Where the market stood on 04 November 2026

Market Concentration

As of 04 November 2026, total market capitalisation stood at $2.65 trillion (point-in-time). Bitcoin alone accounted for 59.34% of that figure, with Ether adding a further 10.70%, meaning the two largest assets together represented roughly 70% of the entire measured market. Stablecoins outstanding reached $303.1 billion (point-in-time), equivalent to approximately 11.4% of total market capitalisation, a share large enough to be structurally significant in any liquidity analysis. Value locked across chains was recorded at $82.3 billion (point-in-time), a figure that covers only assets deposited in tracked on-chain protocols and therefore understates total ecosystem activity by construction.

Breadth of the Week's Movement

The 24-hour market-capitalisation change of +0.37% (point-in-time) suggests modest aggregate movement over that window, but the trailing 7-day distribution among assets with market caps above $1 billion tells a more varied story. Among the strongest performers over the trailing 7 days, Pepe led at +5.39%, followed by Hyperliquid at +4.94%, Monero at +4.87%, Uniswap at +4.64%, and Pump.fun at +1.91%. At the other end, Bitway recorded -41.33%, MemeCore -24.95%, NEAR Protocol -14.28%, Mantle -12.55%, and Ethena -12.16% over the same period. The range between the best and worst performers exceeds 46 percentage points, indicating that the near-flat aggregate headline masked substantial cross-asset dispersion rather than uniform directional movement.

Fee Streams Relative to Capitalisation Rank

Among the eight protocols with the largest annualised fee streams (annualised from trailing 30 days to 04 November 2026), Uniswap leads at $1.02 billion, followed by Lido DAO at $696.1 million, Canton at $594.4 million, Aave at $467.9 million, Morpho at $310.5 million, Meteora at $308.3 million, TRON at $302.7 million, and Ethereum at $263.9 million. Several of these protocols do not appear in the top capitalisation tiers, while assets that rank highly by market cap do not necessarily appear here at all. That gap is worth noting precisely because fee data and capitalisation data measure different things: fees reflect recent on-chain usage over a defined 30-day window, whereas capitalisation reflects aggregate token pricing at a point in time. Neither figure implies anything about the other, and a protocol can rank highly on one dimension while being absent from the other for entirely structural reasons.

What These Figures Cannot Capture

Market-wide aggregates of this kind omit off-chain trading volumes, centralised-exchange order-book depth, derivative open interest, wallet-level concentration, regulatory developments, and the degree to which reported fee streams are attributable to organic versus incentivised activity. They also cannot indicate how representative the 30-day fee window is of longer-term protocol usage patterns, nor do they account for assets excluded from the data provider's coverage universe.

A reader seeking to extend this analysis would need to examine individual protocol documentation, on-chain flow data, and token supply schedules for each asset mentioned.