincoin	—	—
yield-guild-games	—	—
bora	—	—
beam-2	—	—
illuvium	$65.2K	-89%

Showing 20 of 36 assets

03 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

LeaderGALA · $7.7M

Gap26% versus #2

Persistence0 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage10/36 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

Quarter-end TVL uses protocol TVL first for protocol assets and exact-ID chain TVL for chain assets or where protocol TVL is unavailable. A blank is unavailable, not zero. Growth compares with the same complete quarter one year earlier.

Quarter-end TVLtop five

1GALA GALA$7.7M

2WEMIX WEMIX$6.1M

3ApeCoin APE$2.6M

4Somnia SOMI$2.0M

5Beam BEAM$903.2K

TVL growthtop five

1WEMIX WEMIX-25%

2Beam BEAM-58%

3SuperVerse SUPER-61%

4WAX WAXP-71%

5ApeCoin APE-73%

Total value locked · asset comparison

10/36 level · 7/36 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Quarter-end TVL	TVL growth
capybobo	—	—
gmt-token	—	—
alien-worlds	$37.6K	-77%
metaplex	—	—
rollbit-coin	—	—
cross-2	—	—
b3	—	—
hamster-kombat	—	—
incrypt	—	—
gama-token	—	—
deapcoin	—	—
nexpace	—	—
decentraland	—	—
four	—	—
stepn	—	—
superfarm	$22.8K	-61%
smooth-love-potion	—	—
apecoin	$2.6M	-73%
hunt-token	—	—
axie-infinity	—	—
wemix-token	$6.1M	-25%
skale	—	—
the-sandbox	$0	—
adshares	—	—
hive	—	—
catizen	—	—
unipoly	—	—
gala	$7.7M	—
big-time	—	—
wax	$261.6K	-71%
somnia	$2.0M	—
enjincoin	—	—
yield-guild-games	—	—
bora	—	—
beam-2	$903.2K	-58%
illuvium	$0	-100%

Showing 20 of 36 assets

04 · let price answer last

Which assets lead on price and relative strength?

B3 (Base) leads the Gaming tape on Bitcoin-relative strength at +77% over 90 days. 3 of 33 covered assets are above their own 200-day average. Price shows what happened; BTC-relative strength shows whether the asset beat crypto’s opportunity-cost benchmark. Both lines run through 2026-07-31.

Complete set · no silent drops

Which assets are in Gaming?

36 of the 43 coins assigned to Gaming are rated and ranked below, and the other 7 are listed under it with the reason each one is not rated — tape-only names that publish no protocol activity included. Each asset has exactly one canonical functional theme, chosen by a specific-to-general first match on its categories.

