Crypto market cap vs FDV is a comparison of two calculations that use the same token price but different supply definitions. Market capitalization usually multiplies price by circulating supply. Fully diluted valuation (FDV) multiplies price by a project’s stated maximum supply, or by another provider’s chosen “fully diluted” supply. Neither number is a forecast, and neither is meaningful without a timestamp, a supply definition and a source.
A careful reader therefore asks four questions: Which price was used? Which chain or contract was counted? Which wallets were excluded from circulation? What future issuance, burns or bridge activity could change the denominator? The answers explain why two reputable data providers can show different values for the same token.
Core formulas and terms
The basic formulas are short:
- Circulating market cap = reference price × circulating supply.
- Minted or total-supply value = reference price × total supply.
- FDV = reference price × maximum supply, when a finite maximum is defined.
“Circulating supply” is an estimate of units available to the public for trading. It is analogous to free float in equities, but crypto markets lack one universal registry of restricted holdings. CoinGecko says its circulating figure excludes locked, vested, team and foundation holdings, including some tokens that are technically unlocked but reserved for project purposes (CoinGecko Supply Methodology). CoinMarketCap likewise describes circulating supply as a public-float estimate and uses it for its principal market-cap ranking (CoinMarketCap market-cap methodology).
Total supply generally means tokens already minted, minus coins that have been permanently burned. It can include tokens locked in vesting contracts, held by a treasury or assigned to future grants. Maximum supply is a coded or documented upper limit. Some networks have no finite maximum; in that case an FDV based on max supply is undefined or depends on a provider’s convention. “Unlocked supply” is another useful measure: tokens that can technically move now, even if a treasury or insider is unlikely to sell them.
On an ERC-20 token, the contract exposes a totalSupply() method, along with balances and transfer events (Ethereum’s ERC-20 standard). That on-chain number is evidence of minted units, not proof that every unit is public float. Wallet labels, vesting contracts, multisig policies and project disclosures are still needed to estimate circulation.
Why market cap and FDV diverge
Suppose a token trades at $2, has 30 million circulating units, 60 million total units and a 100 million maximum. Its circulating market cap is $60 million, total-supply value is $120 million and FDV is $200 million. The gap is not an error: it represents supply that is locked, reserved or not yet issued under the stated definitions.
The ratio also provides a diagnostic. Here, circulating supply is 30% of maximum supply, so 70% of the eventual ceiling is outside the circulating figure. That does not tell you when tokens will arrive or what price will do. It tells you that future issuance could materially change the supply base. Read the vesting calendar, emissions rules and treasury policy before interpreting the gap.
“Fully diluted” is not always identical across providers. CoinMarketCap defines FDV as maximum supply multiplied by price, while its methodology also lists minted, unlocked and circulating market-cap variants (CoinMarketCap supply definitions). CoinGecko’s documentation separates total, outstanding and circulating supply and may exclude unplanned or permanently reserved balances from its outstanding metric. Always record the provider’s formula instead of copying a label.
Supply events that change the denominator
Unlocks and emissions: A vesting contract can move tokens from an excluded wallet into a team member’s wallet. Mining, staking or liquidity incentives can increase total supply over time. Record the date, amount and recipient category; an “unlock” is a supply event, not evidence that the market absorbed the tokens.
Burns: A verifiable, irreversible burn reduces total supply. A transfer to a wallet described as a “burn address” is only persuasive if no key or contract path can recover the funds. Some dashboards update burns at different times, so note the block or transaction used.
Treasury and insider holdings: Methodologies differ on whether unlocked treasury, founder or private-investor balances count as circulating. A provider may exclude a large strategic wallet even when the token is transferable; another may include it. Treat the wallet classification as an assumption that can change after a review.
Bridged and wrapped tokens: A lock-and-mint bridge can show tokens on two chains while the underlying supply remains one economic pool. CoinGecko describes counting native issuance across chains, adjusting for burns, and excluding bridged or wrapped representations from global market cap to avoid double counting (CoinGecko Supply Update FAQ). If you add chain explorers yourself, map the source lock contract and destination mint contract before summing balances.
Rebases and nonstandard mechanics: A rebasing token can change balances without a conventional transfer. Elastic supply, reflection fees and migration contracts require a project-specific rule. A single explorer field may not capture the economically relevant supply.
