evamp, "market cap", evamp: extrapolated (total) value at marginal (market) prices

If a company is founded, and eight shareholders put in 10k CHF for one share each, then the capitalisation of the company is 80k CHF.  That is the amount of financial capital it starts with, and it can buy real capital (equipment) with this, or whatever it does.  It makes sense to talk about this as that company's capitalisation.  If some kind of market led to these share issuances, then fine, it's a market capitalisation.

Suppose later the company's shares are trading at 15k CHF per share on a market.  Has the company's "market capitalisation" now increased, to 120k CHF?  All else staying equal, the company still only has the 80k CHF of capital, so no.  Its market cap is still 80k CHF.  The 120k CHF is something, but it's not the company's capitalisation.  The 120k CHF is the marginal price the shares are trading at, multiplied by the total number of shares.  This is commonly called "market cap" or "market capitalisation", but it shouldn't be.  It's a different thing.

It's certainly not a total value, because the price is only a marginal phenomenon.  The price is only set when there are market-clearing, meaning overlapping, buy orders and sell orders, and a trade takes place.  Normally, only a tiny fraction of shares change hands on any given day.  The units that did not change hands, do not have known, or knowable, prices, and that's most of the units.

So this quantity is not a total value as in "some entity with this much could buy them all", nor as in "if all units were sold, this much would be raised".  It can not possibly mean anything like either those things, for the basic reason already outlined.

When it comes to further capitalising the company via new share issue, the quantity under discussion says something about what proportion of ownership would be necessary to raise a certain amount of cash, again for small amounts, or at the margins.  If new shares of the same class are issued and sold at the market price of the existing shares, then in theory shareholders need not care about dilution, because the thing they own has just the right amount of new cash, increasing its overall value, to make up for the dilution.  But the quantity under discussion isn't some theoretical amount the company can access via new share issuance, because, again, issuances on that scale wouldn't be taking place at the margins, and the exact market depth profile is unknown in advance.

For items other than shares in a company, the term "market cap" is an even worse misnomer.  It still is not the total value, as implied, and in addition it has nothing to do with capitalisation.  The so-called cryptocurrency (better would be crypto-commodity, or just Bitcoin until something comes along that justifies the generalisation) world is rife with the double misnomer "market cap".

Even so, the quantity under discussion is somehow a meaningful quantity for a commodity with liquid trading.  I can't say exactly what it means, but it's somehow something to do with the thing's overall size.

It certainly shouldn't be called market capitalisation or market cap.

I'm going to start calling it evamp, lower case, standing for something like "extrapolated (total) value at marginal (marke) prices.  The "va-" evokes value, but it's something else, and it's pronounceable.  I doubt anyone else will call it that, but I'm going to.  I have to call it something.