GHO vs YLDS โ side-by-side comparison of supply, chains, backing, and peg data.
Over the last 30 days GHO supply moved +16.7% and YLDS +23.0% โ YLDS grew faster. YLDS held the tighter band: worst deviation 8 bps against 26 bps.
| Metric | GHO | YLDS |
|---|---|---|
| USD circulation value | $697.5M | $656.3M |
| Rank (by USD value) | #17 | #18 |
| Peg | USD | USD |
| Mechanism | crypto-backed | fiat-backed |
| Backing | Overcollateralized (Aave) | Tokenized US Treasuries (SEC registered) |
| Chains deployed | 2 | 4 |
| Primary chain | Ethereum | Ethereum |
| Issuer | Aave | Figure Markets |
| CoinGecko | View โ | View โ |
Both track USD, so they compete for the same use cases. GHO holds overcollateralized (aave); YLDS holds tokenized us treasuries (sec registered). GHO ranks #17 by USD value and YLDS ranks #18.
GHO is larger, with $697.5M in circulation vs $656.3M for YLDS. That's roughly 1.1ร the size.
Neither is inherently safer. Safety turns on reserve composition, issuer transparency, redemption rights and regulatory oversight โ none of which this page audits. GHO uses a crypto-backed model; YLDS uses a fiat-backed one. Read each issuer's most recent reserve attestation before choosing.
Yes. GHO and YLDS both trade on major centralized and decentralized exchanges. Since both track USD, the exchange rate is typically very close to 1:1. Direct swap protocols on Ethereum, Solana, and other chains offer the tightest spreads.
The right choice depends on your use case. Consider: which chain do you need? GHO is available on 2 chains and YLDS on 4. What backing do you prefer? What's your integration surface (exchanges, DeFi protocols, payment providers)? Both have deep liquidity, so market cap alone shouldn't decide it.