Where the market stood on 31 October 2026
A snapshot of digital-asset market structure as of 31 October 2026, covering concentration, weekly dispersion, and annualised fee streams.
Market Concentration
As of 31 October 2026, total market capitalisation stood at $2.617 trillion (point-in-time). Bitcoin alone accounted for 59.25% of that figure, with Ether contributing a further 10.43%. Together, the two largest assets represented roughly 69.7% of the measured total, leaving the remaining share distributed across all other tracked assets. Stablecoins outstanding totalled $306.5 billion (point-in-time), equivalent to approximately 11.7% of total market capitalisation — a proportion that illustrates how much of the asset base is held in instruments explicitly designed to maintain a fixed price rather than to appreciate or depreciate.
Weekly Return Dispersion
The trailing 7-day return distribution among assets with market capitalisations above $1 billion was notably wide. On the upside, Hyperliquid returned +14.67% and Pepe returned +12.98% over the trailing 7 days, while Zcash, Quant, and LEO Token posted gains of +8.42%, +4.95%, and +4.56% respectively over the same period. On the downside, Bitway fell -31.98% and Rain fell -23.55% over the trailing 7 days, with Worldcoin, Polkadot, and Venice Token declining -16.08%, -11.25%, and -9.59% over the same period. A 24-hour market-cap change of -3.41% (point-in-time) coincided with this dispersion, indicating that the short-term move was not uniform: some assets gained substantially while others fell sharply within the same window.
Fee Streams Versus Capitalisation Rank
The largest annualised fee streams, calculated from trailing 30-day data, are led by Uniswap at $1.107 billion annualised, followed by Canton at $594 million, Lido DAO at $579 million, Aave at $466 million, Meteora at $371 million, Morpho at $299 million, TRON at $294 million, and Solana at $277 million annualised. Several of these protocols do not appear among the largest assets by market capitalisation, which means the fee-stream ranking and the capitalisation ranking do not map onto each other cleanly. What this gap does not tell a reader is why the divergence exists: differences in token float, revenue-sharing mechanics, treasury structures, and how fee income flows to token holders versus protocol treasuries all affect the relationship between fees generated and market capitalisation, and none of those factors are captured here.
What These Figures Cannot Capture
Market-wide aggregates of this kind omit several dimensions that bear on interpretation. The $84.95 billion in value locked across chains (point-in-time) is a single composite figure that conceals differences in smart-contract risk, asset composition, and double-counting methodology across chains. Figures on trading volume, liquidity depth, on-chain transaction counts, holder concentration, and protocol governance activity are absent entirely. The snapshot nature of point-in-time capitalisation data means it reflects prices at a single moment and will differ from time-weighted measures over any interval.
A reader seeking to contextualise these figures would next need to examine individual protocol documentation, token economic structures, and chain-level activity data.