Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin statistics.Where are Bitcoins now? (Read 691 times)

hero member
Activity: 1946
Merit: 867
Defend Bitcoin and its PoW: bitcoincleanup.com
January 06, 2025, 10:56:56 AM
#38
Fourth, I gave a warning to a relative who told me that a friend would manage her BTC issues. I think there is nothing to add. However, for the folks reading this, do not transmit any access to anyone you can't 100% trust. Now figure out how many people in life you 100% trust.

Some people might seem 100% trustable at time A, but then death/incapacitation happens at time B..  so then such previously trusted person is put in a position to "do the right thing," yet such person knows enough to know that no one else knows, so is such person going to do the right thing, or not?  Maybe the person does not even know, until put in such circumstances of considerable amounts of possible life-changing wealth, and no one else will know.   Some of us might believe ourselves to be capable or not capable of doing the "right thing," and there will also be times in which "the right thing" will be subject to interpretation...and think of another possibility, the "right" thing (could well be interpreted to be divisible.. .hahahahahahaha.. by 100 million.... or even time-delayed preserving of a "back door" that may or may not be the "right thing" to do).

I agree and there is one more big problem about giving other trustworthy people access to your bitcoin: what if you do indeed get hacked, how would the person that you granted access to your coins prove that it wasn't them who moved the coins off your wallet? That is a very uncomfortable situation if you think about it. You trust someone 100% and you are ok with that person holding your keys, and out of a sudden the coins get moved and that person is not responsible.

There are very good reasons to find other solutions to handle private keys safely and next to avoiding theft, one good reason is to avoid misunderstandings like the one I explained above. I think almost any trust relationship would somehow suffer from such an incident as nobody can prove with certainty what really happened unless a scammer would make a mistake.

And as you mentioned, trust is fragile and has so many components that can change a certain relationship for better or worse sometimes in no time, and sometimes over a longer period of time. Bitcoin is highly sensitive to these things. If someone trustworthy moved currency from a bank account without your consent, the whole problem would most likely be attributable to whomever moved the funds. There is hardly room for misunderstandings like there is when bitcoin wallets are used.
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
January 03, 2025, 06:30:05 AM
#37
...
I agree with a lot of your reasoning about points that you are making @tiCeR especially when it comes to the difficulties of making inferences from the information that we know versus the information that we don't know, so no matter what, there is a lack of solid evidence if we are going to conclusively draw inferences on the non-movement of coins - yet at the same time, I largely come to the opposite conclusion as you in regards to my own thinking that the number of lost coins are likely higher than the estimates, and you seem to be coming to the conclusion that fewer coins are lost than the various inferences.
First, personally, I believe that Satoshi's coins are likely to be lost "on purpose."

Secondly, I believe that a lot of bitcoiners likely believe that they have coins, but they are not in a frequent of enough practice of accessing their coins to realize that they really don't have the coins that they believe that they have.

Third, I believe that a lot of folks are not very good at their plans of successorship, so many of them have not adequately communicated the successorship of their coins, and even if they have communicated such successorship, the form of their communication is not clear enough (or updated enough) in order for successors (namely heirs) to be adequately able to know about the quantity of their coins (and the various locations of such coins) and to access such coins.  Password management can be quite difficult, even when we are trying to recall our own accounts and/or locations of coins and other important things, so frequently if heirs are not even able to adequately figure out coins that a deceased person might have had, they might also not be ready, willing and/or able to spend time trying to figure out such puzzles...even something as simple as getting into the deceased person's laptop that may end up giving some clues, there can be difficulties getting in, and then also difficulties sorting through what information might be important, while perhaps attempting to preserve some of the privacy of the deceased person.

There may be deceased person personal papers in electronic form, in paper forum and even stashed away in various places (buried stamped steel plates that might not even have the whole seed in one place.. so having to put 2 or 3 parts together)

Fourth, - somewhat not related to lost coins, also consider the logistical problems of having someone technical (who might not be 100% honest) helping out a non-technical person, and if the person comes across information that reflects value or even bitcoin that can be irreversibly moved, and if such technical person comes accross life changing amounts of money that he considers himself to be more able to meaningfully spend as compared to a potentially undeserving and unknowing person who  is the rightful beneficiary, then surely there can be temptations to move some or all of such coins to their own self-custody, yet theft of coins still would not be the same as lost coins, since in this kind of a case, the coins would just end up going to someone who took the coins... and sure maybe he does not take all the coins, so he ends up splitting the pot or maybe even retaining some control over the coins when he might transfer the coins to the intended beneficiary.
JJG, I actually found out I like your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, scheme quite a lot. I am not making fun of you. It is how you invite someone else to comment on positions in a structured way, absolutely phenomenal.

