Four of the 18 gainers sit in this group of five - and three of them have been listed under 33 days

TL;DR

This looks like the most resilient group on the book, and half of that resilience is a listing date - three of its four gainers have a "30-day" window shorter than 30 days.

• Only 18 of the 100 instruments are up over 30 days, and four of them are in this group of five: LLYB +21.31% (3rd on the book), MRNAB +15.34% (6th), WENB +12.62% (7th), BRKBB +1.08% (16th).
• The group median distance below the post-listing high is −2.3%, the shallowest of all 20 groups, against −7.6% for the next one (the cold half of the mag7) and a book median of −27.1%.
• But LLYB has been listed 24 days, WENB 32 and BRKBB 12. Of the 20 instruments on the book listed under 33 days, 9 are positive (45%), against 9 of the other 80 (11.3%) - a factor of 4.
• Control for the window and this group is down to MRNAB (60 days, +15.34%) and NFLXB (88 days, −11.05%), the only two with complete windows.
• Being newly listed is not the same as being up, either. Of the five instruments that listed on the same day as BRKBB, three are down between 9.88% and 14.78% over the identical 12 days; of the four in the LLYB cohort, two fell 38.92% and 39.32% over the identical 24 days.
• The group aggregate turnover of 3.9840x is the highest of all 20 groups, and it is one instrument. Excluding MRNAB it is 0.8472x, essentially the book member median of 0.867x - MRNAB alone is 85.8% of the group volume.
• This snapshot cannot produce a premium. There is no underlying reference price and no dividend reinvestment multiplier, and this is the group where that limit bites hardest.

1. What these five are

bStocks is the Binance-operated on-chain equity issuer (entity BTech Holdings Limited, ADGM / FSRA listed certificates, a single chain in BNB Chain, traded only on Binance). CoinMarketCap reports 105 instruments; the snapshot used here covers 100 of them, timestamped 2026-10-31T06:06:52Z.

The five add up to $6.92M of market cap, 0.5% of the $1,318.38M book - the second smallest of the 20 groups (the smallest is storage hardware at $4.67M). Volume is $27.58M, 3.2% of the $873.46M total, more than six times the market cap share.

All five underlyings are US-listed common stock: pharma (Eli Lilly, Moderna), consumer (Wendy's, Netflix), and insurance and holdings (Berkshire Hathaway). No ETFs, no ADRs, no leveraged products - which becomes the key fact in section 3.

2. Four gainers, and the group closest to its highs

Of the 100 instruments, 82 are down over 30 days with a median of −16.71%; only 18 are up. Four of them are in this group of five.

Several book firsts are all in this group: BRKBB is −1.5% from its high, the closest to its own high on the entire book, and its range width of 1.031x is the narrowest on the book; the LLYB position in range of 92.5% is the highest on the book; the WENB 7-day of +15.61% is the best on the book.

The group median distance below the high is −2.3%, the shallowest of all 20 groups. Next is the cold half of the mag7 at −7.6%, then software at −12.9%, against a book median of −27.1%. That is not a small gap.

But half the answer is already visible in this table: the four gainers have been listed 24, 60, 32 and 12 days, and the one loser, NFLXB, has been listed 88.

3. Controlling for the listing date

All 18 gainers on the book, with days listed marked:

Nine of the 18 have been listed under 33 days - exactly half. And only 20 instruments on the whole book have been listed under 33 days, which is 20% of it.

Put those two numbers together:

listed <33 days:  20 instruments,  9 positive over 30d  = 45.0%
listed >=33 days: 80 instruments,  9 positive over 30d  = 11.3%
                                        a factor of 4.0

So being up over 30 days is four times as common among newly listed instruments as among the rest. The reason is not mysterious: an instrument listed 12 days ago can have at most 12 days in its "30-day" field, and it did not exist for most of the drawdown that hit the book. This is the same limit as the fourth point of section 8; here it determines the entire argument.

Control for the window and only two of the five are comparable: MRNAB (60 days, +15.34%) and NFLXB (88 days, −11.05%). In other words, on instruments with complete windows, the claim that pharma and consumer held up rests on one positive case and one negative one.

