Skip to content
Live
Market Cap:$2.70T+0.03%
24h Vol:$97.9B
BTC:59.5%
ETH:10.9%
Coins:22,783
Uniswap

Uniswap

UNI
yearn.finance
yearn.finance
YFI

Fundamental comparison between Uniswap and yearn.finance

Not Financial Advice

This page is an informational analysis, not investment advice. The CryptoValue Score is an algorithmically generated rating from public data — it does not replace professional advice. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile; total loss is possible. Read full risk disclaimer →

Uniswap

Uniswap

71.3
050100
Undervalued
24h+6.61%
7d+4.96%

Coverage: 13/13 · 100%

Calculated:

yearn.finance

yearn.finance

80.9
050100
Strong Value
24h+0.81%
7d-3.76%

Coverage: 12/13 · 94%

Calculated:

Purpose, token role and risks compared

Project context from the same profiles used on the coin pages. Editorial context outside the score.

Uniswap / yearn.finance
Purpose and users

Uniswap (UNI)

Uniswap enables token swaps through liquidity pools instead of a central order book. Traders use the pools; liquidity providers supply the tokens available for trading. [1]

yearn.finance (YFI)

No sourced project profile has been recorded for this coin yet.

Token role

Uniswap (UNI)

UNI provides voting rights in protocol governance. The documentation also describes protocol fees used to burn UNI. This is not a direct fee distribution to all UNI holders. [2][3]

yearn.finance (YFI)

Not yet recorded.

Key risks

Uniswap (UNI)

  • Token mechanics: fee rules vary by version and pool and can change through governance. A burn does not guarantee a higher UNI price; this is our economic interpretation. [4][2]
  • Liquidity providers: price changes can leave a position worse off than simply holding the tokens (impermanent loss). This affects a pool position, not automatically a UNI holding. [5]
  • Contracts: additional v4 hooks introduce their own security risks. A hook extends a pool; the safety of one extension does not establish the safety of other pools. [6]

yearn.finance (YFI)

Not yet recorded.

Example

Uniswap (UNI)

Example: a wallet swaps one token for another through a pool. This is a different role from holding UNI or providing liquidity.

yearn.finance (YFI)

Not yet recorded.

Sources and review date

Uniswap (UNI)

Sources checked on

Sources and scope (6)

Summary of the linked project documentation, not an independent security audit or a complete risk assessment. Examples illustrate usage.

  1. Uniswap · How Uniswap works ↗
  2. Uniswap · UNI token ↗
  3. Uniswap · Governance FAQs and fee distributions ↗
  4. Uniswap · Protocol fee configuration ↗
  5. Uniswap · Protocol glossary ↗
  6. Uniswap · v4 security framework ↗
View complete profile →

yearn.finance (YFI)

Not yet recorded.

Detailed Comparison

MetricUniswapyearn.finance
Price$7.64$2,041.13
Market Cap$4.63B$73.24M
24h Volume662.2M4.1M
Rank#22#343
Circulating Supply606.5M35.9K
ATH$44.92$90,787.00

Uniswap vs yearn.finance — Analysis

Comparison of Uniswap and yearn.finance: published market readings and a Value Score using up to 13 model components. Sourced project profiles add purpose, token role and risks where available.

Value Score Comparison

Uniswap: 71.3/100; yearn.finance: 80.9/100. No direct score comparison: data coverage, calculation timestamp differ or are unrecorded.

Market Capitalization

Uniswap has 63.26 times the market capitalization of yearn.finance. This ratio measures market size; it does not establish volatility or future returns.

Price Performance

Reported price change over 24 hours: Uniswap 6.61%, yearn.finance 0.81%. Over 7 days: Uniswap 4.96%, yearn.finance -3.76%. Missing readings are shown as —.

Distance from All-Time High

Uniswap trades at 17.01% of its reported all-time high; yearn.finance at 2.25%. This distance describes price history and is not a standalone buy signal.

Conclusion

The readings show differences in market value and model assessment. Project purpose, token rights, risks, source dates and data coverage also matter. A higher score does not predict higher returns or lower risk.