First, this is the most unfounded speculation ever. I agree with many things you say, but everyone who has had an interest in secret operations and so on, must come to the conclusion that nobody knows whether these coins are still "alive", you included. Sorry to take this step, but you included. Think about past operations, it would be stupid to outrule possibilities.

I doubt that my statement "outrules possibilities," since I am largely stating my inclinations on the topic.  I did not even proclaim whatever level of probabilities I would assign to various possible alternatives, since I doubt that those kinds of particulars matter at this point in time. .and such bridge would need to be crossed if something (facts and/or logic) around the probabilities were to change.

Secondly, ok this I don't know. I think you are onto something here, I just don't know the magnitude. I think here in this specific case as described by you, in the lower percentage rate, but still. There are lost coins, but I would be surpirsed if somebody didn't check their wallets when they saw the news that BTC crossed $100k.

Of course, there are so many variables, so surely this is a working hypothesis... which is also subject to possible change.. and so surely every day (or at least periodically) there will be guys who are able to reconfirm that they still have access to their coins (whether by luck or crook, who knows?), and there will be guys who go to attempt to access their coins and realize that they no longer have access and there will be guys who pass away (or otherwise become disabled or mentally incapacitated in regards to their keys) which may contribute towards whatever peril ends from their way of holding their keys.

Third, I fully agree. This can be a big one. Shortcut here: explaining siblings how to handle things, it is a nightmare if they have never had anything to do with bitcoin. Yes, you are so right about this.

Again, a lot of scenarios... various levels of trust and mistrust...and maybe even sometimes could be easily resolved, but ends up procrastinating until "too late" to resolve/clarify.

Fourth, I gave a warning to a relative who told me that a friend would manage her BTC issues. I think there is nothing to add. However, for the folks reading this, do not transmit any access to anyone you can't 100% trust. Now figure out how many people in life you 100% trust.

Some people might seem 100% trustable at time A, but then death/incapacitation happens at time B..  so then such previously trusted person is put in a position to "do the right thing," yet such person knows enough to know that no one else knows, so is such person going to do the right thing, or not?  Maybe the person does not even know, until put in such circumstances of considerable amounts of possible life-changing wealth, and no one else will know.   Some of us might believe ourselves to be capable or not capable of doing the "right thing," and there will also be times in which "the right thing" will be subject to interpretation...and think of another possibility, the "right" thing (could well be interpreted to be divisible.. .hahahahahahaha.. by 100 million.... or even time-delayed preserving of a "back door" that may or may not be the "right thing" to do).
hero member
Activity: 1946
Merit: 867
Defend Bitcoin and its PoW: bitcoincleanup.com
January 03, 2025, 05:15:06 AM
#36
...

I agree with a lot of your reasoning about points that you are making @tiCeR especially when it comes to the difficulties of making inferences from the information that we know versus the information that we don't know, so no matter what, there is a lack of solid evidence if we are going to conclusively draw inferences on the non-movement of coins - yet at the same time, I largely come to the opposite conclusion as you in regards to my own thinking that the number of lost coins are likely higher than the estimates, and you seem to be coming to the conclusion that fewer coins are lost than the various inferences.

First, personally, I believe that Satoshi's coins are likely to be lost "on purpose."

Secondly, I believe that a lot of bitcoiners likely believe that they have coins, but they are not in a frequent of enough practice of accessing their coins to realize that they really don't have the coins that they believe that they have.

