Total Number of Bitcoin Addresses with at least 1 Satoshi

[prophetx]

anyone know what the total number is as of today? is there a website tracking this?

[pereira4]

anyone know what the total number is as of today? is there a website tracking this?

I don't think there is a way to exactly know this, but on this website you can get some interesting info on addresses:

http://www.bitcoinrichlist.com/

It's not very accurate I think, but I cant find anything else.

[Lauda]

Picture taken from:

http://www.bitcoinrichlist.com/

As far as the '1 satoshi' part is concerned, counting that would be useless even if there was an effective way to do so. This is due to the fact that this is dust (actually even less than dust per this definition). Definition:

A transaction output is considered dust when the cost of spending it is close to its value.

[tobacco123]

Therefore, the total number of addresses with amount > 0 is 136,897,703. If on average each user has 136 addresses with balance, then we will have about 1 million users.

However, I guess most of the addressees with 0-0.001 BTC belongs to users who try bitcoin and then left. Therefore, we will end up with 3,489,495 address with more than 0.001, which assume belong to serious users. If each user has 10 addresses, we will have about 300k bitcoiners.

[alyssa85]

I don't think anyone is tracking total number of addresses with coins (or even total used addresses, some of which have no coins now).

Blockchain.info tracks number of unique addresses used per day:

https://blockchain.info/charts/n-unique-addresses

About 398,000 addresses are used per day

(As an aside, the above metric is showing an interesting drop starting in March 2016 - no idea what is causing that)

[KenR]

Picture taken from:

http://www.bitcoinrichlist.com/

As far as the '1 satoshi' part is concerned, counting that would be useless even if there was an effective way to do so. This is due to the fact that this is dust (actually even less than dust per this definition). Definition:

A transaction output is considered dust when the cost of spending it is close to its value.

That image however is difficult to understand,those 97% of addresses are from the total number of bitcoin addresses generated or the addresses in the same range IE 0.00-0.01 ? That means I should be able to track any number of addresses containing a amount which I intend to search for ?

[Blind Legs Parker]

(As an aside, the above metric is showing an interesting drop starting in March 2016 - no idea what is causing that)

My 2 satoshis: maybe it's linked to the fact that the price of bitcoin was stagnating at that moment.

[Lauda]

That image however is difficult to understand,those 97% of addresses are from the total number of bitcoin addresses generated or the addresses in the same range IE 0.00-0.01 ?

Nothing difficult to understand. 97% of the total addresses generated have between 0 and 0.001 Bitcoins on them. Just take a closer look on the website.

That means I should be able to track any number of addresses containing a amount which I intend to search for ?

Depends on how you implement the search.

[BitcoinSupremo]

97% of all the addresses have less than 0.002 BTC in them? Wow I must be filthy rich then, taking into consideration this website and if the fact is truly true that 97% of the addresses hold on them less than 0.002 BTC this fact is amazingly shocking.

[Amph]

97% of all the addresses have less than 0.002 BTC in them? Wow I must be filthy rich then, taking into consideration this website and if the fact is truly true that 97% of the addresses hold on them less than 0.002 BTC this fact is amazingly shocking.

it's not a good thing, the distribution in the bitcoin world is amazingly bad, but still better than the one out there, from fiat money

if it is still that bad it also mean that those with high amount of coins are still sitting on the same amount of coins, this also lead us to think that they always buy back, which is good

[mcb1221]

Total Number of Bitcoin Addresses with at least 1 Satoshi

If that will be the case then i think spending the amount will cost much more than the amount that is there in the wallet.

[ATguy]

97% of all the addresses have less than 0.002 BTC in them? Wow I must be filthy rich then, taking into consideration this website and if the fact is truly true that 97% of the addresses hold on them less than 0.002 BTC this fact is amazingly shocking.

it's not a good thing, the distribution in the bitcoin world is amazingly bad, but still better than the one out there, from fiat money

One address does not represent one person. For example if you have 10 BTC total you might have few address in the range 1-10 BTC, tens in the range 0.01-1 BTC and bit more under 0.01 BTC. This happens because of change address, or because you might use different addresses to track from where you received Bitcoins.

But if everyone just used one address (like was popular on blockchain info), it would be much easier to analyze, but then you loose privacy if you use just one address.

Still, so much 0-0.001 is surprising, I guess someone might sending right over dust amounts to many addresses to increase utxo (unspent transaction outputs) size of the database, thus stress testing Bitcoin.

[aso118]

97% of all the addresses have less than 0.002 BTC in them? Wow I must be filthy rich then, taking into consideration this website and if the fact is truly true that 97% of the addresses hold on them less than 0.002 BTC this fact is amazingly shocking.

If bitcoins are spread across addresses (as they should be), then this doesn't give an idea of the total number of coins held by a person.
I for one have my coins in multiple addresses / wallets.

[alyssa85]

(As an aside, the above metric is showing an interesting drop starting in March 2016 - no idea what is causing that)

My 2 satoshis: maybe it's linked to the fact that the price of bitcoin was stagnating at that moment.

Well the price is rising now - but the number of unique addresses used per day hasn't risen to what it was at the start of the year. perhaps people are just keeping their coins on exchanges and no longer moving them to their own wallets.

[Boosterious]

Picture taken from:

http://www.bitcoinrichlist.com/

As far as the '1 satoshi' part is concerned, counting that would be useless even if there was an effective way to do so. This is due to the fact that this is dust (actually even less than dust per this definition). Definition:

A transaction output is considered dust when the cost of spending it is close to its value.

so,percentage of bitcoin address up to 97% ?really? and then how many bitcoin address left?
i dont understand with that stats,any help will apreciated.

[Amph]

97% of all the addresses have less than 0.002 BTC in them? Wow I must be filthy rich then, taking into consideration this website and if the fact is truly true that 97% of the addresses hold on them less than 0.002 BTC this fact is amazingly shocking.

it's not a good thing, the distribution in the bitcoin world is amazingly bad, but still better than the one out there, from fiat money

One address does not represent one person. For example if you have 10 BTC total you might have few address in the range 1-10 BTC, tens in the range 0.01-1 BTC and bit more under 0.01 BTC. This happens because of change address, or because you might use different addresses to track from where you received Bitcoins.

But if everyone just used one address (like was popular on blockchain info), it would be much easier to analyze, but then you loose privacy if you use just one address.

Still, so much 0-0.001 is surprising, I guess someone might sending right over dust amounts to many addresses to increase utxo (unspent transaction outputs) size of the database, thus stress testing Bitcoin.

unless it's an exchange that address rapresent at best a group of people, which still represent a very bad distribution

also you are talking about 1 person having many address in your example, which is another thing

[Nimbulan]

Picture taken from:

http://www.bitcoinrichlist.com/

As far as the '1 satoshi' part is concerned, counting that would be useless even if there was an effective way to do so. This is due to the fact that this is dust (actually even less than dust per this definition). Definition:

A transaction output is considered dust when the cost of spending it is close to its value.

thats some interesting statistics to be honest i have never seen something like that to be honest, its impressive to know that so much addresses are with just 0.001 amount of bticoins max

i think that there are not a lot of people that actually use addresses that have over 0.05 bitcoins because most wallets are used for just dust transactions and nothing else