Rank	Asset	Price	90d	RS-BTC	200-DMA	30d vol	Median volume	Price quality	Activity source	Score	Evidence
1	Capybobo PYBOBO	$0.0008	+5.1%	+25%	Below	36%	$609.5K	usable	tape only	62.0	43%
2	GoMining Token GOMINING	$0.2856	-4.9%	+15%	Below	32%	$8.8M	usable	tape only	61.7	50%
3	Alien Worlds TLM	$0.0018	-2.3%	+18%	Above	280%	$27.9M	usable	protocol	59.8	55%
4	Metaplex MPLX	$0.0232	-6.5%	+14%	Below	264%	$1.4M	usable	protocol	57.2	86%
5	Rollbit Coin RLB	$0.0645	+1.9%	+22%	Below	31%	$204.6K	usable	tape only	57.1	50%
6	CROSS CROSS	$0.0923	-14%	+6.5%	Above	135%	$3.0M	usable	tape only	56.9	50%
7	B3 (Base) B3	$0.0005	+57%	+77%	Below	129%	$5.4M	usable	tape only	55.2	50%
8	Hamster Kombat HMSTR	$0.0002	+7.7%	+28%	Below	251%	$11.3M	usable	tape only	54.4	50%
9	Incrypt INC	$0.0780	-14%	+5.7%	Below	25%	$85.6K	usable	tape only	52.4	50%
10	Gama Token GAMA	$0.1906	-7.4%	+13%	Below	28%	$6.4K	usable	tape only	52.3	50%
11	DEAPCOIN DEP	$0.0010	-12%	+8.4%	Below	32%	$116.7K	usable	tape only	52.1	50%
12	Nexpace NXPC	$0.2505	-16%	+4.6%	Below	50%	$7.6M	usable	tape only	52.1	50%
13	Decentraland MANA	$0.0658	-27%	-7.3%	Below	64%	$10.8M	usable	tape only	50.6	50%
14	Four FORM	$0.2012	—	—	—	—	$408.1K	usable	tape only	48.4	12%
15	GMT GMT	$0.0065	—	—	—	—	$372.6K	usable	tape only	48.1	12%
16	SuperVerse SUPER	$0.0806	—	—	—	—	$241.5K	usable	protocol	47.5	17%
17	Smooth Love Potion SLP	$0.0005	-26%	-5.6%	Below	94%	$1.4M	usable	tape only	46.3	50%
18	ApeCoin APE	$0.1352	-24%	-3.6%	Above	77%	$3.8K	usable	chain TVL	45.7	55%
19	Hunt HUNT	$0.0768	-24%	-4.3%	Below	29%	$147.4K	usable	tape only	45.2	50%
20	Axie Infinity AXS	$0.8426	-39%	-19%	Below	35%	$13.7M	usable	protocol	45.1	86%
21	WEMIX WEMIX	$0.1998	-17%	+3.1%	Below	70%	$1.2M	usable	chain TVL	44.8	55%
22	SKALE SKL	$0.0037	-46%	-26%	Below	122%	$6.9M	usable	tape only	42.8	50%
23	The Sandbox SAND	$0.0427	-41%	-21%	Below	48%	$14.7M	usable	protocol	42.2	50%
24	Adshares ADS	$0.4018	-33%	-13%	Below	35%	$95.8K	usable	tape only	42.0	50%
25	Hive HIVE	$0.0424	-30%	-9.5%	Below	39%	$1.5M	usable	tape only	40.7	50%
26	Catizen CATI	$0.0373	-28%	-7.6%	Below	99%	$4.1M	usable	tape only	40.2	50%
27	Unipoly UNP	$0.1087	-33%	-13%	Below	341%	$154.8K	usable	tape only	38.7	50%
28	GALA GALA	$0.0018	-48%	-28%	Below	58%	$31.0M	usable	chain TVL	38.1	50%
29	Big Time BIGTIME	$0.0057	-58%	-38%	Below	46%	$9.6M	usable	tape only	36.2	50%
30	WAX WAXP	$0.0039	-42%	-22%	Below	52%	$824.0K	usable	chain TVL	35.9	55%
31	Somnia SOMI	$0.0848	-54%	-34%	Below	68%	$5.3M	usable	chain TVL	35.9	50%
32	Enjin Coin ENJ	$0.0250	-54%	-34%	Below	50%	$3.7M	usable	tape only	35.3	50%
33	Yield Guild Games YGG	$0.0180	-59%	-39%	Below	65%	$5.9M	usable	tape only	34.5	50%
34	BORA BORA	$0.0202	-44%	-24%	Below	40%	$182.9K	usable	tape only	33.7	50%
35	Beam BEAM	$0.0071	-64%	-44%	Below	114%	$8.0K	usable	protocol + chain TVL	27.3	65%
36	Illuvium ILV	$2.84	-41%	-20%	Below	47%	$1.2M	usable	protocol	26.4	86%

Showing 20 of 36 assets

Not rated — and why

7 of the 43 Gaming coins are not rated this week: 6 have no price within 7 days, 1 reports no traded volume. Each one stays on this page with its reason instead of being scored at the midpoint of a range nothing measured.

Coin	Market cap	Reason	Detail
Audiera BEAT	$930.3M	No price this week	No traded price in the 95 days to 2026-07-31.
ECOMI OMI	$49.6M	No price this week	No traded price in the 95 days to 2026-07-31.
Moca Network MOCA	$38.5M	No price this week	No traded price in the 95 days to 2026-07-31.
Power Protocol POWER	$17.4M	No price this week	No traded price in the 95 days to 2026-07-31.
GameBuild GAME	$17.2M	No price this week	Last traded price is 2026-05-22, 70 days before this page's 2026-07-31 reading.
Xai XAI	$15.7M	No traded volume reported	No traded volume is reported on most of the last 30 days, so it has no liquidity reading.
Echelon Prime PRIME	$14.6M	No price this week	No traded price in the 95 days to 2026-07-31.

Methodology · boundaries make the answer useful

What can make this comparison misleading?

This Gaming comparison names 5 ways its own evidence can mislead, all listed below. The largest is that crypto network activity is not company earnings: protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders. Coverage is also uneven — 3 of 36 assets carry enough native evidence to rank on more than price.

Crypto network activity is not company earnings. Protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders.
Market-cap values are a dated universe snapshot, not point-in-time historical supply data.
Current category labels are applied to historical prices; this creates survivorship and taxonomy hindsight.
Funding rates, open interest, liquidations, exchange flows, unlock schedules, historical circulating supply and developer activity are not held and are not inferred.
Equal weighting is used for sector history because true historical market-cap weights are unavailable.

Price and technicalsThrough 2026-07-31. Five-year weekly observations benchmarked to Bitcoin.