Third, I believe that a lot of folks are not very good at their plans of successorship, so many of them have not adequately communicated the successorship of their coins, and even if they have communicated such successorship, the form of their communication is not clear enough (or updated enough) in order for successors (namely heirs) to be adequately able to know about the quantity of their coins (and the various locations of such coins) and to access such coins.  Password management can be quite difficult, even when we are trying to recall our own accounts and/or locations of coins and other important things, so frequently if heirs are not even able to adequately figure out coins that a deceased person might have had, they might also not be ready, willing and/or able to spend time trying to figure out such puzzles...even something as simple as getting into the deceased person's laptop that may end up giving some clues, there can be difficulties getting in, and then also difficulties sorting through what information might be important, while perhaps attempting to preserve some of the privacy of the deceased person.

There may be deceased person personal papers in electronic form, in paper forum and even stashed away in various places (buried stamped steel plates that might not even have the whole seed in one place.. so having to put 2 or 3 parts together)

Fourth, - somewhat not related to lost coins, also consider the logistical problems of having someone technical (who might not be 100% honest) helping out a non-technical person, and if the person comes across information that reflects value or even bitcoin that can be irreversibly moved, and if such technical person comes accross life changing amounts of money that he considers himself to be more able to meaningfully spend as compared to a potentially undeserving and unknowing person who  is the rightful beneficiary, then surely there can be temptations to move some or all of such coins to their own self-custody, yet theft of coins still would not be the same as lost coins, since in this kind of a case, the coins would just end up going to someone who took the coins... and sure maybe he does not take all the coins, so he ends up splitting the pot or maybe even retaining some control over the coins when he might transfer the coins to the intended beneficiary.

JJG, I actually found out I like your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, scheme quite a lot. I am not making fun of you. It is how you invite someone else to comment on positions in a structured way, absolutely phenomenal.

First, this is the most unfounded speculation ever. I agree with many things you say, but everyone who has had an interest in secret operations and so on, must come to the conclusion that nobody knows whether these coins are still "alive", you included. Sorry to take this step, but you included. Think about past operations, it would be stupid to outrule possibilities.

Secondly, ok this I don't know. I think you are onto something here, I just don't know the magnitude. I think here in this specific case as described by you, in the lower percentage rate, but still. There are lost coins, but I would be surpirsed if somebody didn't check their wallets when they saw the news that BTC crossed $100k.

Third, I fully agree. This can be a big one. Shortcut here: explaining siblings how to handle things, it is a nightmare if they have never had anything to do with bitcoin. Yes, you are so right about this.

Fourth, I gave a warning to a relative who told me that a friend would manage her BTC issues. I think there is nothing to add. However, for the folks reading this, do not transmit any access to anyone you can't 100% trust. Now figure out how many people in life you 100% trust.
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
December 28, 2024, 02:56:58 PM
#35
...
You can use inactive UTXOs, and different age cut-offs to estimate possible lost bitcoins. With different age cut-offs, you will have different estimations and they are all not accurate.
https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/charts/hodl-waves/
There are always very old, and inactive UTXOs suddenly become active again and make your estimations inaccurate. It's only important by knowing a fact that there are lost bitcoins that contribute to higher value of Bitcoin and it's gift for all of us.
Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more.  Think of it as a donation to everyone.
You have essentially stated what I already mentioned. You call it inactive UTXOs, which essentially add to total BTC coin age. But a dormant wallet is not a lost wallet as this here shows:

The post is from April 2024. Now it is more or less safe to say that most of these 50 BTC wallets are lost because those were probably some nerds playing around mining a block and then lost interest and did lose or forget about the keys. But there is no way to say how many of these wallets are indeed dead in the water.

When I read this
Quote
I think the estimation about lost wallets is way to aggressive. Asserting that wallets with unspent UTXOs since 2014 can reasonably be considered lost is a joke in my opinion. 2014 was the time when people started figuring out all the stuff about handling wallets and so on because the info was out there, Youtube channels popped up, guides were there and so on and so forth. I understand that those who experimented with mining in 2010 may have lost the coinbase transactions here and there because they lost interest, hence the many 50 BTC wallets, but not in 2014. Coins have still been lost since then of course, but I can tell that those who have been around had a very good clue how to safely store BTC and those who newly joined had access to essential info.

