STEEM have presented an argument why they should be valued much higher on CMC.
https://steemit.com/steem/@dantheman/how-to-calculate-the-market-capitalization-of-steemIf websites like coinmarketcap.com wish to remain fair and relevant in their comparisons and rankings of this new generation of cryptocurrency, then they will need to adopt the more sophisticated measures used by real capital markets.
However I think, given they mined at least 80% of the initial STEEM to themselves, which they haven't communicated in their bitcointalk announcement and most of it isn't liquid that it isn't 'available supply' as CMC ranks.
Only 0.47% of STEEM is liquid in individual accounts, this is going to make the pump on CMC legend... wait-for-it... dary!
I...
I think that if you used their suggested 'sophisticated measures' anyone could create an over-valued/pumped coin by mining/holding the majority themselves and incentivising the removal of the majority from the liquid supply with less than 0.5% easily available.
Obviously it's up to CMC to evaluate but I think your current method of listing the liquid amount as available and the rest under total like Ripple/STR is correct.
=> 12,928,066.340 STEEM
With a total current supply of 22,214,424.000 STEEM means Steemit has 58% and the rest is held by community members.
So even if you wanted to factor out Steem held by Steemit, the current methodology of factoring out all vesting *users* is wrong.
If you create 10 billion shares, and sell 1 of them for $1.00 back and forth with yourself to generate millions in daily volume, it obviously doesn't create a coin that should be listed above Bitcoin. Which is what the scammers would attempt to do.
So the real question is whether or not there exists a legitimate market with actual trades with many independent individuals valuing the coin or whether it is a closed market with a bunch of sock puppets. In effect, are all trades in the token based upon arms-length fair valuation / speculation or are the trades simply moving money from one pocket to another.
At a certain point it becomes obvious the market is pricing in the full supply rather than just part of it. Does it really make sense that someone buying STEEM, then converting it to VESTS should REDUCE the market cap?
Soon the ridiculousness of the current method will become apparent when Steem Backed Dollars will have a higher market-cap than the STEEM that is backing it.
So I think there is a case to be made that a chain is either "public" or "private" with a value set by the "market" or by "decree". It is easy enough to tell the difference.