How Market Data Providers Differ

Price and volume aggregators are the default reference for most readers. Their numbers disagree, for reasons that are documented and rarely read.

Where they differ

Venue inclusion. Which exchanges are counted. Providers maintain criteria and they are not the same. Historically, inclusion of venues with fabricated volume inflated figures substantially.

Weighting. Volume-weighted average, median, or a liquidity-adjusted measure. Each produces a different price during volatility.

Supply figures. Circulating supply is not standardised. Treatment of locked, vested, burned and foundation-held tokens differs, which changes market capitalisation and rankings.

Update frequency. Some figures are near-real-time, others are refreshed periodically. During fast moves the difference is visible.

Volume adjustment. Several providers now publish adjusted volume that excludes or discounts venues failing liquidity tests. Whether a quoted figure is raw or adjusted is frequently unstated in coverage.

The consequences

Rankings differ between providers, because market capitalisation depends on the supply figure.

Volume comparisons are unreliable unless both figures come from the same methodology.

Historical data is revised when methodologies change, which means a chart drawn today may differ from one drawn last year for the same period.

Using them well

Read the methodology page. Reputable providers publish it. It answers most questions about why numbers differ.

Prefer venue-level data for anything you will act on. The price at the venue where you will actually transact is the only one that determines what you pay.

Use adjusted volume where available, and state which you are using.

Check supply figures against the contract for anything beyond the largest assets. The contract is authoritative; the aggregator is a copy that may be stale.

Where primary sources exist

Prices and depth: the venues themselves. Platforms publishing full order book data, such as retail venues covering the pair, are primary for their own market.

Supply: the token contract on a block explorer.

Fund flows: the issuers.

On-chain metrics: the chain, or analytics firms who publish their labelling methodology.

The habit worth forming

For anything you are going to act on or publish, go to the primary source. For orientation, an aggregator is fine.

The distinction matters most exactly when the numbers matter most, which is during volatility, when aggregator prices diverge from venue prices by the largest margin.