What's more, BTC had crossed the $1,000 mark already in 2013. Everyone knew that this is more serious than buying pizzas with 10,000 BTC. There is no way it can make sense that Chainalysis defines wallets as lost when coins haven't moved since 2014. I don't know what you think, but to me it is ridiculous and I am honestly not sure why they would come up with that idea. I'd just call them dormant and let everyone else come up with their own opinion. I don't think Satoshi's coins are lost. It's possible, but I assume they are not because why would I bother? It makes more sense for everyone to take them into account rather than optimistically write them off the BTC supply balance sheet hoping that it boosts the value of my holdings due to increased scarcity.
Edit: Here is another example.
Quote
Wallets from February 2009 waking up after 15.5 years.

I agree with a lot of your reasoning about points that you are making @tiCeR especially when it comes to the difficulties of making inferences from the information that we know versus the information that we don't know, so no matter what, there is a lack of solid evidence if we are going to conclusively draw inferences on the non-movement of coins - yet at the same time, I largely come to the opposite conclusion as you in regards to my own thinking that the number of lost coins are likely higher than the estimates, and you seem to be coming to the conclusion that fewer coins are lost than the various inferences.

First, personally, I believe that Satoshi's coins are likely to be lost "on purpose."

Secondly, I believe that a lot of bitcoiners likely believe that they have coins, but they are not in a frequent of enough practice of accessing their coins to realize that they really don't have the coins that they believe that they have.

Third, I believe that a lot of folks are not very good at their plans of successorship, so many of them have not adequately communicated the successorship of their coins, and even if they have communicated such successorship, the form of their communication is not clear enough (or updated enough) in order for successors (namely heirs) to be adequately able to know about the quantity of their coins (and the various locations of such coins) and to access such coins.  Password management can be quite difficult, even when we are trying to recall our own accounts and/or locations of coins and other important things, so frequently if heirs are not even able to adequately figure out coins that a deceased person might have had, they might also not be ready, willing and/or able to spend time trying to figure out such puzzles...even something as simple as getting into the deceased person's laptop that may end up giving some clues, there can be difficulties getting in, and then also difficulties sorting through what information might be important, while perhaps attempting to preserve some of the privacy of the deceased person.

There may be deceased person personal papers in electronic form, in paper forum and even stashed away in various places (buried stamped steel plates that might not even have the whole seed in one place.. so having to put 2 or 3 parts together)

Fourth, - somewhat not related to lost coins, also consider the logistical problems of having someone technical (who might not be 100% honest) helping out a non-technical person, and if the person comes across information that reflects value or even bitcoin that can be irreversibly moved, and if such technical person comes accross life changing amounts of money that he considers himself to be more able to meaningfully spend as compared to a potentially undeserving and unknowing person who  is the rightful beneficiary, then surely there can be temptations to move some or all of such coins to their own self-custody, yet theft of coins still would not be the same as lost coins, since in this kind of a case, the coins would just end up going to someone who took the coins... and sure maybe he does not take all the coins, so he ends up splitting the pot or maybe even retaining some control over the coins when he might transfer the coins to the intended beneficiary.
hero member
Activity: 1946
Merit: 867
Defend Bitcoin and its PoW: bitcoincleanup.com
December 28, 2024, 12:17:32 PM
#34
...
You can use inactive UTXOs, and different age cut-offs to estimate possible lost bitcoins. With different age cut-offs, you will have different estimations and they are all not accurate.
https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/charts/hodl-waves/

There are always very old, and inactive UTXOs suddenly become active again and make your estimations inaccurate. It's only important by knowing a fact that there are lost bitcoins that contribute to higher value of Bitcoin and it's gift for all of us.

Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more.  Think of it as a donation to everyone.

You have essentially stated what I already mentioned. You call it inactive UTXOs, which essentially add to total BTC coin age. But a dormant wallet is not a lost wallet as this here shows:



The post is from April 2024. Now it is more or less safe to say that most of these 50 BTC wallets are lost because those were probably some nerds playing around mining a block and then lost interest and did lose or forget about the keys. But there is no way to say how many of these wallets are indeed dead in the water.

When I read this

Quote

I think the estimation about lost wallets is way too aggressive. Asserting that wallets with unspent UTXOs since 2014 can reasonably be considered lost is a joke in my opinion. 2014 was the time when people started figuring out all the stuff about handling wallets and so on because the info was out there, Youtube channels popped up, guides were there and so on and so forth. I understand that those who experimented with mining in 2010 may have lost the coinbase transactions here and there because they lost interest, hence the many 50 BTC wallets, but not in 2014. Coins have still been lost since then of course, but I can tell that those who have been around had a very good clue how to safely store BTC and those who newly joined had access to essential info.

