Bitcoin Wealth Distribution (Bitcoinica data)

[zhoutong]

This simple research was done on Bitcoinica clients that have traded at least once and kept a positive account net value. It's generally consistent with overall Bitcoin wealth distribution.

Perhaps this data is useful for people who are curious about Bitcoinica clients' trading activity.

% Population      % Wealth
10.0%   0.0%
20.1%   0.0%
30.1%   0.0%
40.1%   0.0%
50.1%   0.1%
60.2%   0.3%
70.2%   0.8%
80.2%   2.2%
85.1%   3.7%
90.0%   7.3%
92.0%   10.1%
95.1%   17.7%
95.9%   20.4%
97.7%   32.0%
97.9%   34.3%
98.2%   36.8%
98.5%   41.0%
98.7%   45.4%
99.0%   50.0%
99.2%   55.7%
99.5%   65.2%
99.7%   80.5%
100.0%   100.0%

Gini Coefficient = 0.87709

We welcome other exchanges/e-wallets to publish stats like this as well.

[evoorhees]

So 1% of the people have half the wealth!??!  That's not FAIR!!!!

::grabs pitchfork and heads for Singapore::

[slush]

We should Occupy Bitcoin

[Jonathan Ryan Owens]

We should Occupy Bitcoin

Here's some hand signals we can adapt?

[GoWest]

That sort of ties in with my data.... http://www.thebitcointrader.com/2011/10/is-it-time-to-occupy-bitcoin-street.html

[zhoutong]

So 1% of the people have half the wealth!??!  That's not FAIR!!!!

::grabs pitchfork and heads for Singapore::

In the whole Bitcoin world, it's the same - 1% owns half.

[finway]

Same the whole picture.

[oOoOo]

In the whole Bitcoin world, it's the same - 1% owns half.

It's not the same.

In the Bitcoin World 1% may own 50% of all coins, however, unlike in the "Real World" they didn't acquire those 50% through swindles, frauds and crimes.

.

[2_Thumbs_Up]

In the whole Bitcoin world, it's the same - 1% owns half.

When bitcoin was one day old, 1 person owned 100%. I'd say the market seems to be evening things out.

[wareen]

I think such comparisons are a bit moot at this point. The price of Bitcoin is so low that almost everybody can be a part of the 1% if he/she wants to. There are simply not that many people wanting to hold Bitcoin as an investment. Also, if the price would rise, I'd expect some of the larger holders to cash out.

As I keep saying: Bitcoin won't make the inequalities of this world to magically disappear!
But as Bitcoin does not have a mechanism built in that constantly worsens this inequality, the long term prospects are surely much better than with traditional currencies.

[Cryptoman]

The other message you could take away from this data is that only 1% of the people are careless enough to leave large amounts of BTC on a trading site.

[BitcoinMint.US]

So it's safe to say that 50% of bitcoinica's users lost all their money?

[cypherdoc]

So 1% of the people have half the wealth!??!  That's not FAIR!!!!

::grabs pitchfork and heads for Singapore::

In the whole Bitcoin world, it's the same - 1% owns half.

D*mn that 1%!  they should be Zhoutawnged!

[FreeMoney]

So it's safe to say that 50% of bitcoinica's users lost all their money?

Yeah, most people lose or withdraw all their money, it's not that interesting.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

In the whole Bitcoin world, it's the same - 1% owns half.

When bitcoin was one day old, 1 person owned 100%. I'd say the market seems to be evening things out.

LOL, perfect!

[Aldun]

Wow, that's quite interesting to see. That would mean 0.3% actually owns 20% of the Bitcoins if I'm reading the statistics right?

[Andrew Vorobyov]

The other message you could take away from this data is that only 1% of the people are careless enough to leave large amounts of BTC on a trading site.

True.. Lack of guarantees

[evoorhees]

The proper way to read "wealth distribution" statistics is simply to replace the word "own" with the word "produce," for in a market economy the money one owns he (typically) had to produce something for, in order to obtain that money. The worker produces labor and trades it. The merchant produces transportation and logistics and trades it. The manufacturer produces physical items. The cook produces dinner, the politician produces problems, etc.

One's wealth measured in dollars is thus a rough proxy measurement of what they produced, as valued by the person who previously owned that money and traded it in return.

So, properly read, a stat like "the top 1% own 50% of the wealth" should be understood as "the top 1% produced 50% of the wealth"... and then with that understanding it quite quickly shows the folly of policies which punish, tax, and otherwise hinder such people. It also illustrates the sheer productive uselessness of vast swaths of the population.

[ElectricMucus]

So, properly read, a stat like "the top 1% own 50% of the wealth" should be understood as "the top 1% produced 50% of the wealth"... and then with that understanding it quite quickly shows the folly of policies which punish, tax, and otherwise hinder such people. It also illustrates the sheer productive uselessness of vast swaths of the population.

Not under a system which permits usury and 'employment'

That's irrelevant for bitcoin though. But be warned: Angy mobs normally lynch people who express this kind of attitude publicly...

[evoorhees]

So, properly read, a stat like "the top 1% own 50% of the wealth" should be understood as "the top 1% produced 50% of the wealth"... and then with that understanding it quite quickly shows the folly of policies which punish, tax, and otherwise hinder such people. It also illustrates the sheer productive uselessness of vast swaths of the population.

Not under a system which permits usury and 'employment'

That's irrelevant for bitcoin though. But be warned: Angy mobs normally lynch people who express this kind of attitude publicly...

Hehehehe you'd prefer a system which prohibited employment and forbid one man from offering his wealth to another man at a mutually-agreed price for the opportunity cost of the usage of that wealth?