Protocol activityThrough 2026-07-31. Fees, revenue, protocol TVL and DEX volume.

Chain activityUsers and transactions through unavailable; separately sourced chain TVL through 2026-07-25.

Market capSnapshot dated 2026-07-04; no historical supply series is implied.

Questions the page should answer directly

Crypto analysis FAQs

These 20 answers cover the questions this page can settle from data it holds — what the category is, how the score is built, what the coverage gaps are, and what would change the read. Every answer below is also present in the page’s FAQ schema and in its plain-text rendition. None of them is a recommendation.

What is Gaming crypto?

Gaming crypto refers to cryptocurrency projects grouped by what they actually do rather than by market fashion. This page tracks 36 such coins by market cap, price and Bitcoin-relative strength, with protocol fees and revenue where a project publishes them. Readings are as of 2026-07-31.

What is the total market cap of Gaming crypto coins?

The Gaming coins on this page are tracked against a universe of 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04, separately from the price series, and each coin's own figure is in the table on this page.

Are Gaming crypto coins outperforming Bitcoin?

Gaming has returned -40.6% versus Bitcoin over 52 weeks and -8.2% over 13 weeks on an equal-weight current-member index. 3/33 covered assets are above their 200-day averages as of 2026-07-31.

Which Gaming asset has the strongest research score?

Capybobo ranks first at 62/100: 30.1 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.9 = 62.0. It is labelled “Illiquid · research only” with 43% overall evidence and 0% native-economics evidence.

Why are some Gaming coins not rated?

7 of the 43 coins are not rated this week: 6 have no price within 7 days, 1 reports no traded volume. They stay listed with the reason beside each one rather than being scored at a neutral midpoint, because a missing reading is not a middling reading.

How is the Gaming 4-factor score calculated?

The exact sum is Market leadership /35 + Network and economic traction /30 + Value capture /20 + Liquidity and downside risk /15. Missing data pulls only the affected factor toward neutral and lowers evidence; it is never silently reweighted.

Why can a Gaming asset be labelled tape-led?

Tape-led means price and relative-strength evidence exists but less than half of the native traction and value-capture evidence is available. Such assets remain visible but rank below fully evidenced assets.

Does protocol revenue accrue to the token?

Not necessarily. Protocol fees and revenue measure network economics; token-holder value depends on the protocol’s burn, buyback, staking, distribution and governance rules. This page never assumes accrual merely because revenue exists.

Does crypto have a P/E or PEG ratio?

No comparable company-style P/E or PEG is used. Where coverage permits, the page shows network fee yield and protocol-revenue yield against a dated market-cap snapshot, with an explicit token-accrual caveat.

How much history is shown for Gaming?

The page shows five years of weekly price and relative-strength history and 20 complete calendar quarters of on-chain activity where available. Missing periods remain gaps.

Why do the crypto data dates differ?

Prices and technical metrics run through 2026-07-31; protocol activity through 2026-07-31; chain users and transactions through the latest available chain date; chain TVL through 2026-07-25; market capitalisation is a separate snapshot dated 2026-07-04.

Are stablecoins and wrapped tokens included in Gaming?

No. Pegged, wrapped, liquid-staking receipt and tokenized-asset instruments are excluded because they do not have independent price discovery.

Can one token appear in multiple raw crypto categories?

Yes, but public MLA pages assign each asset to exactly one functional theme using a specific-to-general first-match taxonomy. Gaming therefore has one canonical membership list.

What would invalidate the current Gaming theme read?

The read weakens if the sector’s 13-week relative return versus Bitcoin falls below zero, fewer than one-third of covered assets remain above the 200-day average, and the leading asset’s native activity also contracts.

Does this page include funding rates, open interest or token unlocks?

No. Those datasets are not held in the current research store, so the page names them as unavailable rather than inferring them from price.

Which projects are generating the most network fees?

Metaplex leads Gaming crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $11.9M, 546% ahead of Axie Infinity. 0 of 3 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 4 of the 36 ranked assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

Metaplex leads Gaming crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $11.9M, 595% ahead of Axie Infinity. 0 of 3 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 3 of the 36 ranked assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

GALA leads Gaming crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $7.7M, 26% ahead of WEMIX. 0 of 7 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 10 of the 36 ranked assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

Which Gaming project has the largest fee base?

Metaplex leads covered trailing-12-month fees at $11.9M. Coverage is 4/36; this is network activity, not automatically token-holder income.

Which are the biggest Gaming crypto coins by market cap?

Axie Infinity is the largest Gaming crypto coin by market capitalisation at $183.7M, ahead of ApeCoin at $145.5M and Decentraland at $137.9M. The 36 Gaming coins on this page carry $2B between them, with a market-cap figure on file for 36 of them. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04.