What's more, BTC had crossed the $1,000 mark already in 2013. Everyone knew that this is more serious than buying pizzas with 10,000 BTC. There is no way it can make sense that Chainalysis defines wallets as lost when coins haven't moved since 2014. I don't know what you think, but to me it is ridiculous and I am honestly not sure why they would come up with that idea. I'd just call them dormant and let everyone else come up with their own opinion. I don't think Satoshi's coins are lost. It's possible, but I assume they are not because why would I bother? It makes more sense for everyone to take them into account rather than optimistically write them off the BTC supply balance sheet hoping that it boosts the value of my holdings due to increased scarcity.

Edit: Here is another example.

Quote

Wallets from February 2009 waking up after 15.5 years.
hero member
Activity: 1722
Merit: 801
December 28, 2024, 06:01:44 AM
#33
I searched for sources for a while now and I agree that what shahzadafzal said. It ranges from sometimes 1.8m to as many as 6 million. Does anyone know a source of which you think the applied methodology to determine lost coins permanently makes sense and is verifiable to a certain degree?

Since these sources vary so widely, I think nobody really has a clue as to how many BTC are lost. When a guy says he threw a hard drive in the trash, even that can't be verified. It is probably true, but it doesn't have to be. Are satoshis coins considered lost permanently in most of these reports?
You can use inactive UTXOs, and different age cut-offs to estimate possible lost bitcoins. With different age cut-offs, you will have different estimations and they are all not accurate.
https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/charts/hodl-waves/

There are always very old, and inactive UTXOs suddenly become active again and make your estimations inaccurate. It's only important by knowing a fact that there are lost bitcoins that contribute to higher value of Bitcoin and it's gift for all of us.

Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more.  Think of it as a donation to everyone.
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
December 28, 2024, 05:59:06 AM
#32
As far as I know many services recognise coins as lost if the wallet has not been used for many years, but we have seen many cases where after 10 years or more many old wallets come back to life.
I use 3M lost coins for my stats because I don't need very much accuracy.
hero member
Activity: 1946
Merit: 867
Defend Bitcoin and its PoW: bitcoincleanup.com
December 28, 2024, 12:59:23 AM
#31
...
But if we add bitcoins on centralised crypto exchanges to this statistic, we can get a figure = 31%. This is good news as more bitcoins come out of the shadows. But in my opinion if you take into account lost coins permanently, at least 30% of coins will be in the shadow zone.


But how are they coming up with these numbers for lost coins permanently? Frankly, the numbers vary widely. It is a huge difference whether 2 million BTC or 6 million BTC are lost.

Bitcoins lost forever 2.4m (11%), according to report an estimate suggest between three million to as many as six million may be have been lost forever.
A loose estimate that's often agreed upon is 3.5 million.

I searched for sources for a while now and I agree that what shahzadafzal said. It ranges from sometimes 1.8m to as many as 6 million. Does anyone know a source of which you think the applied methodology to determine lost coins permanently makes sense and is verifiable to a certain degree?

Since these sources vary so widely, I think nobody really has a clue as to how many BTC are lost. When a guy says he threw a hard drive in the trash, even that can't be verified. It is probably true, but it doesn't have to be. Are satoshis coins considered lost permanently in most of these reports?

It can't be solely based on peoples' reports or coin age.
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
December 27, 2024, 08:17:51 AM
#30
https://dailyhodl.com/2024/12/24/31-of-all-bitcoin-holdings-now-belong-to-etfs-governments-and-microstrategy-mstr-cryptoquant-ceo/
Exchange-traded funds (ETFs), governments and MicroStrategy (MSTR) own nearly one-third of all known Bitcoin (BTC) holdings.

The 31% of known BTC holdings owned by ETFs, governments and MicroStrategy represents a 14% increase from December 2023, according to Ki Young Ju, the founder and chief executive of the digital asset analytics firm CryptoQuant.
“Bitcoin Cap Table Update: ETFs, governments, and MSTR now account for 31% of all known Bitcoin holdings, up from 14% last year.”