The group aggregate turnover has to be taken apart the same way. The 3.9840x is the highest of all 20 groups (second is the 2x leveraged group at 3.9193x), but:

this group (5)     cap $6.92M   volume $27.58M   turnover 3.9840x
excluding MRNAB    cap $4.63M   volume  $3.92M   turnover 0.8472x
book member median                               turnover 0.867x
book aggregate                                   turnover 0.6625x

MRNAB alone is 85.8% of the group volume. Remove it and the group sits at the book median - "the highest-turnover group" is a property of one instrument, not of five.

4. Counter-example: listing late is not the same as going up

The explanation above has an obvious hole: if being newly listed were enough to dodge the drawdown, every new instrument would be positive. They are not.

Of the five instruments that listed on the same day as BRKBB, three are down between 9.88% and 14.78% over the identical 12 days. Of the four in the LLYB cohort, two fell close to 40% over the identical 24 days - more than twice the book median of −16.71%. Across the 20 instruments listed under 33 days, the 30-day median is −4.94%, still negative.

So a short window is not a shield; it only shrinks the sample of the fall that gets measured. The factor of 4 in section 3 is real, but what it establishes is that "a higher share of new instruments is positive", not that "new instruments are positive". Only the first of those supports the argument here, and the fact that three of this group's four gainers happen to land on the new-instrument side still needs an explanation - one this snapshot cannot give.

The second counter-example is NFLXB, the only loser in the group. Its position in range of 3.0% is the 6th lowest on the book (above only INTCB, DJTB, INTWB, CBRSB and SECZB), its price of $62.20 sits almost exactly on its post-listing low of $61.54, and it is −25.4% from its high. It reads as the bad apple of the group.

Put it back among the 10 instruments that listed on the same day and it is the best one:

the 10 listed on 2026-08-04, by 30d
NFLXB  -11.05%   ASMLB  -14.76%   SMCIB  -20.90%
CRDOB  -24.66%   BMNRB  -25.07%   COHRB  -27.97%
ALABB  -29.51%   ASTSB  -32.69%   USARB  -33.18%
IRENB  -42.42%

The only loser in this group ranks 1st in its own cohort. Which means all five members of this group are the best or close to the best of their respective cohorts - and that cannot be seen in the 30-day column, because that column puts an 88-day instrument and a 12-day instrument side by side.

A third counter-example: going up is not a property of these underlyings either. ADBEB (+4.39%, software) and PDDB (+0.57%, an ADR) at the same 32 days, JPMB (+2.89%, a bank) at 24 days and BBB (+0.02%) at 19 days are all positive, and none of them has anything to do with pharma, fast food or insurance. And the top two of the book's 18 gainers are −3x inverse ETFs (SOXSB +70.82%, SQQQB +24.94%) - a product that shorts a falling market goes up by construction, which is a different question from which sector held up.

5. MRNAB: the second-highest turnover on the book

Once the window problem is removed, this is what this group actually leaves behind.

The MRNAB turnover of 10.307x is the second highest on the book. The group 2 piece on the denominator trap already took that table apart - the 38.460x at the top belongs to INTWB, a 2x leveraged ETF - and this report does not re-tell that part. What can be added is the anomalous position MRNAB holds on it:

Only two names in the turnover top 15 are up over 30 days: MRNAB and UVXYB. And UVXYB is a 2x long-volatility product - in a month with a book median of −16.71% it rises mechanically. MRNAB is the only directionally long common stock in the turnover top 15 that is up over 30 days.

Absolute volume is just as anomalous:

• MRNAB trades $23.66M in a day, 13th on the book, while its market cap ranks 53rd - a gap of 40 places.
• It is 2.71% of book volume on 0.17% of book market cap, a ratio of 15.6.
• Its volume is 6.0 times the other four members combined ($3.92M), while its market cap is only slightly below that of NFLXB.

On the range side: the MRNAB width of 1.934x (post-listing high $254.19, low $131.43, price $220.80) is the widest of its own 4-name cohort (STXB 1.615x, CRWDB 1.422x, SQQQB 1.368x), while its position in range of 72.8% is the third highest in this group. So it produced the largest swing in this group, closed high in that swing, and is the 13th largest volume on the book - and it is the only instrument on the book where all three are true at once.

