#MASK Market cap breaks 35 million USD: first confirm which coin, then look at the “market cap” metric
In this round’s Binance Square Hot List, the #10 entry is about “MASK’s record market cap exceeding 35 million USD.” Before anything else, you need to identify this ticker: it is not Mask Network—it’s Nullmask on Solana, with mint address HuAXPyDWDaMYFKuwQHpqL1oPnj93zdzWmtvFGzCeCUa7. The short address shown on Nullmask’s official website matches the full address in LBank’s listing announcement. LBank also labels the asset as MEME. At 11:45 BJT, the Solana mainnet RPC returns approximately 992.05 million tokens with 6 decimal precision. What’s being discussed here is this specific Solana token—you can’t mix in Mask Network’s行情.
Next, consider the boundary conditions of the Hot List number. At 11:45 BJT, DexScreener’s specified Raydium ZEC/MASK pool page/API shows a price of about $0.03874, down 5.05% over 24 hours. The pool liquidity is about $687,000 and 24-hour volume is about $687,000. The page lists both FDV and “Market Cap” as about $38.74 million. The Raydium pool API at the same timestamp also recognizes the same mint and trading pair. Since the public page provides no independent verification of circulating supply, “Market Cap = FDV” can only be understood as the metric displayed on that page; on-chain supply of ~992.05 million tokens is not the same as verified circulating supply. The “breakthrough of $35 million on October 2” is a historical milestone, and shouldn’t be used as a conclusion about the current price direction or circulating market cap.
Even more worth checking are on-chain transfer fee parameters. The Raydium interface marks MASK as a Token-2022 transfer-fee token, with a fee rate of 300 basis points (3%), and it also returns the fee-configuration authority address that is still set. It suggests that holders first verify the exact transfer/trading routes and fee rules; this is not a detail you can ignore, and you can’t simply say that every buy/sell automatically costs an extra 3%.
The project’s website promotes a zero-knowledge privacy feature, but its multi-network documentation writes Solana as an “extension direction.” This material by itself is insufficient to prove that this Solana token already has measurable usage of a verifiable privacy protocol. What can currently be confirmed is the asset identity, a quote for one main pool, and the fee configuration—not a complete metric of privacy adoption scale or a full “record market cap” definition. The above行情 will change; data was collected on 2026-10-04 at 11:45 BJT.
Source: Solana mainnet RPC; Raydium pool interface; DexScreener specified pool行情; Nullmask official website; LBank listing announcement.
In this round’s Binance Square Hot List, the #10 entry is about “MASK’s record market cap exceeding 35 million USD.” Before anything else, you need to identify this ticker: it is not Mask Network—it’s Nullmask on Solana, with mint address HuAXPyDWDaMYFKuwQHpqL1oPnj93zdzWmtvFGzCeCUa7. The short address shown on Nullmask’s official website matches the full address in LBank’s listing announcement. LBank also labels the asset as MEME. At 11:45 BJT, the Solana mainnet RPC returns approximately 992.05 million tokens with 6 decimal precision. What’s being discussed here is this specific Solana token—you can’t mix in Mask Network’s行情.
Next, consider the boundary conditions of the Hot List number. At 11:45 BJT, DexScreener’s specified Raydium ZEC/MASK pool page/API shows a price of about $0.03874, down 5.05% over 24 hours. The pool liquidity is about $687,000 and 24-hour volume is about $687,000. The page lists both FDV and “Market Cap” as about $38.74 million. The Raydium pool API at the same timestamp also recognizes the same mint and trading pair. Since the public page provides no independent verification of circulating supply, “Market Cap = FDV” can only be understood as the metric displayed on that page; on-chain supply of ~992.05 million tokens is not the same as verified circulating supply. The “breakthrough of $35 million on October 2” is a historical milestone, and shouldn’t be used as a conclusion about the current price direction or circulating market cap.
Even more worth checking are on-chain transfer fee parameters. The Raydium interface marks MASK as a Token-2022 transfer-fee token, with a fee rate of 300 basis points (3%), and it also returns the fee-configuration authority address that is still set. It suggests that holders first verify the exact transfer/trading routes and fee rules; this is not a detail you can ignore, and you can’t simply say that every buy/sell automatically costs an extra 3%.
The project’s website promotes a zero-knowledge privacy feature, but its multi-network documentation writes Solana as an “extension direction.” This material by itself is insufficient to prove that this Solana token already has measurable usage of a verifiable privacy protocol. What can currently be confirmed is the asset identity, a quote for one main pool, and the fee configuration—not a complete metric of privacy adoption scale or a full “record market cap” definition. The above行情 will change; data was collected on 2026-10-04 at 11:45 BJT.
Source: Solana mainnet RPC; Raydium pool interface; DexScreener specified pool行情; Nullmask official website; LBank listing announcement.