There is something misleading about each of those pie charts, since there should be another two pie charts that shows how many bitcoin are in unknown entities (private hands), so then it would show known entities and unknown entities in order to put the unknown portion into perspective.  The pie charts imply that to be the whole bitcoin supply when I would suspect that each of them is depicting less than 25% of the total bitcoin supply.
I like this statistic better
https://treasuries.bitbo.io/
But if we add bitcoins on centralised crypto exchanges to this statistic, we can get a figure = 31%. This is good news as more bitcoins come out of the shadows. But in my opinion if you take into account lost coins permanently, at least 30% of coins will be in the shadow zone.


hero member
Activity: 1946
Merit: 867
Defend Bitcoin and its PoW: bitcoincleanup.com
December 27, 2024, 01:38:45 AM
#29
https://dailyhodl.com/2024/12/24/31-of-all-bitcoin-holdings-now-belong-to-etfs-governments-and-microstrategy-mstr-cryptoquant-ceo/
Exchange-traded funds (ETFs), governments and MicroStrategy (MSTR) own nearly one-third of all known Bitcoin (BTC) holdings.

The 31% of known BTC holdings owned by ETFs, governments and MicroStrategy represents a 14% increase from December 2023, according to Ki Young Ju, the founder and chief executive of the digital asset analytics firm CryptoQuant.
“Bitcoin Cap Table Update: ETFs, governments, and MSTR now account for 31% of all known Bitcoin holdings, up from 14% last year.”


There is something misleading about each of those pie charts, since there should be another two pie charts that shows how many bitcoin are in unknown entities (private hands), so then it would show known entities and unknown entities in order to put the unknown portion into perspective.  The pie charts imply that to be the whole bitcoin supply when I would suspect that each of them is depicting less than 25% of the total bitcoin supply.

Good catch and does anyone know on what number these
Quote
31% of known BTC holdings
is based on? I did a quick search in the quoted article, but it only talks about 31% of known BTC while not saying how many BTC holdings are known.

JayJuanGee I think your 25% number could be quite accurate. I know it is a guess, but I did the following:



If you look at the table and you go bottom up, you could suspect that most of the 10K BTC - 100K BTC wallets are identified and you can see that when you scroll down on the website and see whether the wallet addresses have a tag. Most of them do. Let's assume that all addresses in the range 10K BTC - 1 mio BTC are known, that makes roughly 3,000,000 BTC.

Then I checked how many wallets in the 1K BTC - 10K BTC are tagged and the number of tagged addresses goes down a lot, but I would suspect it could be around 50% tagged, probably less but let's go with 50%. That makes 2,300,000 BTC.

I then checked addresses in the range of 100 BTC - 1K BTC and there you can see that hardly any address is tagged. I am aware it doesn't mean it is definitely unknown, but going by these estimates based on the tags, it could be around 26%.

In my opinion this makes sense. Any wallet below 1K BTC is most likely not identified. Give or take of course, but the wallets ranging from 10 BTC to 100 BTC won't be in corporate or institutional hands for the most part. Some of them yes, but why would they be identified unless they must be disclosed or have a proven connection to another / bigger wallet of that same entity.

This has been an interesting topic ever since, same thing for how many BTC are lost, but I have found that as soon as you change the source of information, the numbers change too.
full member
Activity: 203
Merit: 106
🌀 Cosmic Casino
December 26, 2024, 06:10:07 PM
#28
https://x.com/JSeyff/status/1857089998614335761
"US Spot #Bitcoin ETFs now own an estimated ~1.07 million BTC. As a group they're likely to pass Satoshi's estimated holdings of ~1.1 million BTC in the next few days or weeks" (C) James Seyffart
Bitcoin ETFs were approved in March, meaning it took them just 8 months to own over 1 million BTC and be ready to surpass Satoshi. What will happen in the coming years and how many bitcoins will they own and what percentage of the bitcoin supply will they account for?

Some people's concerns are not unfounded, bitcoin ETF approval is like a double-edged sword. On one hand, that will positively impact the price of bitcoin as more people invest in it, but on the other hand, bitcoin will be held mainly by institutions making it more susceptible to manipulation and becoming more centralized. But in the end, there is nothing we can do to fight or stop them from accumulating more bitcoins.

Honestly, I have mixed feelings, not knowing whether to be happy or sad about this news.
I try to see reasons why that wouldn’t go and there can’t be some obvious manipulation on the market. Reason being that, while all the institutions and whales might share a profit oriented goal, there wouldn’t be a single way to go about it and all can’t agree on a method. Let’s call it the greediness of mankind. It certainly would kick in with some, trying to make more than the other and looking out for means to archive that outside the norms, not to mention the small players that trade the market as well which all these is dependent on as well.

I thought that we should know that the BTC spot ETFs were approved on January 10 and they started to trade on January 11.

See this, everything you need to know about BTC spot ETFs article from August.

Of course, it is an amazing phenomena in regards to getting BTC price exposure, even though also the power of bitcoin and the value comes from directly holding it and directly being able to transact in it without anyone being able to stop such transactions.

I was hoping to read a little further but, you stopped suddenly, not as extensive as you often are in your comments. I guess this is how this one goes due to the link.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1093
Goodnight, o_e_l_e_o 🌹
December 26, 2024, 04:35:51 PM
#27
I believe this would be helpful for you and anyone interested in this
The upgraded version. Cheesy



I'm quite happy that there are still a lot Bitcoin that hold by people in non custodial wallet, I thought the number would be less than 50%, probably like 10% considering most people around myself hold their Bitcoin in Binance.

But we don't know what we happen in the next decade, I hope the number of Bitcoin in "people" will increase.
10.5 million BTC by real hodlers is a good one. The infographic didn't actually say where there are HODLing, whether custodial, non custodial etc. But I am cool that that big number is in the hands of the people.

1.6m allocated to unknown whales is ridiculous. The number is small compared to what I have in my head. This means that whales have simply left bitcoin to shit coins of low price and volume they can manipulate easily. Maybe known institutions holding BTC should be classified as whales, maybe known whales to make things connect well.
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
December 26, 2024, 03:53:39 PM
#26
https://dailyhodl.com/2024/12/24/31-of-all-bitcoin-holdings-now-belong-to-etfs-governments-and-microstrategy-mstr-cryptoquant-ceo/
Exchange-traded funds (ETFs), governments and MicroStrategy (MSTR) own nearly one-third of all known Bitcoin (BTC) holdings.

The 31% of known BTC holdings owned by ETFs, governments and MicroStrategy represents a 14% increase from December 2023, according to Ki Young Ju, the founder and chief executive of the digital asset analytics firm CryptoQuant.
“Bitcoin Cap Table Update: ETFs, governments, and MSTR now account for 31% of all known Bitcoin holdings, up from 14% last year.”


There is something misleading about each of those pie charts, since there should be another two pie charts that shows how many bitcoin are in unknown entities (private hands), so then it would show known entities and unknown entities in order to put the unknown portion into perspective.  The pie charts imply that to be the whole bitcoin supply when I would suspect that each of them is depicting less than 25% of the total bitcoin supply.
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
December 26, 2024, 05:46:34 AM
#25
https://dailyhodl.com/2024/12/24/31-of-all-bitcoin-holdings-now-belong-to-etfs-governments-and-microstrategy-mstr-cryptoquant-ceo/

Exchange-traded funds (ETFs), governments and MicroStrategy (MSTR) own nearly one-third of all known Bitcoin (BTC) holdings.

The 31% of known BTC holdings owned by ETFs, governments and MicroStrategy represents a 14% increase from December 2023, according to Ki Young Ju, the founder and chief executive of the digital asset analytics firm CryptoQuant.

“Bitcoin Cap Table Update: ETFs, governments, and MSTR now account for 31% of all known Bitcoin holdings, up from 14% last year.”



legendary
Activity: 2030
Merit: 1109
Free Free Palestine
December 03, 2024, 09:49:15 AM
#24



If the institutions hold too much Bitcoin, they have a power to "change" the trend of Bitcoin bullish and bearish season, making it harder to predict.

It is inevitable that they manipulate prices because it is part of the financial game. Even if they don't hold a lot of bitcoin, there is always a way to manipulate it if they want to. What is more worrying as many have pointed out is that Bitcoin will become more centralized if the majority of the supply is held by large institutions or governments and this seems to be becoming a reality. But what's sadder is that even if we don't like it or are worried, there's no way to stop them from doing it.

