Segwit Adoption. I looked at some data, and we are not there yet.

[bitmover]

We only need data since 02/26/2018 (Bitcoin Core segwit release date).

I only notice this now: SegWit was implemented on August 23, 2017. Why use Feb 26 (a couple months later)?

This was a mistake in my first post, corrected later on:

I stripped block data before block 481824 (segwit activation)

By 2017-08-24 (the day block 481824 was mined ) there were:

But from my sources it is  2017-08-24 01:05:01

Anyway, that doesn't make much of difference...

And there was still  a block with 2992 legacy transactions (and zero segwit) in 2020!

I made a summary per day already. I can create one per block, but it takes some time so I'll only do it if someone's going to use it.

No need for one per block, as I used your other post to get data from each block.

[1714145670]

1714145670

[1714145670]

1714145670

[tranthidung]

The increases of values are confirmed by box plots. In the same period, whilst the increases in BTC add counts (reached peak in May) are not significantly over 3 types of address, the rises in address values are very significantly and noticeable. The peak of address values (1-address type, specifically) in 2020 so far was hit in September. It began the rise since August and with the amazing breakout of BTC I think the new peak can be hit in October. Let's wait time to confirm it.

Bech32 addresses are less affected by bitcoin rises (both in counts and values). People still have favorite in Legacy addresses to store their bitcoin and it can be explained by the fact that most of people store their bitcoin on exchangers, not on their own non-custodial wallets (my assumption only).

Two plots are other confirmations for your pie charts in OP.  

[tranthidung]

You can see differences among 3 years (for address count and address values over 3 types of addresses): 2018, 2019 and 2020 (not yet completed)

• In 2018
  
  • Address count: 1-address decreased over months, and the highest peak was in January 2018 and gradually fell after that. In contrast, the 3-address rose over months and reached its peak in November.
  • Address value: almost same trends. 1-address was high in first half of 2018, then fell significantly in the second half. 3-address increased over months but with less significance compares to address-count.
• In 2019
  
  • Address count: Both 1- and 3-address increased the first half (with peaks were around May) and decreased in the second half. Bech32-address increased stably over months.
  • Address value: In this year, the 3-address type is dominant in address value with 2 highest peaks in January and June. It is very different than rest 2 years (2018 and 2020)

In 2018

In 2019

[BTMBitcoinVN]

A small data point "out of the field":

The BTM department of BitcoinVN announced in a recent tweet that all their current Bitcoin ATMs have been upgraded to enable SegWit deposits and withdrawals from their machines.


Native SegWit addresses can be identified that they commonly begin with “bc1…” at the start of the alphanumeric string.

https://news.bitcoinvn.io/bitcoin-atm-saigon-upgraded-segwit/?lang=en

We have upgraded all of our current fleet to utilize native Bech32 addresses 

Especially since Bitcoin ATM users often just transfer smaller amounts of funds the savings in tx fees should be quite noticeable as we enter the next bull market (in Dec 2017 the peak tx fee one unfortunate customer had to pay was over 100$  ).

[tranthidung]

A small data point "out of the field":

The BTM department of BitcoinVN announced in a recent tweet that all their current Bitcoin ATMs have been upgraded to enable SegWit deposits and withdrawals from their machines.


Native SegWit addresses can be identified that they commonly begin with “bc1…” at the start of the alphanumeric string.

https://news.bitcoinvn.io/bitcoin-atm-saigon-upgraded-segwit/?lang=en

We have upgraded all of our current fleet to utilize native Bech32 addresses  

Especially since Bitcoin ATM users often just transfer smaller amounts of funds the savings in tx fees should be quite noticeable as we enter the next bull market (in Dec 2017 the peak tx fee one unfortunate customer had to pay was over 100$   ).

I know you meant this terrible period that I was in too. The time-series plot is for median statistics (that already exclude min, max and outlier values), not for maximum so you can imagine how those spikes look like if I use Maximum statistics and plot them.

To avoid derailing the thread, I invite you to read Bitcoin transaction fees (feer per KB - in USD) with median, outliers, plots

Your statement can be verified by plots above. Segwit adopters are mostly use the address type for smaller transactions but as said it does not solely because of them, exchangers and merchants have their roles here as well.

[tranthidung]

About Bech32-address, it has upwards trend in count and value over last 3 years (plots show that trend -- see in median and interquartile range, the vertical line and box, respectively). Pay your attention on axis-scales that are different over 3 years.

In 2018

In 2019

In 2020 (10 months)

[Wind_FURY]

Obviously the more software wallets, like Electrum, and the more exchanges integrate and support Bech32 as the default, the more of its usage trajectory goes up.

Don't listen to the FUD.

[NotATether]

There is no reason to use legacy. I have been using bech32 nearly since it got added into Electrum. The incentive is there, you pay a tiny little bit less in transaction fees. Could this be some exchange that keep being the bulk users still with outdated systems in place? Maybe the pools as well?

There is one big reason why people still use legacy addresses, because legacy signatures are standardized across all clients and implementations, while segwit signed messages aren’t. P2WSH and P2WPKH signatures don’t have an standard that’s implemented by everyone yet, so each client uses its own incompatible format of segwit signatures. This results in each client being unable to verify segwit signatures made by other clients and they are poorly written to print that the signed message is invalid, even though it’s perfectly valid.

For example the other day I made a signed message from a segwit address in Electrum to give to someone, but none of the online message tools would verify the signature, they all said it was invalid because it turns out they only support legacy addresses.

