[Apr 2024] Fees are HIGH, wait for opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs

[LoyceV]

I am waiting for less than 2 sat vB for my big consolidations.

Me too And more importantly: large Bitcoin companies (exchanges/casinos) are no doubt waiting too. In the past, we've seen large dumps of low-fee transactions in mempool once fees are low. It'll take a few days to confirm them all, after which they'll dump the next batch.

[1714518643]

1714518643

[1714518643]

1714518643

[1714518643]

1714518643

[1714518643]

1714518643

[1714518643]

1714518643

[philipma1957]

I started mining in 2021 and had my pool send me BTC as .0005 (or lower) as I was very skeptical of a pool "rugging" me.  

When I have made payments I did so with my Trezor, and it was using its own algorithm to determine what UTXOs to spend, I didn't understand UTXOs, so I just let Trezor do its thing.

So in November when I saw the fees had spiked I had the pool pay me when my balance hits .02 BTC.

Then I read this article about higher fees turning small UTXOs into dust. - https://jrjr.meme/to-dust-you-shall-return/#84f286e7-c306-4bf7-bcea-aa7a53393e1f-link

So now I am understanding UTXO management quite a bit too late.

I have over 100 Segwit UTXOs under .001 BTC.

I am trying to figure out the most efficient strategy to consolidate my UTXOs. I realize that no one has a crystal ball regarding fees, so let's assume the fees stay where they are now. I have questions:

1. In the first post off this thread it says this "If you have many different inputs, I suggest to consolidate them in multiple steps. Don't create a 100,000 bytes transaction with 500 inputs, but instead create many transactions with 20-ish inputs." Is this still a recommended plan? It seems that each individual consolidation has a bit of overhead which could be saved by having only 1 consolidation, and then also that the multiple resulting UTXOs will also be smaller perhaps ending up as dust themselves.

2. Is there a way in Trezor to see the size of each UTXO? Without that info, I have no idea whether a UTXO is dust at this price. I have exported the trezor info into a csv, but that doesn't give me the size of the UTXO.

3. If I do a consolidation with a very low fee hoping it happens to get picked up, and it doesn't complete, what will happen to it? How long until I can try again?

so 100 under 0.001 = under 0.1 in total which is 5000 bucks.

do a full consolidation with a high fee option of 3 sats. do not execute it .

here is an example it is way cheaper then you would pay as it is 1 or 2 getting merged not 100 edit it is 1 as   3 x 134 = 402




you can see the cost to do it all at any fee

by setting up like I did on my trezor wallet.

in my case it is 20 cents  doing 3 sats. in your case at 3 sats you would be over $200 (I think)

[dkbit98]

2. Is there a way in Trezor to see the size of each UTXO? Without that info, I have no idea whether a UTXO is dust at this price. I have exported the trezor info into a csv, but that doesn't give me the size of the UTXO.

You can't see this information in Trezor Suite app, but you can turn on coin control, select UTXO you want, and set custom fees double checked on mempool.space.
Try using this UTCO calculator that was made by Jameson Lopp to get more accurate size values:
https://jlopp.github.io/unspendable-utxo-calculator/

I am waiting. I am spending larger inputs now,  but I made an 11 sat vB tx yestertday. I am waiting for less than 2 sat vB for my big consolidations.

This is little bit utopian thinking.
It's more realistic to say that fees are more likely to go up in near future, especially with halving coming soon.
My prediction is that we wont see fees below 10 sat/vB any time soon, but I could be wrong.

[philipma1957]

2. Is there a way in Trezor to see the size of each UTXO? Without that info, I have no idea whether a UTXO is dust at this price. I have exported the trezor info into a csv, but that doesn't give me the size of the UTXO.

You can't see this information in Trezor Suite app, but you can turn on coin control, select UTXO you want, and set custom fees double checked on mempool.space.
Try using this UTCO calculator that was made by Jameson Lopp to get more accurate size values:
https://jlopp.github.io/unspendable-utxo-calculator/

I am waiting. I am spending larger inputs now,  but I made an 11 sat vB tx yestertday. I am waiting for less than 2 sat vB for my big consolidations.

This is little bit utopian thinking.
It's more realistic to say that fees are more likely to go up in near future, especially with halving coming soon.
My prediction is that we wont see fees below 10 sat/vB any time soon, but I could be wrong.

he could do ⅓ of them now.

[Danydee]

That depends on your wallet. I don't know whether or not Trezor keeps broadcasting your transaction. Currently, the mempool limit is 4.95 sat/vbyte, anything lower than that won't even broadcast. But the same link dropped from 1.8 GB to 918 MB this year, so I have high hopes we'll get a good opportunity to consolidate inputs at low fee.

I've tried about 2 ~ 3 years ago by signing tx offline and broadcasting it manually.. there was still some broadcasters that were allowing spreading it! The new transaction too doesn't show in all explorers, of course, there were only few that were displaying the new tx...

Assuming it is still working, the method would be as follows:

1/ To export the (single address) wallet and import it to a wallet that allow reusing it..

2/ Spend like ~97% of the bitcoins in a single transaction for getting back 3% to the same wallet.

3/ Finally spend the 3% with very high fees to prioritize the tx confirmation ! ? ??



Obviously it need first to verify if there is still nods that will allow broadcasting tx with fees bellow the minimum!!

[hosseinimr93]

3/ Finally spend the 3% with very high fees to prioritize the tx confirmation ! ? ??

What will you achieve by making that extra transaction?
In that way, you would have to pay fee for two transactions and you would waste more money on fee.  

Obviously it need first to verify if there is still nods that will allow broadcasting tx with fees bellow the minimum!!

Nodes can have their own settings and there should be nodes that allow you to broadcast transactions with lower fees.

[Danydee]

3/ Finally spend the 3% with very high fees to prioritize the tx confirmation ! ? ??

What will you achieve by making that extra transaction?
In that way, you would have to pay fee for two transactions and you would waste more money on fee.

First transaction fees could be set as low as 1Sat/Byte ...  the UXTO on the scond would be from the unconfirmed first Tx, so spending it with high fees is to accelerate and promote its confirmation, and its confirmation will entangle with it the confirmation of the first tx..  as the first is a parent transaction!



My bad that could work as well with client wallet that change adresses.. but needs wallet with customisable blockchain explorers to set an explorer that recognize the low fees transaction.  !

[hosseinimr93]

First transaction fees could be set as low as 1Sat/Byte ...  the UXTO on the scond would be from the unconfirmed first Tx, so spending it with high fees is to accelerate and promote its confirmation, and its confirmation will entangle with it the confirmation of the first tx..  as the first is a parent transaction!

But in this way, you would have to pay more fee. It would be better to make a single transaction with high fee.
Take note that miners would prioritize CPFP transactions based on their effective fee rate, not based on the fee rate used for the child.

The effective fee rate is equal to the total fee paid for the transactions divided by their total (virtual) size.

[Danydee]

First transaction fees could be set as low as 1Sat/Byte ...  the UXTO on the scond would be from the unconfirmed first Tx, so spending it with high fees is to accelerate and promote its confirmation, and its confirmation will entangle with it the confirmation of the first tx..  as the first is a parent transaction!

But in this way, you would have to pay more fee. It would be better to make a single transaction with high fee.

My wondering was about that case where ther'll be too much UXTOs that makes the fees too huge !!  Then the UXTO to the scond transaction will count as single input, so the fees would not be too high even if settling at maximum!

Take note that miners would prioritize CPFP transactions based on their effective fee rate, not based on the fee rate used for the child.

Maybe, but I don't think that it will be always the case!

[LoyceV]

Take note that miners would prioritize CPFP transactions based on their effective fee rate, not based on the fee rate used for the child.

Maybe, but I don't think that it will be always the case!

What hosseinimr93 says is correct. If a miner would be dumb enough to to do what you suggested, it would be massively abused. Miners prioritize profit maximization, which means they'll start with the highest number of sats per vbyte (total transaction "up chain" including parents) an go down from there.

[un_rank]

My wondering was about that case where ther'll be too much UXTOs that makes the fees too huge !!  Then the UXTO to the scond transaction will count as single input, so the fees would not be too high even if settling at maximum!

Sending multiple UTXOs in different transactions and including outputs of one into the next transaction does not reduce the fees you'll pay. It will still be a cumulative fee based on the total transaction size.
If parent transaction used a very low fee, the child tx will use a much higher fee to supplement it and make it profitable for the miner.

If you have too much UTXOs wait for a time when the feerate I know and consolidate, or use coin control and only spend few UTXOs which has majority of the amount in your wallet.

- Jay -

[Danydee]

Take note that miners would prioritize CPFP transactions based on their effective fee rate, not based on the fee rate used for the child.

Maybe, but I don't think that it will be always the case!

What hosseinimr93 says is correct. If a miner would be dumb enough to to do what you suggested, it would be massively abused. Miners prioritize profit maximization, which means they'll start with the highest number of sats per vbyte (total transaction "up chain" including parents) an go down from there.

Anyway it worth to give it a try !

If someone is owning a too heavy wallet to move it the worst that can happen is that the transactions get canceled after 14 days! 

[Cricktor]

Anyway it worth to give it a try !

If someone is owning a too heavy wallet to move it the worst that can happen is that the transactions get canceled after 14 days! 

No, if you insist in what you proposed, you're simply wasting some coins that could've been better invested in a more successful fee level for just one transaction only. A CPFP chain, smallest be just two transactions as you suggested, will always be more expensive than a single transaction with proper fees.

If someone owns a too heavy wallet he'd be smart enough to pay a fee level that has at least a reasonable chance to be taken by a miner. There's no guarantee a transaction gets purged after 14 days. I could've configured my own node to use a mempool size of 3GB and a transaction keep period of 12 months in my mempool. Dooh!

[Danydee]

Anyway it worth to give it a try !

If someone is owning a too heavy wallet to move it the worst that can happen is that the transactions get canceled after 14 days! 

No, if you insist in what you proposed, you're simply wasting some coins that could've been better invested in a more successful fee level for just one transaction only. A CPFP chain, smallest be just two transactions as you suggested, will always be more expensive than a single transaction with proper fees.

If someone owns a too heavy wallet he'd be smart enough to pay a fee level that has at least a reasonable chance to be taken by a miner. There's no guarantee a transaction gets purged after 14 days. I could've configured my own node to use a mempool size of 3GB and a transaction keep period of 12 months in my mempool. Dooh!

I don't think so as the transaction would be mainly ignored.. and at the worst as the TXs will still remain unconfirmed you could just spend it again when you want!

[LoyceV]

Anyway it worth to give it a try !

You'd be wasting your time.

If someone is owning a too heavy wallet to move it the worst that can happen is that the transactions get canceled after 14 days!  

Transactions don't "get canceled". Once broadcasted, each node can do whatever they want with it. Some will drop it, and your own wallet may drop it (depending on it's default, Bitcoin Core for instance keeps it). But some nodes may keep your transaction forever, which means as long as all the inputs are valid, it can eventually get confirmed.

I don't think so as the transaction would be mainly ignored.. and at the worst as the TXs will still remain unconfirmed you could just spend it again when you want!

Spending at least one of the inputs is the only way to make sure your older transaction becomes invalid.

Let's stop giving incorrect advice in my thread. Miners don't fall for the "trick" to apply CPFP on a large low-fee transaction if the effective fee is low. There's no point trying.

[NotATether]

If someone is owning a too heavy wallet to move it the worst that can happen is that the transactions get canceled after 14 days!  

Transactions don't "get canceled". Once broadcasted, each node can do whatever they want with it. Some will drop it, and your own wallet may drop it (depending on it's default, Bitcoin Core for instance keeps it). But some nodes may keep your transaction forever, which means as long as all the inputs are valid, it can eventually get confirmed.

Bitcoin Core by default only keeps your transaction in its mempool for 336 hours (14 days) before kicking it out:

  -mempoolexpiry=<n>
       Do not keep transactions in the mempool longer than <n> hours (default:
       336)

But I'm sure you already knew that.

The chance that you'll find a node with a custom -mempoolexpiry is very low. But that's a good thing actually, because the sooner your low-fee transaction gets evicted, the sooner you can use the inputs to create a better transaction.

[LoyceV]

Bitcoin Core by default only keeps your transaction in its mempool for 336 hours (14 days) before kicking it out:

 -mempoolexpiry=<n>
       Do not keep transactions in the mempool longer than <n> hours (default:
       336)

But I'm sure you already knew that.

I knew that for other transactions, but I meant a transaction made by my own wallet in Bitcoin Core. Did that change? I remember (years ago) I had an unconfirmed zero-fee transaction for months, until I double spent it. I don't think it ever stopped broadcasting it.

[LoyceV]

Watching Mempool.space's Mempool Goggles is mesmerizing:

On the live site, the rectangles move all the time.

In this case, the biggest transaction is this one: someone pays $800 to spam 80,000 vbytes.
The highlighted rectangles are consolidations. This one (I don't think it shows in the screenshot above) pays $850 to consolidate 887 inputs into one. According to Walletexplorer, it belongs to Kraken.

Johoe's 2 week overview shows a build up of 12 sat/vbyte transactions. I think those are planned consolidations:


All in all, the last chance for cheap consolidations was in Oktober last year. Currently, it costs about 10 times more. The spam attack got less, but as shown above, people still waste massive amounts of money on wasting block space. Add the bull run and it's very hard to predict how fees will develop in the future.

[bitmover]

All in all, the last chance for cheap consolidations was in Oktober last year. Currently, it costs about 10 times more. The spam attack got less, but as shown above, people still waste massive amounts of money on wasting block space. Add the bull run and it's very hard to predict how fees will develop in the future.

Nobody can predict when will the fees get lower. This is a fact, as the price volatility is very high now.

But as soon as the bear market comes, the fees will most likely get lower again. And the bear market will come in the next months/year, we all should be prepared for it.

In the bear market, ordinals will disappear, exchanges will have lower volume (which means less people sending coins), etc...

I will save my consolidations for the bear market. I will make only transactions that I really need now.

[philipma1957]

All in all, the last chance for cheap consolidations was in Oktober last year. Currently, it costs about 10 times more. The spam attack got less, but as shown above, people still waste massive amounts of money on wasting block space. Add the bull run and it's very hard to predict how fees will develop in the future.

Nobody can predict when will the fees get lower. This is a fact, as the price volatility is very high now.

But as soon as the bear market comes, the fees will most likely get lower again. And the bear market will come in the next months/year, we all should be prepared for it.

In the bear market, ordinals will disappear, exchanges will have lower volume (which means less people sending coins), etc...

I will save my consolidations for the bear market. I will make only transactions that I really need now.

why do you say the bear comes in 2024 or 2025

it should come in 2026

fees will suck for the next 18-20 months