212 похожих чатов

What’s the true circulating supply right now not counting team

tokens, etc. there are 3 chains this is on and it’s cofusing. CoinGecko and cmc show 2 chains only. Does that include reef scan ?

6 ответов

10 просмотров

Hello, thanks for the question. We understand your concern, but thankfully there is a simple answer to this. The circulating supply is always available at https://node-api.reef.finance/api/supply in real-time. CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko are showing accurate circulating supplies, as they are pulled from the API endpoint. For both platforms, values like Total Supply or Max Supply are manually updated. We had CoinGecko remove the max supply value recently, in line with the removal of the max supply due to the move to a layer 1 blockchain and resulting change in tokenomics (an oft-requested update on that is also in the works). For anyone who is trying to add up all the tokens existing on Ethereum, Reef Chain and Binance Smart Chain together, that simply doesn't work. It doesn't work because tokens locked in bridges are single tokens, not duplicates. Assuming there were only 3 billion tokens for a moment, if you had 500 million of them locked up in an Ethereum bridge, the only 500M are left circulating on Ethereum while the other 500M could be on Binance Smart Chain or Reef Chain. You don't double count them because those tokens are locked in a bridge, and cannot be moved without locking another token on the other side of the bridge. Hopefully that helps clear everything up! If you have any more questions about this, please reply to me so that I get a notification about it.

At CMC ist right. 16.1 Billion.

Bene Richi
At CMC ist right. 16.1 Billion.

Hey Bene, can we also say that out of 16.1B we have 3.5B of erc20/bep20 locked in a bridge for reef20 staking?? Or that would be wrong statement? Thanks

G G
Hey Bene, can we also say that out of 16.1B we hav...

Please read the statement above. Circulating and totalsupply is the same.

Bene Richi
Locked in bridges yes.

Yes that’s what I meant after reading above statement, just wanted to double check I understood it correctly, cheers

Похожие вопросы

Обсуждают сегодня

Карта сайта