Why two credible sources disagree
Differences can come from either side of the multiplication. Prices may be last-trade, volume-weighted, index or time-weighted values, sampled at different seconds. Supply may be live on-chain, cached at a block height, supplied by the project or frozen until an index rebalance. A Nasdaq filing for a crypto index, for example, defines circulating supply by units likely available for trading and specifies a block-time snapshot; when inputs cannot be determined reliably, it permits an approximation using a median free-float factor (SEC-filed Nasdaq index methodology).
Regulatory and market-structure documents also distinguish issued from unissued supply. In a 2026 Cboe filing, the exchange says total supply for its test is currently issued units, excluding unissued units, and illustrates the distinction with Bitcoin’s issued supply versus its 21 million maximum (SEC Release No. 34-104904). This is a measurement convention for that rule, not a universal definition for every dashboard.
For research, do not average conflicting figures into false precision. Preserve both observations, explain the rule behind each and use a range when the classification is genuinely uncertain.
Worked snapshot example
Imagine Project Delta at 12:00 UTC on 3 October 2026. The chosen reference price is $0.80 from a documented index. The token contract reports 900 million minted units. The project’s tokenomics page states a 1.2 billion maximum. Analysts identify 250 million units in a vesting contract, 100 million in a foundation treasury and 50 million in an unrecoverable burn address.
- Total supply: 900 million minted minus 50 million burned = 850 million.
- Circulating estimate: 850 million minus 250 million vested minus 100 million treasury = 500 million, assuming the provider excludes both wallets.
- Circulating market cap: $0.80 × 500 million = $400 million.
- Total-supply value: $0.80 × 850 million = $680 million.
- FDV: $0.80 × 1.2 billion = $960 million.
The 500 million figure is a classification, not a fact visible from totalSupply() alone. If another provider includes the unlocked treasury, its circulating figure becomes $480 million and market cap becomes $384 million. Both calculations can be internally consistent. The comparison should show the wallet list, exclusion rationale, price timestamp and block height.
A reproducible supply checklist
Use this template whenever you save a market-cap or FDV snapshot:
- Asset identity: symbol, chain, contract address and migration status.
- Price: quote currency, venue or index, timestamp in UTC, and whether it is last, VWAP or TWAP.
- Supply fields: circulating, total, maximum and unlocked amounts, with units and decimals.
- Source trail: explorer query or block height, project tokenomics document, provider methodology and retrieval time.
- Wallet treatment: list treasury, team, investor, vesting, bridge-lock and burn addresses; state which are excluded.
- Events: next unlock, emission rule, burn transaction, migration or bridge event that could change the numbers.
- Uncertainty: mark figures as on-chain, provider-estimated, project-reported or approximated; give a range when needed.
- Interpretation: describe dilution exposure and measurement limits separately from any investment decision.
Re-run the snapshot after a material unlock, burn, migration, methodology update or sharp price move. Keep the original record so changes in the reported metric can be distinguished from changes in the token itself.
Using the metrics responsibly
Market cap is useful for comparing the value assigned to currently circulating units under a stated price convention. FDV is useful for exposing how much larger the valuation would be if a defined future supply were priced at today’s reference price. Neither measure captures revenue, governance rights, token utility, liquidity, concentration, security risk or the market impact of releasing supply.
Use the figures as measurement inputs for research. Avoid turning an FDV gap into a promised price target, and avoid treating a low circulating market cap as proof that a project is cheap. Clear definitions, dated evidence and explicit uncertainty make the comparison informative without pretending that supply data has more precision than its methodology supports.
Sources and further reading
- CoinGecko Supply Methodology — CoinGecko, Updated 2025; accessed 2026-10-03
- CoinGecko Supply Update FAQ — CoinGecko, Updated 2025; accessed 2026-10-03
- ERC-20 Token Standard — Ethereum.org, Accessed 2026-10-03
- Market Capitalization (Cryptoasset, Aggregate) — CoinMarketCap, Updated 2026-01-06
- Supply (Circulating, Total, Max) — CoinMarketCap, Accessed 2026-10-03
- SR-NASDAQ-2025-016 Amendment No. 2 — U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Filed 2025; accessed 2026-10-03
- Cboe Rule Filing No. 34-104904 — U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2026; accessed 2026-10-03
Editorial note: This article is general educational information, not personalized financial, accounting, tax, or legal advice. Product capabilities and obligations can change; verify current facts and consult a qualified professional where needed.
