Global Bitcoin Ownership

[Smartvirus]

Bitcoin will always be volatile, but the volatility will only be reduced. We like or we do not like, this is what will happen as bitcoin is getting more mature and it has been what is happening since when bitcoin was created, there has always been reducing volatility. To get 10x right now can be up to or more than 10 years, but we are still going there.

That’s actually a good thing as, a lot of lads do see volatility to be a problem, given how swift Bitcoin can pump and how swift it could also dump. With an increase in its overall value and popularity and the amount of Bitcoin that has being mined and actively circulation, it’s only normal for volatility to drop and we are going to see it drop even more in the coming years. It makes ownership a lot more possible and reassuring for faint hands.

[KingsDen]

Quoting to get the image in my profile, although I reduced the size to help load time.

According to data provided by Alexes Nakamoto as of this month's 3rd, the image below ^{(that's if the information in the image is correct though)} depicts the total amount of Bitcoin held worldwide by institutions, CEX, individuals, lost BTC, etc.

Source

It is interesting to know that Strategy owns bitcoin more than BlackRock. I am simply not aware.

Meanwhile, what is the validity of the information above. How are these figures gotten, especially not related to ETF and public companies.
So, China still holds BTC. Interesting.

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Does it mean that if strategy owns upto 51% of bitcoin supply, they can attack the network? Please, this is not true. 51% attack is no longer feasible, we are talking about quantum computer attack now.

[Marvelockg]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Strategy and other investors still occupying the larger ration of holders tells of the power of individual investors and speaks to the fact that it's totally a false narrative when people think that bitcoin will go down to zero. These are core systems that are already in place that will prevent that from ever happening.

Strategy might be an institution but that's what being an intentional investor entails. Bitcoin is open for an interested investor and whoever is strong enough to key in really big stands to enjoy staying invested in bitcoin real good.

[BitBrainers]

If there is more demand for free Bitcoins than for ETF-held Bitcoins, then there will be significant outflows because you would be able to make more profit with self-custodied Bitcoins.

This is the self-correcting mechanism nobody talks about. The market itself puts a ceiling on custodial concentration. When too much supply gets locked in ETFs, the premium on freely circulating Bitcoin rises, ETF investors notice the gap, they exit to chase the better return, and the concentration reverses. Bitcoin does not need regulators to solve this. The incentive structure solves it automatically.

[CryptoYar]

[...]

Possibility of Bitcoin dropping to zero is more of fairytale daily. When MicroStrategy and other large institutions are spending billions on it, they are not gambling. They have their research and consider Bitcoin long term reserve. These big holders form reliable price bottom, as they are not interested in quick get rich schemes, but in way to hedge against crumbling fiat system. These strong hands continue to strengthen network going forward while they are still part of game.

I think that arrival of these large institutions has affected everybody game. It is no longer just pastime for tech enthusiasts, it is financial approach. I think institutions could be too much for some but it is necessary to have some level of stability for market. Yes, door is open to all, but those who realize importance of being intentional, like these large companies, will really benefit in next decade. Too many big dogs have vested interest in Bitcoin success to allow it to fail.

[X-ray]

It is interesting to know that Strategy owns bitcoin more than BlackRock. I am simply not aware.

Their entire premise of the company growing to multi billion valuation from a software company that's on the brink of bankruptcy is literally by holding bitcoin, they keep looping their capital over and over again until their asset become so many and almost 100% of them are Bitcoin.

The crazy thing is the ETF is catching up. I guess the ETF was really selling like a hotcake.

[DiMarxist]

According to data provided by Alexes Nakamoto as of this month's 3rd, the image below ^{(that's if the information in the image is correct though)} depicts the total amount of Bitcoin held worldwide by institutions, CEX, individuals, lost BTC, etc.

Source

This indicates that self-custody is still winning despite the number of people investing in STRC and others because of the dividends they will receive.
Many Bitcoiners may be unaware that President Donald Trump's enthusiasm for Bitcoin is not coincidental; rather, it stems from his family's experience of being debanked and antagonized by the traditional banking system when he began his presidential campaign.
This debanking caused him to shift to pro-crypto motivate in 2024. After winning the election, President Donald Trump backed Bitcoin because he realized the true value of assets that were not under state control due to lawsuits and frozen assets he experience suring his campaign,  which is why he supported BTC after he won the election.
This shows that if BTC is not outside the regulatory design, it will be just another regular asset, and I hope what I said here is enough to change the mindset of some Bitcoiners who participate in the STRC and other ETF investments or use a custodial platform as storage, know one of the dangers they will experience in the future.

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Waoo going by the pictures about seeing here the amount of Bitcoin left to be mined is gradually going coming to an end, because it's less than 5% remaining. From what am seeing we may be gradually seeing an end to mining and when that eventually happens there is going to be an hike in the price of Bitcoin. This is because Bitcoin will become more scarce and important because the value will rise because Bitcoin will not become scarce in terms of circulations.

[PocketAurora]

If the data is accurate, it shows how widely distributed Bitcoin ownership has become, but I would still treat it as an estimate. A lot of Bitcoin ownership data is based on wallet analysis, and one person or company can control many addresses. Also, lost BTC is impossible to measure exactly. So it’s useful for general understanding, but not something I’d take as 100% exact. 

[AprilioMP]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

What came to mind when I read this question was that it’s indeed the large corporations and major investors who are capable of making large-scale purchases. Most others simply buy within the limits of the disposable income they have left after their basic needs are met.
When all the remaining Bitcoin is bought up by large companies like MicroStrategy and other organizations, regular buyers making small purchases will feel it’s unfair, but that can’t be blamed on them.

[abaeze]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Bitcoin is most secure in self custody, so depositing BTC in corporate custody means entering a centralize system. Since decentralization is the biggest strength of Bitcoin, and if these things are compromised due to the influence of government or major political parties or others, then it actually becomes a kind of threat to the existence of Bitcoin. When large amounts of BTC are deposited with large ETFs or custodians, there is a possibility of government pressure or seizure, so centralized custody creates a risk. Although it is not currently possible to control 51% of the 21million Bitcoin, but a question remains for the future. However BTC accumulation and celebration is not bad and I think it's a kind of Bitcoin marketing but for ordinaries there are security risks.

[Dunamisx]

The global bitcoin ownership lies in the ends of every one of us because we are the one with the highest rate of holdings when it comes to bitcoin assets, let's forget about institutions and government or any other entity that tends to possess Bitcoin,  instead we should consider the rate of adoption and the number of people that are holding bitcoin across the world, all these are part of what makes bitcoin not to be centralized because it is serving it purpose for the people to use across the globe.

[Hamza2424]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Bro, it is clear from the chart that no one could hold 51% of the BTC supply alone. By the way, I was not afraid before, and to be honest, I never thought about it very seriously because it is not a threat. Although if all the institutions, like public companies, start buying and they hold more than 50% combined, then that can be a threat because manipulation would become too easy for them. But until they are honest, the holders would enjoy the profits.

So reap the fruits and enjoy them until they reach there because it is going to take them some time. But could they even reach there? I don't think so because the math here is telling me they won't reach that point. They eventually have to sell. Also, these companies are providing shares to buyers who are also individuals.

[Franklyn-wood]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

If companies are buying bitcoin, it is good. It is making bitcoin scarce and it can reduce bitcoin volatile so that more people can see bitcoin as a store of value. Although it will be good if more companies are buying so that it will not concentrate more as few companies asset.

You can see how countries are buying gold, they will still buy bitcoin like that. We are moving closer to the day this will begin rapidly.

If companies can invest in Bitcoin, then every individuals should endeavor to also make there own investments no matter how small it is, as this is what a lot of people say that it is too late for them to buy BTC and enjoy from all the wonderful benefits it has to offer..
For reputable organization to invest there money in Bitcoin shows there are lots of benefits to gain from it with time. There need to be no much campaign with all the information gotten from reliable source.
Talking about gold is good, yet Bitcoin have a lot to offer that gold compare to other forms of asset out there

[BlackHatCoiner]

We are hoping for Bitcoin to be less volatile so companies can join but is this really what we want only to get the attention from companies?  Is a stable Bitcoin really better than a volatile one?

Bitcoin is not going to become stable just because companies join. These companies will increase the liquidity, and thus make it less volatile, but even at market capitalization of $20 trillion, Bitcoin would still swing at 5-10% annually, depending on the fiat currency debasement.

For people who see Bitcoin as what it truly is, hard money that restores the long-term thinking on civilization, this decreased volatility is not a downside at all. It's just a lot better if you join now, because the potential gains are far more than the risks. That's why it's considered an asymmetrical bet. Once Bitcoin has eaten a large piece of the stock market, real estate market and bond market, it will be considered a safe heaven to put your wealth into.


The way I view the current environment is that Bitcoin is just the best use of your money, if you want to grow your money into more money. This is only a temporary phase that cannot last forever, because without investments, like opening a restaurant or funding a startup, there is no economic output. If all people understood the returns of Bitcoin, and liquidated their capital to buy bitcoin, we would see less and less goods and services being offered and therefore, the purchasing power of Bitcoin would decline. So obviously, we cannot imagine a scenario where Bitcoin is forever a lucrative financial opportunity to grow your money.

At some point, when liquidity of Bitcoin has increased at above $20-50 trillion, using your bitcoin to fund a business becomes rational again. But as long as people do not awake to the reality that fiat money destroys civilization, and the alternative to that is Bitcoin, then Bitcoin will remain a very lucrative opportunity. There is just not a business idea as good as shutting down central banks!

[Muba20]

My question now is, do will we still need to be afraid that 51% of BTC could end up in the custody of MicroStrategy/other ETF organizations since Strategy is raising billions of dollars through their STRC dividend offer to investors to buy more Bitcoin almost every 2 months (funny enough, some Bitcoiners are celebrating their accumulation)?

Companies are buying more Bitcoin and the general public is gaining more confidence in Bitcoin. In the future, when more companies express interest in Bitcoin, Bitcoin will become more expensive, and the general public will also be more interested in Bitcoin. In this way, Bitcoin is building trust among the public. Therefore, I must say that the more companies come to Bitcoin, It will be more stronger. Now if Bitcoin is controlled by a few companies, when more companies start buying Bitcoin, no single company will be able to control Bitcoin. Moreover, the amount of Bitcoin held by the general public is not small, so it would not be right to think that a few institutions will only control Bitcoin. It is true that if an institution can control a large portion of the total Bitcoin, then it can have some control, but it will never be able to do so completely.