Falcon USD vs A7A5 โ side-by-side comparison of supply, chains, backing, and peg data.
Peg history unavailable.
Over the last 30 days USDf supply moved +40.9% and A7A5 +18.8% โ USDf grew faster.
| Metric | USDf | A7A5 |
|---|---|---|
| USD circulation value | $1.65B | $544.7M |
| Rank (by USD value) | #13 | #19 |
| Peg | USD | RUB |
| Mechanism | crypto-backed | fiat-backed |
| Backing | Delta-neutral (Falcon) | RUB deposits in banks |
| Chains deployed | 2 | 2 |
| Primary chain | Ethereum | Tron |
| Issuer | Falcon Finance | โ |
| CoinGecko | View โ | View โ |
USDf is USD-pegged and A7A5 tracks RUB, so they serve different currency markets and their market caps are not directly comparable. A7A5 holds rub deposits in banks. We track no published reserve breakdown for USDf.
USDf is larger, with $1.65B in circulation vs $544.7M for A7A5. That's roughly 3.0ร 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. USDf uses a crypto-backed model; A7A5 uses a fiat-backed one. Read each issuer's most recent reserve attestation before choosing.
Yes. USDf and A7A5 both trade on major centralized and decentralized exchanges. Since they track different currencies (USD vs RUB), conversion follows the underlying FX rate. 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? USDf is available on 2 chains and A7A5 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.