But this snapshot cannot answer why. The question left open by group 2 (the group definition here says the cause of that gap has not been established) is still unresolved in this data, for three reasons, all of which have to be stated:

• The 24-hour volume is an aggregate with no trade count and no order book. That $23.66M could be one large print or sustained liquidity, and this snapshot cannot tell the difference.
• The test group 2 used - compare against the spot sibling token - cannot be run here, because there is no second Moderna-linked token on this book, so the leverage factor and the instrument factor cannot be separated.
• There is no underlying volume. So the most natural check, whether token-side volume is anomalous relative to the underlying, is not available.

What can be stated is where it sits on this book, not what causes it.

6. Structure: what these five tokens actually are

All of this comes from the issuer record on this site rather than being invented here:

• The wrapper is a tracker certificate, issued by BTech Holdings Limited as formally listed certificates under ADGM / FSRA - not equity.
• No voting rights.
• Dividends are pass-through: 30% US withholding first, then reinvested via a multiplier.
• Reserves are covered by attestation, not on-chain proof of reserve. For comparison, xStocks uses Chainlink proof of reserve, refreshed daily or when reserves move more than 10%, verifiable on chain; an attestation is not.
• Redemption is available, KYC required, $5 minimum. (The xStocks primary redemption minimum is $5,000.)
• US persons are blocked.
• A single chain in BNB Chain, traded only on Binance, deposits supported only over BSC - sending over the wrong network loses the asset.
• The issuance model is exchange-self: the issuing entity and the sole trading venue are the same party.

The dividend line matters more for this group than for the others. These underlyings include pharma and consumer companies, and for any of them that pays a dividend the multiplier has already moved since listing - and this snapshot does not hold the multiplier. So the first point of section 8 is not boilerplate here: it means part of the divergence between these token prices and their underlying share prices may be reinvestment, and this data cannot separate the two. Every "−1.5% from the high" and "92.5% of range" in section 2 is a position on the token price series, which is not the same as a position on the underlying.

The book-narrowest range on BRKBB has to be read the way group 1 established. The flagship pricing anchors piece already states it: a narrow range on a newly listed instrument carries no information - BRKBB has been listed 12 days, and 1.031x only says it has not moved much in 12 days, not that it is stable.

What this report can add is two other numbers: the BRKBB 24-hour volume of $125.3K is the 4th lowest on the book (below it are TMFB $91.6K, CRMB $91.8K and VSTB $105.3K), and its turnover of 0.223x ranks 93rd. Which is to say the narrowest range and the closest-to-high name on the whole book belongs to a token that has barely traded.

The same property holds book-wide. Of the six instruments closest to their own highs, three are in this group, two in broad market and equipment, and one in financials and payments:

BRKBB  -1.5%  12d     LLYB  -1.6%  24d     TMFB  -1.9%  12d
JPMB   -2.1%  24d     WENB  -2.3%  32d     SPYB  -3.1%  117d

Five of the six have been listed under 33 days, the one exception being SPYB (117 days, an S&P 500 ETF, which its own report explains separately).

7. This snapshot was taken on a Saturday

The timestamp 2026-10-31T06:06:52Z is a Saturday morning UTC. The US cash market closed Friday at 20:00 UTC and does not reopen until Monday.

This has already been quantified once on this issuer: one stock, four books laid the four tokenized versions of AAPL side by side on a Saturday and concluded that a quote outside trading hours is a market maker opinion, not a market price.

So the 24-hour changes here read as follows: that window (Friday 06:06 UTC to Saturday 06:06 UTC) contains a full Friday US session, so it is not a pure closed-market quote; but the snapshot itself lands inside the closed window.

For the conclusion in section 5, this has a concrete effect. The MRNAB 24-hour change is +0.06%, essentially flat, while it traded $23.66M inside that window - a flat price on the 13th largest volume on the book is harder to explain under closed-market quoting, because a market maker quote does not have to move with volume in the first place. That is the concrete consequence of the first of the three limits above: with no trade count and no order book, heavy two-sided volume and a pinned quote cannot be told apart here.

