bitunix

Supply Held by Addresses with 100–1K BTC

النطاق
  • 1M1M
  • 3M3M
  • 6M6M
  • 1Y1Y
  • ALLALL
المقياس
  • خطيخطي
  • لوغاريتميلوغاريتمي
الأحدث
5.29M
2026-11-02 · 5,287,070.881 · BTC
تغيّر 1D
+0.07%
السابق 5.28M
تغيّر 7D
+0.08%
السابق 5.28M
تغيّر 30D
+0.93%
السابق 5.24M
المئين 4Y
100%
السجل الكامل 100%
أعلى مستوى على الإطلاق
5.29M
2026-11-02 · 0.00%
نطاق 1Y
5.06M – 5.29M
منذ 2009-01-03
جارٍ تحميل البيانات…

حول هذا المقياس

ما الذي يقيسه

Supply Held by Addresses with 100–1K BTC is the sum of BTC balances at addresses in the 100–1,000 BTC interval on each day. The series is denominated in BTC and classifies individual addresses rather than grouping all wallets of one owner.

كيفية قراءته

A rising line means this large-balance layer accounts for more BTC in absolute terms; a falling line means fewer coins sit in it. The series held about 3.893 million BTC at the April 2024 halving and recorded 5.2674 million BTC on October 16, 2026. Compare with 1K–10K BTC addresses to see whether nearby large-balance layers are moving together or diverging.

An increase is not enough to identify institutional accumulation: a larger custody wallet split into several addresses can produce the same result. A higher BTC total also need not mean a higher share of all supply, since circulating supply grows; ownership and concentration require additional context.

التكرار
يومي (UTC 00:00)
الأصل
BTC
النوع
قيمة واحدة
الوحدة
BTC
البيانات منذ
2009-01-03
أحدث البيانات
2026-11-02
نقاط البيانات
6,513

الأسئلة الشائعة

Does 100–1,000 BTC identify institutional holders?

No. Balance size alone cannot distinguish individuals, custodians, exchanges or other organizations. One organization may also control addresses in several different bands.

What historical growth has this group recorded?

It held about 3.893 million BTC at the April 20, 2024 halving and reached 5.2674 million BTC on October 16, 2026. Those values show growth in the address band, without identifying the source or owners of the added balances.

Does a higher total mean Bitcoin ownership is more concentrated?

Not necessarily. You would need its share of circulating supply and information linking addresses to owners. Splitting one large wallet can lift this band while making the address distribution appear less concentrated.