Over two-thirds of the Bitcoin supply has not moved in a year


Key Takeaways

  • Long-term holders continue to sit on their Bitcoin stashes
  • Two-thirds of the supply has not changed hands in the last year, despite rampant volatility and a collapse of the Bitcoin price
  • Over half the supply has not moved in 2 years or longer

“Supply squeeze” is a seductive phrase thrown around among Bitcoin enthusiasts. 

It refers to the predicted propelling upwards of the Bitcoin supply as a result of the supply cap – there will only ever be 21 million bitcoins – and a constant increase in demand. 

Whether this comes to fruition remains to be seen. But there does appear to be a growing cohort of Bitcoin investors who are holding. In fact, over two-thirds of the entire supply has not moved in over a year, an all-time high. 

To be precise, 67.9% of the Bitcoin supply has not moved in over a year. That is extremely high, especially when considering the last year have brought its fair share of scandals, including the respective crashes triggered by LUNA, Celsius and FTX. 

Combining these scandals with the most rapid monetary tightening in the wider economy, which have seen interest rates rise from near-zero to close to 5%, and the crypto market has been pillaged. 

Looking at the price action over the last 12 months, Bitcoin has fallen from $41,000 to $15,000 and is now trading at $28,000, with more than its fair share of ups and downs in between. And yet, two-thirds of the supply has been stagnant. 

Branching further out, over half the supply has now not moved in two years, close to 40% hasn’t moved in three years, while 28% has been stationary for 5 years. 

Of course, lost coins will be included in all these statistics. Bitcoin has been around since 2009, and that means people have died, and with them access to their coins has vanished. 

There are also simple cases of lost keys, people still roaming the Earth but with no access to their wallets. Let us not forget that Bitcoin was just a niche Internet plaything not so long ago, trading for less than $1 per coin. 

Not to mention, Satoshi Nakamoto’s mammoth stash of an estimated 1 million coins, or over 5% of the entire supply, remains untouched and included in the above stats. 

So make of it what you will, but Bitcoin still remains quite an illiquid market and with a dwindling supply, it is easy to see the narrative pushed by enthusiasts that if demand continues to rise, the price will only go upward. 

Of course, whether that demand will indeed continue to rise is another question entirely, and a much harder one to answer. 

The post Over two-thirds of the Bitcoin supply has not moved in a year appeared first on CoinJournal.

Coinbase CTO bets Bitcoin to $1M in 90 days, but I’m not sure even he believes it


Key Takeaways

  • Former Coinbase CTO Balaji Srinivasan bet an anonymous Twitter account $1 million that Bitcoin would trade at $1 million or greater in 90 days
  • Srinivasan is predicting imminent hyperinflation and a collapse of the US dollar
  • Bet is on wildly unfavourable terms, with the other side of the bet, James Medlock, able to lock in massive profit risk-free by simply buying a call option with a $1 million strike for insurance 
  • Bet comes nearly a year to the day after Do Kwon’s infamous bet with another anonymous Twitter account over LUNA price

I’m no chemist, but one of the most potent mixtures known to humankind has to be that of ego and money. 

In what may go down in the annals of Internet history, former Coinbase chief technology officer and prominent angel investor Balaji Srinivasan bet $1 million that the price of Bitcoin would be $1 million or greater in 90 days’ time. 

The bet was confirmed over Twitter, with the other side taken by anonymous meme enthusiast James Medlock. “(My wife) is the only person who knows I am James Medlock”, he posted in another tweet. “And I immediately told her about the bet”. 

What is the bet?

The bet started when Medlock posted the below tweet, an innocuous tweet outlining his belief that the US would not experience hyperinflation, apparently in response to some crypto enthusiasts declaring that it was inevitable. 

It should have ended there. But in came Srinivasan declaring he “will take that bet”. Not only that, but on wildly unfavourable terms. The setup is this: Medlock sends 1 BTC and Srinivasan sends $1 million to escrow today, with the latter denominated in the stablecoin USDC. 

The logic is that, were hyperinflation to occur and the US dollar to collapse, Bitcoin would reap the gains and explode upwards. Hence, the bet turned from hyperinflation into the Bitcoin price. 

If Bitcoin trades at $1 million or greater on June 17th, the kitty is Medlock’s. If it doesn’t Srinivasan takes the bounty.

The bet makes no sense

Obviously, this bet makes no sense for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the original tweet was a joke, as $1 million in the event of hyperinflation would become worthless. 

But the crux of it is the terms. Looking at market odds, this is a longshot of almost impossible odds. So much so, in fact, that a massive chunk of the bet could be guaranteed to Medlock in a risk-free manner in about 30 seconds, should he so please. 

All he would have to do is go to the market and buy a call option on Bitcoin with a strike price of $1 million dollars on the same expiry date of the bet (June 17th). This would cost pennies in comparison, and a massive chunk of the $1 million could be pocketed. 

Of course, everybody knows this, and the bet is nothing more than a grab at publicity or some sort of self-marketing stunt by Srinivasan. He reportedly already holds a massive stash of Bitcoin in any case, with the bet not being overly material to him. Call me a cynic, but there is also the fact that Srinivasan launched a podcast a month ago. 

The funny part is that Medlock didn’t have 1 BTC, worth $26,000 at the time, to hand. Poker player Isaac Haxton stepped in to cover the 1 BTC (without taking any upside). Medlock has also said he will donate a total of 70% of the winnings after taxes to charity – yet he will still pocket a cool $300,000 from a tweet which was a literal joke. 

What would have to happen for the bet to win?

Were this bet to win, it is hard to imagine what the world would look like. A 3600% increase to $1 million per Bitcoin in 90 days would place the market cap of Bitcoin at close to $20 trillion. That is a mind-boggling number – for one thing, it is more than all mortgage debt in the US. 

For this to happen in 90 days would likely mean a total collapse of the economy and society as we know it. The banking sector evaporating into thin air and the US dollar collapsing would throw the world into chaos, with an almost unimaginable level of crime, unrest and anarchy. 

People would lose their life savings and society would collapse near-instantly. And yet, there are Bitcoiners cheering on Srinivasan in this bet. Go figure. 

In an amusing twist of fate, the bet comes nearly a year to the day that LUNA founder Do Kwon bet with another anonymous Twitter account that LUNA would be a lower price in one year than it was then. This week marked the one-year point, and I think any cryptocurrency investor knows what has happened to LUNA. 

Some people have too much money and just don’t know what to do with it, I suppose. 

The post Coinbase CTO bets Bitcoin to $1M in 90 days, but I’m not sure even he believes it appeared first on CoinJournal.

Top 10,000 Bitcoin investors control one-third of the supply


Key Takeaways

  • Bitcoin is a decentralised asset, yet large amounts are controlled by a select few
  • The top 114 addresses hold nearly 3 million BTC, 15.5% of the total supply
  • The anonymous Satoshi Nakamoto holds 5.2% of the supply
  • MicroStrategy hold 0.68% of the supply

 

Whether you love or hate Bitcoin, the world’s first cryptocurrency has thrown the word “decentralised” into the modern vernacular.  

But while Bitcoin is the closest thing to a decentralised asset out there, it is worth noting that it does possess pressure points. Not central points of failure, but rather large holders who do possess significant amounts of the currency. In some cases, enough to cause a serious stir should those coins ever hit the market all at once.

Satoshi Nakamoto

The most obvious of the large holders is anonymous founder Satoshi Nakamoto. Whether one person or a group, Nakamoto possesses approximately 1 million bitcoins from the early days. That is equivalent to about 5.2% of the total supply – a very large number.

Nobody knows who Nakamoto is, but it is certainly a risk to have this amount of coins in the hands of one person/entity.

 Coinbase even listed this factor as a risk to its business on its S-1 form when it went public in April 2021. Under the risk section, the company outlined “the identification of Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous person or persons who developed Bitcoin, or the transfer of Satoshi’s Bitcoins” as a risk to Bitcoin and, by extension, Coinbase’s business. 

While speculating on Nakamoto’s identity is a fool’s game, and these coins could easily be lost forever, it is easy to see how Coinbase listed this as a risk on its filing. The fact is that one entity or person holds 5.2% of the supply, and nobody has any idea who.

Bitcoin whales

Looking beyond Nakamoto, there are plenty of wallets which contain a lot of Bitcoin. One study by the National Bureau of Economic Research outlines that the top 10,000 bitcoin investors control one-third of the total supply.

That figure is an estimate and is “likely an understatement since we cannot rule out that some of the largest addresses are controlled by the same entity”, according to the study. For example, it doesn’t include the aforementioned 5.2% of coins controlled by Nakamoto, as it cannot be known whether Nakamoto is one individual.  

Seeing as Bitcoin returned the equivalent of 230% compounded annually between 2011 and 2021, and in doing so outperformed every major financial asset class in the world, perhaps it is not surprising that a small group of early adopters control significant amounts of the supply.

A $2,000 investment in 2010 would have netted you 10,000 bitcoins, which today is worth over $26 million. The select few who got involved in those early days and held onto their stash today hold significant amounts of the supply.

Today, only 114 addresses contain 10,000 BTC or more (with exchange addresses likely some of those) and those 114 addresses contain nearly 3 million BTC, or 15.5% of the total supply.

The below table shows quite how much Bitcoin is locked up in a small number of the top addresses.

Entities that hold large amounts of Bitcoin

Branching out from individuals, there are also entities which hold massive amounts of Bitcoin.

The first to spring to mind is Michael Saylor and MicroStrategy, who own 130,000 bitcoins, 0.68% of the total supply. This is the most by any public company and some fear that should this ever hit the market, then the Bitcoin price may be dented downward, such is the quantity of bitcoins that MicroStrategy hold. 

While MicroStrategy is the public company which holds the most Bitcoin, the private Chinese company Block.one, which developed the cryptocurrency EOS, owns 140,000 bitcoins. This makes it the largest known holding by any one company. 

Final thoughts

It is true that Bitcoin’s unique fundamentals make it a uniquely decentralised asset. The way the proof-of-work mechanism functions and the fact that no insiders started with any coins (even Nakamoto had to mine that stash) have helped make this decentralised quality a reality.

But despite this decentralisation, there do exist several big holders who hold enough coins that the market could be rocked, at least in the short-term, were anything to ever happen that led to those coins hitting the market.

The scale of Bitcoin’s rise has been so staggering that some of those early casuals who bought in for pennies are now in possession of monster stacks worth millions upon millions. As for Satoshi Nakamoto’s net worth in November 2021 at the Bitcoin all-time high? A cool $70 billion, good for 15th richest person in the world.

The post Top 10,000 Bitcoin investors control one-third of the supply appeared first on CoinJournal.

Bitcoin, stocks seesaw after 0.50% ECB rate hike jolts markets

  • Bitcoin retested the $25,000 area, while S&P 500 had gained about 1% after plunging on ECB interest rate hike news.
  • The ECB on Thursday surprised with a 50 basis point rate hike.
  • Reports that JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley are looking to help First Republic Bank buoyed stocks.

Bitcoin and stocks have recovered slightly after trading lower as investors reacted to the latest monetary policy news from the European Central Bank (ECB.)

On Thursday, markets were digesting recent events around US banks and the possible ramifications to the Federal Reserve’s next move on its rate hikes when the ECB announced a surprise 50 basis points interest rate hike. Stocks reacted lower and so did the crypto market, with crypto analyst Michael van de Poppe suggesting the Fed could follow suit at its meeting next week. 

S&P 500, Bitcoin recover after ECB news

The S&P 500 staged a slight recovery, thanks to the resurgence of regional bank shares.

Despite trading down 0.7% at one point, the benchmark index was up 1% at 12:20 pm ET, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average that had initially plunged by more than 300 points, reversed and was hugging gains with just over 100 points, or 0.3% higher. Elsewhere, the Nasdaq Composite was up by 1.5%.