8. What this method cannot compute

First, no premium or discount. The snapshot holds only the token price, not an underlying reference price. More importantly, the dividend mechanism is "30% US withholding first, then reinvested via a multiplier" - without knowing the current multiplier, the token price and the share price are not comparable to begin with. This limit is heaviest on this group, for the reason in section 6. So this report gives no premium figure at all.

Second, how many shares one token represents cannot be computed. The snapshot holds no conversion ratio, so circulating supply cannot be converted into any share count. The difference between the LLYB unit price of $1,416.51 and the WENB price of $7.17 cannot be read as one LLYB representing more shares.

Third, the range-width windows are not equal length. The five here are 88 / 60 / 32 / 24 / 12 days - not one of them qualifies for the 46-name "listed 100 days or more" list, so no width in this group can be compared against mature instruments (the common-stock width median among those 46 is 1.768x, and the widest here, MRNAB at 1.934x, looks close to it on only 60 days). The 1.031x on BRKBB is the narrowest on the book, and that is a 12-day result.

Fourth, for an instrument listed under 30 days, its "30-day" field covers less than 30 days. On the book 15 instruments have been listed under 30 days and 11 under 20, and two of them are in this group (LLYB at 24, BRKBB at 12), while the 32 days on WENB barely clears it. In this report that limit is not a footnote - it is the whole of section 3, and the reason this report does not treat "this group held up" as a conclusion. The book 30-day median of −16.71% cited above, and every rank, contain those 15 clipped values.

Fifth, market cap is the CMC definition: price times circulating supply. The $1,318.38M book total above is the sum of these 100 rows, while the bStocks row on the /stocks page of this site shows an on-chain size of $914M - two numbers from different sources at different moments, which will not reconcile.

Sixth, 100 of 105. CMC reports 105 instruments, the snapshot in hand holds 100, and the missing 5 appear in no statistic here.

Seventh, the turnover in section 5 cannot be attributed to any cause. The 24-hour volume is an aggregate with no trade count, no order book and no underlying volume, and this book holds no second Moderna-linked token to compare against. So this report states where MRNAB sits on this book and not why it sits there.

Conclusion. This group genuinely is the most resilient on this book - four of the 18 gainers, a median distance below the high of −2.3% that is the shallowest of all 20 groups, and the book firsts on closest-to-high (BRKBB), highest position in range (LLYB) and best 7 days (WENB) all sitting here.

But half of that is a listing date. LLYB has been listed 24 days, WENB 32 and BRKBB 12, and across the book 45% of the 20 instruments listed under 33 days are positive against 11.3% of the other 80 - a factor of 4. Control for the window and only MRNAB (60 days, +15.34%) and NFLXB (88 days, −11.05%) remain comparable: one positive case and one negative one.

And a short window is not a shield: three of the other instruments that listed on the same day as BRKBB fell between 9.88% and 14.78% over the identical 12 days, and two in the LLYB cohort fell close to 40% over the identical 24. So the factor of 4 in section 3 establishes that a higher share of new instruments is positive, not that new instruments are positive - and the fact that three of this group's four gainers happen to land on that side is something this snapshot cannot explain.

NFLXB, the group's only loser, proves the same point from the other direction: it sits on its own post-listing low (3.0% of range, 6th lowest on the book) and is nevertheless the best 30-day figure among the 10 instruments that listed with it. It is not the exception in this group; it is the only member whose window is long enough to have the drawdown fully counted against it.

The last item is MRNAB. Its turnover of 10.307x is 2nd on the book, its volume of $23.66M is 13th while its market cap ranks only 53rd, and it is the only directionally long common stock in the turnover top 15 that is up over 30 days. That position is solid; its cause is not something this snapshot can supply - no trade count, no order book, no underlying volume, and no second token on this book tracking the same company to compare against.

Data from CoinMarketCap, timestamped 2026-10-31T06:06:52Z, covering 100 of the 105 instruments bStocks has reported. Instrument detail and quotes at /stocks/bstocks. This is research, not investment advice. DYOR.