United Stables vs GHO — side-by-side comparison of supply, chains, backing, and peg data.
| Metric | U | GHO |
|---|---|---|
| USD circulation value | $1.08B | $648.2M |
| Rank (by USD value) | #16 | #18 |
| Peg | USD | USD |
| Mechanism | crypto-backed | crypto-backed |
| Backing | Stablecoin basket | Overcollateralized (Aave) |
| Chains deployed | 3 | 2 |
| Primary chain | BSC | Ethereum |
| Issuer | United Stables | GHO |
| CoinGecko | View → | View → |
Both U and GHO track USD, but they differ in backing and issuer. U is backed by stablecoin basket while GHO is backed by overcollateralized (aave). As of today, U ranks #16 and GHO ranks #18 among tracked stablecoins.
U is larger, with $1.08B in circulation vs $648.2M for GHO. That's roughly 1.7× the size.
Neither U nor GHO is inherently "safer" — safety depends on the specific backing composition, issuer transparency, redemption rights, and regulatory oversight. U uses crypto-backed backing model; GHO uses crypto-backed. Users should read each issuer's most recent reserve attestation before choosing.
Yes. U and GHO 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? U is available on 3 chains and GHO on 2. 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.