While US stocks have rebounded higher amid reports that banking giants JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley were coming to the aid of embattled lender First Republic Bank, concerns remain and investors continue to be cautious. 

Bitcoin toyed with resistance around $25,000 on Thursday as cryptocurrencies continued to track events around the stock market.

The flagship cryptocurrency, which traded lower earlier in the day amid the highlighted broader market downswing, showed it’s still highly correlated to equities despite last week’s spike that had some observers suggesting a rising decorrelation.

Indeed, as CoinJournal analyst Dan Ashmore argues in our deep dive published today, Bitcoin could eventually decouple from other risk assets. However, that’s an outlook that mostly doesn’t apply to the current trading scenario, with the two assets largely in lockstep.

The post Bitcoin, stocks seesaw after 0.50% ECB rate hike jolts markets appeared first on CoinJournal.

No, Bitcoin is still as correlated as ever with the stock market – A Deep Dive


Key Takeaways

  • Bitcoin’s recent surge has drawn surprise as banking sector has pulled stock market down
  • Declaring this a break in the correlation trend is a mistake, writes our Data Analyst Dan Ashmore, who says Bitcoin remains risk-on
  • Both the stock market and Bitcoin continue to trade off interest rate expectations, aside from isolated episodes of systemic risk to Bitcoin, the numbers show
  • Recent week shows a slightly softer relationship than normal, amounting to a less dramatic a less dramatic version of the price action around the FTX and Celsius collapses in 2022
  • Normal correlation bound to be resumed soon, our data shows

One of the dominant storylines over the last year or two so has been the incredibly tight relationship between Bitcoin and the stock market. 

We will get into the numbers shortly, but the mantra is that when the stock market jumps, Bitcoin jumps more. When the stock market falls, Bitcoin falls more. That is the bottom line. But is it true still true?

Some market participants are starting to think that this relationship is shifting, especially given events of the past week. The word “uncorrelated” is thrown around a lot in markets, and now some are saying Bitcoin is making progress towards that status. I’m not so sure that is correct. 

Correlation has been high since 2022 started 

Let us first look back over the price action from the start of 2022, which more or less marked the stock market peak. 

I’ll get deeper in the next section, but the best way to kick off an assessment of correlation is by the old-fashioned eye test. Let’s begin by charting Bitcoin’s returns against the Nasdaq since the start of 2022:

It is immediately clear that there is a strong pattern here. 

Before looking at correlation coefficients, by looking at the respective price action we can see that the assets have been in lockstep aside from two (visually notable) periods. The first is August 2022, when Bitcoin lagged behind the Nasdaq’s gains. It still gained, but it was outperformed by the Nasdaq – uncommon for periods of expansion. This was shortly after the contagion crisis sparked by Celsius (it filed for bankruptcy in mid-July). 

The second period of divergence that jumps out is a much more noticeable one – November 2022. As the Nasdaq surged off softer inflation readings and optimism on interest rate policy, Bitcoin fell. Not only that, but it fell dramatically, down from $20,000 to $15,000. Of course, this was thanks to Sam Bankman-Fried and the FTX collapse, a bearish shock specific to crypto, much like Celsius was. 

Let’s now graph the correlation itself. I won’t get too deep on the math, but I have used the 60-Day Pearson indicator and rolled it back to the start of 2022.  

The results more or less back up what we discussed above. For the uninitiated, a correlation of 1 means a perfect relationship (the word count of this article and the number of words I have written this month, for example) while a correlation of 0 means no relationship (such as my word count per month and the number of T-Rexs spotted in New York City). 

Celsius and FTX collapses are clear below, while the other dip occurs around the time of LUNA (the stock market also fell around this time as we transitioned to high interest rate policy).

Correlation can be misleading

This shows correlation, but not necessarily causation. My old maths teacher had a great way of explaining this difference. Shark bites and ice cream purchases may be correlated, but nobody would argue that digging into Ben and Jerries makes you more likely to be hunted by a great white shark.

Instead, there is a lurking variable. In this case, on sunnier days, people are more likely to both swim at the beach and buy ice cream, and it is the swimming rather than the ice cream that makes a shark bite more likely. Swimming is the lurking variable. 

While that example is exaggerated (shark bites are extremely rare, in case I’m arising a phobia of yours!), the point is a good one. In financial markets, we have another lurking variable. In truth, we have lots of them – there are an imaginable amount of variables that affect the stock market – but the big one this past year has been the Federal Reserve and its interest rate policy. 

It is not the stock market that is causing Bitcoin to move, it is interest rate policy causing both the stock market and Bitcoin to move. And in turn, expectations about inflation have been the key factor feeding into interest rate expectations. This is why we have seen repeatedly big movements around CPI announcements and Fed meetings. 

There is a saying, “correlations of risk assets go to 1 in times of crisis”. And when we transitioned into a new interest rate paradigm in April 2022, when it became clear inflation was rampant, that is exactly what happened. 

All risk assets sold off, including both stocks and equities. Bitcoin, being more volatile, of course sold off more. And since then, bar the aforementioned episodes, the correlation has held. 

Is the correlation falling?

The big question is whether this correlation is falling. Indeed, that is the ultimate vision for Bitcoin. An uncorrelated store of value, akin to a digital form of gold.

Some have looked at the price action of the past week or two and declared that this means we are seeing a lower correlation. But I think this is simply a smaller version of what we saw during the Celsius and FTX “decouplings”. A short-term dip in correlation in response to a specific event. 

Bitcoin sold off drastically in the wake of the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) troubles, before rebounding sharply once the US administration announced it was stepping in to guarantee deposits. 

The stock market, on the other hand, also sold off but to a far lesser degree. And then with the banking turmoil striking Europe yesterday, Bitcoin held firm while markets wobbled. The declaration was that this must mean the famous decoupling is taking place. 

I believe this is a fallacy and I think the numbers agree. 

Bitcoin first sold off aggressively because SVB had the potential to be a crisis on the scale of Celsius and FTX, as Circle, the issuer of the world’s second-biggest stablecoin, USDC, holds $3.3 billion of reserves in the bank (and the original fear was that it may hold more, before the number was clarified). 

USDC hence depegged, falling to below 90 cents on many exchanges. Obviously, a USDC collapse would have been harrowing for the industry and hence Bitcoin plummeted, falling to around $20,000. 

While SVB presented an ominous threat to financial markets as a whole, the danger within cryptocurrency was elevated because of the importance of USDC to the industry, especially following the shutdown of BUSD last month.

With 25% of Circle’s reserves in cash, there was fear of insolvency until it was clarified that only 8.25% of reserves were held in SVB, before the US administration stepped in to guarantee deposits in any case. 

Once this fear was over, Bitcoin rallied back, reversing the fall when the crisis came to light. But stocks didn’t jump to the same extent. This makes sense.  

Besides, the price action was not all that dramatic and the supposed “decoupling” was hardly drastic. European banks were hit Wednesday, but Thursday has largely seen a rebound, while on a whole, the stock market is doing just fine, showing moderate gains. 

Looking at the correlation metric, it has barely moved over a longer time frame such as 60-day, and is already bouncing back. The 30-day metric shows more movement, but as with any smaller sample size, is always more volatile and less indicative. Both metrics already appear to be bouncing back in any case.

Whatever way you swing it, a simple glance at the previously mentioned chart comparing the Nasdaq to Bitcoin is all you need to know. Bitcoin is trading like an extreme-risk asset, and that much is quite clear.

The trillion dollar question is whether this will change in the future. Can Bitcoin finally decouple from risk assets and establish itself as an uncorrelated store of value? Can it become a true hedge asset?

That may happen one day. But it hasn’t happened yet.

The post No, Bitcoin is still as correlated as ever with the stock market – A Deep Dive appeared first on CoinJournal.