What happens if they hold more than 50% of the supply? Could that happen?
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1210
December 03, 2024, 09:06:16 AM
#23
I happened to find a very interesting statistic
https://treasuries.bitbo.io/

The trend now is that soon a lot of bitcoins will be owned by public and private companies.
19.78M bitcoins have already been mined, and the influx of new coins will no longer be able to have a strong impact on the market
It's really scary to imagine.

The amount is increase now, they own 13.447%. We still didn't count the lost coins and whales who own Bitcoin, which make the coins that available for the public are getting lower and lower.

If the institutions hold too much Bitcoin, they have a power to "change" the trend of Bitcoin bullish and bearish season, making it harder to predict.
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
December 03, 2024, 08:53:27 AM
#22
https://www.theblock.co/post/329190/blackrock-ibit-spot-bitcoin-etf-500000-btc
BlackRock’s spot ETF surpasses 500,000 bitcoin in assets under management

"BlackRock’s IBIT spot bitcoin ETF has exceeded 500,000 BTC in assets under management less than a year after trading began.
The fund is now approaching the $50 billion AUM mark following another $338.3 million worth of net inflows on Monday."
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
November 21, 2024, 04:34:49 AM
#21
I happened to find a very interesting statistic
https://treasuries.bitbo.io/


The trend now is that soon a lot of bitcoins will be owned by public and private companies.
19.78M bitcoins have already been mined, and the influx of new coins will no longer be able to have a strong impact on the market
legendary
Activity: 2002
Merit: 4743
November 19, 2024, 06:47:04 AM
#20
https://x.com/JSeyff/status/1857089998614335761
"US Spot #Bitcoin ETFs now own an estimated ~1.07 million BTC. As a group they're likely to pass Satoshi's estimated holdings of ~1.1 million BTC in the next few days or weeks" (C) James Seyffart



Bitcoin ETFs were approved in March, meaning it took them just 8 months to own over 1 million BTC and be ready to surpass Satoshi. What will happen in the coming years and how many bitcoins will they own and what percentage of the bitcoin supply will they account for?

Some people's concerns are not unfounded, bitcoin ETF approval is like a double-edged sword. On one hand, that will positively impact the price of bitcoin as more people invest in it, but on the other hand, bitcoin will be held mainly by institutions making it more susceptible to manipulation and becoming more centralized. But in the end, there is nothing we can do to fight or stop them from accumulating more bitcoins.

Honestly, I have mixed feelings, not knowing whether to be happy or sad about this news.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/usd/assets-by-market-cap/


The ETF market gives many pluses, but it is also an additional market to sell off an asset other than the crypto market.
ETF assets can be used in collateral, in indices, in other exchange instruments, and in 5 years it will be difficult for many people to analyse the assets. For example, DAI now has many instruments other than cryptocurrencies as collateral.
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
November 18, 2024, 11:39:58 AM
#19
https://x.com/JSeyff/status/1857089998614335761
"US Spot #Bitcoin ETFs now own an estimated ~1.07 million BTC. As a group they're likely to pass Satoshi's estimated holdings of ~1.1 million BTC in the next few days or weeks" (C) James Seyffart
Bitcoin ETFs were approved in March, meaning it took them just 8 months to own over 1 million BTC and be ready to surpass Satoshi. What will happen in the coming years and how many bitcoins will they own and what percentage of the bitcoin supply will they account for?

Some people's concerns are not unfounded, bitcoin ETF approval is like a double-edged sword. On one hand, that will positively impact the price of bitcoin as more people invest in it, but on the other hand, bitcoin will be held mainly by institutions making it more susceptible to manipulation and becoming more centralized. But in the end, there is nothing we can do to fight or stop them from accumulating more bitcoins.

Honestly, I have mixed feelings, not knowing whether to be happy or sad about this news.

I thought that we should know that the BTC spot ETFs were approved on January 10 and they started to trade on January 11.

See this, everything you need to know about BTC spot ETFs article from August.

Of course, it is an amazing phenomena in regards to getting BTC price exposure, even though also the power of bitcoin and the value comes from directly holding it and directly being able to transact in it without anyone being able to stop such transactions.
Pages:
Jump to: