#nil $NIL @Nillion I spent some time comparing public supply trackers for $NIL and ended up with a different question than I expected.
Four sources. Four circulating supply figures: roughly 448M, 487M, 500M and 510M.
On a 1B maximum supply, that's a 62M token gap between the lowest and highest estimates.
At around $0.04 per token, the difference might look small in dollar terms. But it changes the picture of how much supply is already circulating, how much remains locked, and how much future dilution an investor might be pricing in.
That's the part that bothers me.
A lot of small-cap analysis starts with market cap versus FDV to estimate potential unlock pressure. But if the circulating supply figure itself isn't consistent, the model is only as reliable as the number underneath it.
There are caveats here. These snapshots come from different dates, and I haven't verified the discrepancy on-chain. Staking classifications, reporting delays or different supply definitions could explain some of the gap.
So I wouldn't automatically assume one tracker is wrong.
But before debating $NIL 's utility, burns or roadmap, I'd want to understand exactly what each source is counting.
Makes me wonder how many small-cap valuations are being compared using ratios that look precise on a dashboard...
...but depend on a circulating supply number that nobody has properly reconciled.
What's the first source you'd trust to settle a supply discrepancy like this?
#DEXE has bounced off the support zone and is currently breaking above the daily SMA50. Looks promising. Buy a small bag and be patient. The potential upside targets are: