Entity-Adjusted LTH Realized Loss to Exchanges
- 1M1M
- 3M3M
- 6M6M
- 1Y1Y
- ALLALL
- LineárisLineáris
- LogaritmikusLogaritmikus
A mutatóról
Mit mér
Entity-Adjusted LTH Realized Loss to Exchanges measures the USD shortfall to acquisition cost on loss-making deposits attributed to the long-term holder cohort, generally around 155 days or older. It filters identified internal transfers and counts the loss component of deposits, not their full value.
Hogyan értelmezzük
Higher readings show a larger amount of loss-bearing older capital moving toward tracked exchanges, where coins can become available for trading or collateral. The series reached about $434 million on May 19, 2022, that year's high. Lower readings mean less such loss is reaching these venues, not necessarily less total loss across long-term holders.
Depositing BTC does not establish that it was sold. Address labels, entity grouping and cohort attribution all affect coverage, and deposits miss losses realized through other routes. Compare the series with its own history; do not assume it reconciles exactly with network-wide LTH loss totals.
- Gyakoriság
- Napi (UTC 00:00)
- Eszköz
- BTC
- Kategória
- On-chain mutatók
- Típus
- Egyetlen érték
- Egység
- USD
- Adatok kezdete
- 2011-08-17
- Legfrissebb adatok
- 2026-10-28
- Adatpontok
- 5,552
GYIK
Is LTH Realized Loss to Exchanges the value of BTC deposited?
No. It records only the gap below attributed acquisition cost on deposits made at a loss. A large deposit near breakeven may therefore contribute very little to this metric.
Does an LTH loss deposit prove capitulation?
It shows that older holdings with an attributed loss reached an exchange. They might be intended for trading, collateral or custody, so the deposit alone cannot establish a forced exit or a completed sale.
Why does this exchange loss series begin in 2011?
The available series starts on August 17, 2011, later than the network-wide LTH loss history. Its coverage is limited to identified exchange-bound transfers; missing earlier coverage should not be read as proof that no deposits occurred.