[Carlton Banks]

There is one big reason why people still use legacy addresses, because legacy signatures are standardized across all clients and implementations, while segwit signed messages aren’t.

I don't think that's exactly a "big" reason, most users don't need to prove ownership of funds at any address (other than by sending a transaction from the address, of course). And many probably aren't aware that it's possible (or even what it means)

There is a developing standard (BIP322), but it may not be finalized for a few weeks/months yet. It was recently changed (simplified, in fact), so the new proposal will be reviewed amongst Bitcoin developers before it's ready to be implemented into wallet/client software.

[OcTradism]

For example the other day I made a signed message from a segwit address in Electrum to give to someone, but none of the online message tools would verify the signature, they all said it was invalid because it turns out they only support legacy addresses.

You can check this topic and try to verify your message (Segwit address and not in Electrum walelt) with Brainwallet. With few steps to convert address and you can verify it with Brainwallet.

How to verify SegWit signature with Brainwallet ?

Electrum wallet uses a different standard and you can not apply the guide. Message that is signed by Segwit address in Electrum wallet can only be verified by Electrum wallet. About possibility to Sign messages in Segwit address in future

[pooya87]

Electrum wallet uses a different standard and you can not apply the guide.

it is not a different standard, it is the same thing that has been used forever with just changing the first byte (recovery byte) to a different value. when verifying signatures you don't even have to pay attention to that byte if you wish to (it is just a helper).
the "standard" is also outlined in BIP-137 which is a very old one too.

[Kakmakr]

I have to be honest with you, many of my friends have bitcoins gifted to them on Paper wallets (Legacy addresses) that would most probably never be shifted to SegWit addresses. These people do not see the need to do that and those coins are stored for long-term (Cold Storage) and not daily use, so they see no benefit in doing this now.

A lot of these people are not Bitcoin enthusiasts like myself, so for them to do this ...is a huge risk. I offered to help with this, but they say there is no immediate need to do this. I agree with them from their perspective... Why mess with something that is working and that are secure.

It would be different if they planned to use those coins frequently ... because tx's would be confirmed much quicker and also much cheaper. 

[bitmover]

I have to be honest with you, many of my friends have bitcoins gifted to them on Paper wallets (Legacy addresses) that would most probably never be shifted to SegWit addresses. These people do not see the need to do that and those coins are stored for long-term (Cold Storage) and not daily use, so they see no benefit in doing this now.

Your Friends coins are not considered in the last statistics,  as we are considering only recent transactions.
I agree with you and your friends:they shouldn't move their coins if they do not need.

[tranthidung]

I made a summary per day already. I can create one per block, but it takes some time so I'll only do it if someone's going to use it.

Hi LoyceV,

I download the dataset from there https://loyce.club/blockdata/blockdata.txt.gz. There is no variable for address types in the dataset.

Would you mind sharing how did you process that original dataset in order to retrieve another one for Segwit adoption, please.

• https://loyce.club/other/daily_transaction_data.txt
• It's almost one year since the last update. I would prefer to update the analysis for Segwit adoption

[LoyceV]

Would you mind sharing how did you process that original dataset in order to retrieve another one for Segwit adoption, please.

I had to search for what exactly I did. The good news is I found back the script I used.
The bad news: I used "outputs" from Bitcoin block data (550 GB): inputs, outputs and transactions, but my VPS provider disappeared months ago, so it's not up to date and not easily available either. I have an (outdated) backup on a computer that's currently powered off.

Update: My "outputs" data is complete again (133 GB), and I'm now counting daily transactions.
Results when it's ready: loyce.club/other/daily_transaction_data2.txt.

[tranthidung]

Update: My "outputs" data is complete again (133 GB), and I'm now counting daily transactions.
Results when it's ready: loyce.club/other/daily_transaction_data2.txt.

Thank you LoyceV for your time to update the dataset.  

It's my update, after one year.

• Data source: https://loyce.club/other/daily_transaction_data2.txt
• The Bech32-address count grows very well since January 2021. You can see this growth on both time-series charts or box plots.
• Box plots: the median --vertical line inside box -- in December 2020 is less than 150,000 but since January 2021, it has never been below 150,000, very good growth.
• The Bech32-address value has similar growth. Its median (10^12) grows from about 22 in December 2020 to almost above 30 in 8 months of 2021.
• More impressively, this growth is opposite with the decreases from 1- and 3-address since January 2021, especially since May 2021. It means, Bech32-address actually takes over 1- and 3-address types. Its growth does not only come from the bigger adoption of Bitcoin
• For 2018 - 2019 analytics, check them there

Time series

Address count

Address value (10^12)

[LoyceV]

Time series

The orange ("1-address") bars aren't visible for the last couple of months. Can you improve this, for instance by using a line instead of bars in the graph?

The good news is: Segwit is now really taking over native addresses!

[tranthidung]

The orange ("1-address") bars aren't visible for the last couple of months. Can you improve this, for instance by using a line instead of bars in the graph?

Ok, there you go

The good news is: Segwit is now really taking over native addresses!

Segwit is on its way to really take over native 2 other types. It's just the beginning.

[LoyceV]

Ok, there you go

It didn't help: can you make the line 1 pixel in width?

[tranthidung]

It didn't help: can you make the line 1 pixel in width?

I am not familiar with it. I looks a little better if I narrow down the window to 2018 - 2021