I think of a few reasons -
* Security
* Managing funds for customers.
* Big institutions selling to big investors & 1000 Bitcoin minimum.
I don't really think because of security because they would be using a hardware wallet. More like they are managing funds for big investors. I could be wrong but this is more likely the reason for it.
Topic: Bitcoins accumulated by institutional investors - page 3. (Read 479 times)
Or it could be that a lot of exchange platforms are diversifying their assets into different hot and cold wallets in order to minimize the risk of having their balances emptied in one fell sweep. But yeah, it's not really a secret that every time the price falls, loads of people are buying bitcoins in order to gain some profit, though the reason why the richy rich are keeping them in one huge chunk is still unclear.
The vertical lines suggest this is simply one person/company/organization/institution splitting their coins over multiple addresses, rather separate entities accumulating more coins.
There is a vertical jump of 200 addresses towards the end of 2018. If that was due to multiple entities, then it would have happened over days to weeks at least, and we wound see a steep, but certainly not vertical, line. The fact that there were 200 new addresses all holding >1000 BTC all appear at once very strongly suggests this was a large entity who was splitting their coins up over the course of a couple of transactions at most, most probably for security reasons, rather than keeping many thousands of bitcoin in the same address.
You can see other periods of growth that look far more normal such as at the start of 2016.
There is a vertical jump of 200 addresses towards the end of 2018. If that was due to multiple entities, then it would have happened over days to weeks at least, and we wound see a steep, but certainly not vertical, line. The fact that there were 200 new addresses all holding >1000 BTC all appear at once very strongly suggests this was a large entity who was splitting their coins up over the course of a couple of transactions at most, most probably for security reasons, rather than keeping many thousands of bitcoin in the same address.
You can see other periods of growth that look far more normal such as at the start of 2016.
Well irony is when the facts clearly say that whales are getting bigger and bigger using market manipulation people still think that we are moving towards more even distribution. I don't think there is any even distribution happening around. There is still a pretty wide gap between the early adopters and the late adopters and taking in consideration the current scenario of market manipulation i highly doubt that this thing is going to improve any time soon.
Are there really a need to keep same coin in different addresses?
The reason is that, the secret keys can be lost or miss placed and can't be found anymore. That simply means losing the coin. Also, bitcoin is not held in secret just like politicians hide public monies (fiat) in different accounts so that if one is traced, the others might not be found by the public or investigating agencies
The reason is that, the secret keys can be lost or miss placed and can't be found anymore. That simply means losing the coin. Also, bitcoin is not held in secret just like politicians hide public monies (fiat) in different accounts so that if one is traced, the others might not be found by the public or investigating agencies
I have just seen this tweet from glassnode on Twitter which shows that the number of addresses that hold over 1000 BTC has dramatically increased in the last year and a half. Pretty much since we have dropped from the $6000 level the BTC has started to be accumulated. Are they institutions? What's your take on that? Also why wouldn't they split their holdings in multiple addresses instead of keeping them all in one?
Looking at the graph we are approaching 2100 addresses with > 1000 BTC, that translates to at least 2,100,000 BTC.
Looking at the graph we are approaching 2100 addresses with > 1000 BTC, that translates to at least 2,100,000 BTC.
Jump to: