Relying on wallets as a way to measure the growth of the number of users will give wrong and inaccurate results because there are many ways to own bitcoin without having a wallet, for example, central platforms, second layer solutions, managing more than one wallet for one user and others make it an inaccurate standard.
Finally, even if there was a comprehensive adoption and was measured with better estimates, the market capacity is still an important criterion that making the volatility slower, for example, with a market capacity of 100 trillion, we will get much less volatility than a market capacity of 100 million and so on.
Topic: Is this true or not? - page 2. (Read 553 times)
Flat out not true.
With things like the lightning network more and more people are transacting without their wallets / addresses being touched. Addresses / wallets are just one small indicator of what is going on.
As more people use LN for day to day transactions BTC price will change. But there will be limited visibility on chain with addresses / wallets.
Some people like LN, some people don't. At this point it's 'whatever', it's being used and it's growing so all other things aside lots of small transactions are going to matter more to theBTC price then a few larger ones.
-Dave
With things like the lightning network more and more people are transacting without their wallets / addresses being touched. Addresses / wallets are just one small indicator of what is going on.
As more people use LN for day to day transactions BTC price will change. But there will be limited visibility on chain with addresses / wallets.
Some people like LN, some people don't. At this point it's 'whatever', it's being used and it's growing so all other things aside lots of small transactions are going to matter more to theBTC price then a few larger ones.
-Dave
The inflation rate of bitcoin is under the inflation rate of the USA and this shows us bitcoin still can be counted as a hedge against the inflation rate. But still, the definition of inflation hedge can be different and you cannot expect to see the market is always bullish in every timeframe there is not any market like this and still, according to all the analyzes the price of bitcoin is bullish in longterm and this can be a hedge against inflation rate if you enter the market in a good situation or if you aim for longterm otherwise this cannot be a hedge against inflation rate.
As the adoption continues, the volatility has been decreasing.
It is not actually correlated with adoption.When an asset has higher and higher price, it becomes more expensive and the volatility should be consequently smaller. At least the difference between two all time highs should be smaller. It's natural.
Bitcoin now has price in thousands of dollar but you can see its in altcoins now. Altcoins are easier to have x10, x100 in bull run and it is exactly what Bitcoin experienced with its past bull run.
Higher price means higher marketcap and it's harder to manipulate higher market capped projects.
A person can own multiple addresses and wallets. It's hard to argue that if we had 1 billion wallets, bitcoin wouldn't be as volatile as it is.
Bitcoins is getting less volatile2009/2012, the volatility was 99x
2013/2016, the volatility was 33x
2016/2020, it was 6.24x
2020/till present, it has been 3.94x
As the adoption continues, the volatility has been decreasing.
1 billion wallets doesn't mean 1 billion different users, but even if it did, I don't see how that would matter. If a lot of people dump bitcoin whenever something bad is said about it or when the governments announce more regulation or even bans, the value will always drop.
You are right, but in long term, bitcoin is a hedge against inflation, after the significant down time, bitcoin got to all-time-time. The last I could remember was when Elon Musk wanted to manipulate the market, followed by Chinese government FUD, this resulted in bitcoin price downturn from $63500 to a price below $30000, yet bitcoin skyrock back and reach $68900. Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation? I guess every person has a different view on this. Good luck in explaining how good bitcoin is at maintaining its value to those who invested in it at $50-60k. On the other hand, its much easier to use the same logic on those who invested at $1-2k, for example.
But if people that do not believe bitcoin is not a hedge against inflation is asked if it is a hedge in long term, they have to think about it very well to know how true it is. Bitcoin is highly volatile and can be regarded as a speculative asset, but in short period of time. If it is a long period of time, it is actually a hedge against inflation.
Their accuracy here may not be totally confirmed as genuine because the source to their statistical assumptions is only base on centralized exchanges source and decentralized exchanges/hardware wallets aren't inclusive here, and i think it will be a little bit a teadeous task enough to get the right statistics as everyday and every minutes we got lots numbers of wallet getting created from different sources, so this can be rather left inconclusive.
A person can own multiple addresses and wallets. It's hard to argue that if we had 1 billion wallets, bitcoin wouldn't be as volatile as it is. 1 billion wallets doesn't mean 1 billion different users, but even if it did, I don't see how that would matter. If a lot of people dump bitcoin whenever something bad is said about it or when the governments announce more regulation or even bans, the value will always drop. More people owning bitcoin can also be seen as more chances of dumping. We can't know if they are strong or weak hands.
Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation? I guess every person has a different view on this. Good luck in explaining how good bitcoin is at maintaining its value to those who invested in it at $50-60k. On the other hand, its much easier to use the same logic on those who invested at $1-2k, for example.
Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation? I guess every person has a different view on this. Good luck in explaining how good bitcoin is at maintaining its value to those who invested in it at $50-60k. On the other hand, its much easier to use the same logic on those who invested at $1-2k, for example.
Bitcoin was less than $1 before, it got to $10, $100, $1000, $10000 and reach all-time-time of $69000 last year, now at $21300. Is that not an hedge against inflation? Bitcoin is highly volatile, but those that hold it for long see it as a hedge against inflation.
That puts it less into the category of inflation hedges and more into a category with growth stock as pointed out by mk4. Being an inflation hedge would imply a certain disconnect from the stock markets, similar to gold, however so far Bitcoin seems to behave more like a leveraged stock position. Looking at gold, however, it doesn't really look like much of an inflation hedge right now either.
Depending on what one expects from an inflation hedge it might still be early to tell though. It doesn't look like the decoupling from the stock market will happen any time soon, however I do expect Bitcoin to make up for lost purchasing power in a year or so.
The data isn't really accurate since they're only count of total accounts on Coinbase and Blockchain.com while the truly Bitcoin holders hold their coins on hardware wallet which will make their calculation gone wrong. Also each wallet have many address, how accurate they can calculate the whole address are owned by one wallet?
The reason why he said it's need to hit 1Billion wallets is because the adoption, they think if 1/7Billion people use Bitcoin in the whole world already enough to make it very decentralized. I'm not thinking about how many wallet would make Bitcoin hedge against inflation, but I would think how all the countries especially China, India etc end their drama to ban and unban Bitcoin.
The reason why he said it's need to hit 1Billion wallets is because the adoption, they think if 1/7Billion people use Bitcoin in the whole world already enough to make it very decentralized. I'm not thinking about how many wallet would make Bitcoin hedge against inflation, but I would think how all the countries especially China, India etc end their drama to ban and unban Bitcoin.
The address thing seems to be true because what first came to my mind is whether they were counting addresses generated but not used. However, I have already seen that this is not the case, only those that have appeared in a transaction are taken into account (thinking about it, I don't know how they could have discovered those that are generated and not used, it would be impossible because they can be generated offline).
As for the wallets, you are right to point out that the number of wallets will be less than the number of addresses but as for knowing the exact number it is impossible.
The billion wallets thing so that according to him, Bitcoin is an inflation hedge, seems to me to be bullshit.
People tend to believe whatever they feed with from the analytic view to statistics, the datas of the wallets collected comprises of those wallets that have sent transactions to the blockchain and does not include the dormant and unused wallet not minding whether their are generated online or offline.As for the wallets, you are right to point out that the number of wallets will be less than the number of addresses but as for knowing the exact number it is impossible.
The billion wallets thing so that according to him, Bitcoin is an inflation hedge, seems to me to be bullshit.
Bitcoin inflation rate stood at 1.77% which is lower than United states inflation rate and that seems to me that when you talking about inflation rate one needs to take a lot of things into account but using a highly volatile asset like Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation seems to have several consideration because Bitcoin is more of an asset and also Bitcoin is a currency even because, Bitcoin can be used for the exchange of goods and services.
The address thing seems to be true because what first came to my mind is whether they were counting addresses generated but not used. However, I have already seen that this is not the case, only those that have appeared in a transaction are taken into account (thinking about it, I don't know how they could have discovered those that are generated and not used, it would be impossible because they can be generated offline).
As for the wallets, you are right to point out that the number of wallets will be less than the number of addresses but as for knowing the exact number it is impossible.
The billion wallets thing so that according to him, Bitcoin is an inflation hedge, seems to me to be bullshit.
As for the wallets, you are right to point out that the number of wallets will be less than the number of addresses but as for knowing the exact number it is impossible.
The billion wallets thing so that according to him, Bitcoin is an inflation hedge, seems to me to be bullshit.
Not sure about the exact number needed, but for bitcoin to be a (better) and more stable inflation hedge, what it mostly needs is people using it for that purpose; or simply people just holding it for longer periods of time.
^ People's opinions on what an inflation hedge should be are mostly debatable, but I think people mostly want a far less volatile asset for an inflation hedge, not an asset that moves like a high-beta growth stock.
^ People's opinions on what an inflation hedge should be are mostly debatable, but I think people mostly want a far less volatile asset for an inflation hedge, not an asset that moves like a high-beta growth stock.
Bitcoin won't hedge inflation until it hits 1B wallets: Scaramucci
According to glassnode, there are over 1 billion created bitcoin addresses, but this can not be used to know the number of bitcoin wallets, a site can estimate the total number of bitcoin wallets but no valid data which can be considered accurate about it because a single HD wallet can be able to generate many addresses and some people may continue to use different address for different transactions.
Okay, let us assume that bitcoin wallet one day would get to 1 billion. I assume this because if Glassnode indicate only 1 billion bitcoin address to be existing for now, that means that less than 1 billion wallets are existing for now.
But is what this man talked about be true?
Bitcoin was less than $1 before, it got to $10, $100, $1000, $10000 and reach all-time-time of $69000 last year, now at $21300. Is that not an hedge against inflation? Bitcoin is highly volatile, but those that hold it for long see it as a hedge against inflation.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-won-t-hedge-inflation-until-it-hits-1b-wallets-scaramucci
https://studio.glassnode.com/metrics?%3Bm=blockchain.UtxoLossCount&%3Bs=1509303349&%3Bu=1576540800&%3Bzoom=&a=BTC&m=addresses.Count&zoom=all
According to glassnode, there are over 1 billion created bitcoin addresses, but this can not be used to know the number of bitcoin wallets, a site can estimate the total number of bitcoin wallets but no valid data which can be considered accurate about it because a single HD wallet can be able to generate many addresses and some people may continue to use different address for different transactions.
Okay, let us assume that bitcoin wallet one day would get to 1 billion. I assume this because if Glassnode indicate only 1 billion bitcoin address to be existing for now, that means that less than 1 billion wallets are existing for now.
But is what this man talked about be true?
Bitcoin was less than $1 before, it got to $10, $100, $1000, $10000 and reach all-time-time of $69000 last year, now at $21300. Is that not an hedge against inflation? Bitcoin is highly volatile, but those that hold it for long see it as a hedge against inflation.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-won-t-hedge-inflation-until-it-hits-1b-wallets-scaramucci
https://studio.glassnode.com/metrics?%3Bm=blockchain.UtxoLossCount&%3Bs=1509303349&%3Bu=1576540800&%3Bzoom=&a=BTC&m=addresses.Count&zoom=all
Jump to: