Bedrock vs Newton Protocol — how do they compare? Bedrock trades at Rp2,549 (market cap Rp770,62M, Rp174,9M 24h volume), while Newton Protocol trades at Rp835.58 (market cap Rp245,16M, Rp107,09M 24h volume). The key difference: Bedrock is far larger — about 3.1× Newton Protocol's market cap, and Bedrock's circulating supply is 301,7M / 1B BR (31%) versus 293,6M / 1B NEWT (30%) for Newton Protocol. Which is the better fit depends on your goals — on Pluang, investors hold Bedrock for 5 Days and Newton Protocol for 24 Days on average.
| BR | NEWT | |
|---|---|---|
Market Cap | Rp770,62M | Rp245,16M |
Volume (24h) | Rp174,9M | Rp107,09M |
Circulating Supply | 301,7M / 1B BR (31%) | 293,6M / 1B NEWT (30%) |
Typical Hold Time | 5 Days | 24 Days |
What Pluang investors did over the last 30 days
No sentiment data available yet.
Bedrock DAO serves as the governance layer of the Bedrock ecosystem, enabling BR token holders to influence its future through veBR, a voting escrow token. The voting power increases with the duration of the lock and resets each season to maintain fairness. veBR holders are responsible for making decisions regarding protocol parameters, incentives, and liquidity allocation. Over time, governance responsibilities are shifting from the Bedrock team to the community.
Read more on BR →The Newton Protocol serves as a verifiable automation layer for on-chain finance, enabling users to delegate complex, cross-chain actions to AI agents while ensuring that each step adheres to user-DeFined guidelines through cryptographic guarantees. It combines smart accounts, such as ERC-4337 and EIP-7702, to allow for detailed delegation, along with trusted execution environment (TEE) attestations and zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) to verify the correctness of every off-chain decision. The ultimate aim is to transform automation into a trust-minimized framework, thereby facilitating agentic finance across multiple blockchains.
Read more on NEWT →