Compare programmes
Same formula, same window, both audited against on-chain data. Comparison is where the difference between a burn and a buyback becomes impossible to miss.
Decentraland is the better outcome for holders by 43.1 percentage points over 12 months. The two run different mechanisms: No burn programme against Scheduled burn.
Permalink /compare/decentraland-vs-injective — the pair is normalised alphabetically, so the reverse order redirects here rather than becoming a second page.
Where the two differ
The share of circulating supply added or removed over twelve months — the figure the ranking sorts on. Below zero the float is shrinking; above it, holders are being diluted.
Unlocks release tokens that were minted long ago, so they move the float without touching total supply — and on chains where burning does not reduce the reported supply, the burn does not show here either. INJ shows the wider gap: its float moves 15.5 pp worse than its total supply, so the schedule is doing more to holders than the programme is.
The hairline marks 1.00×, where burns exactly cover everything added. Burns divided by issuance plus scheduled unlocks over the same window. Above the line a programme is reversing dilution; below it, only slowing it.
Removed against added
MANADecentraland
INJInjectiveDollar figures derive from licensed price data we may display and never redistribute, which is why this block exists on the page and not in the API response. Two different tokens have no common unit otherwise.
Programme facts
Popular comparisons
Comparison pages are generated on demand and only indexed when both tokens carry a figure and the gap is at least 5 pp. Below that they are thin pages that drag the whole domain down, so we decline to publish them rather than let a crawler find them.