Spent Volume Aged 3y–5y
- 1M1M
- 3M3M
- 6M6M
- 1Y1Y
- ALLALL
- LineárisLineáris
- LogaritmikusLogaritmikus
A mutatóról
Mit mér
Spent Volume Aged 3y–5y measures the BTC amount spent each day from outputs last moved three to five years earlier. It tracks reactivation of mature outputs in BTC per day, whether the transfer changes ownership or merely changes wallets.
Hogyan értelmezzük
A spike means a substantial amount from this mature age band became active; quiet periods indicate limited spending from that pool. The historical maximum was about 179,600 BTC on December 4, 2018, whereas the 2020 maximum was only about 6,784 BTC. Activity at this age can be highly episodic, so a single burst carries less information about the broader cohort than a sustained change.
Three to five years can span much of a halving cycle, but it does not prove that the same person held through that entire period. Pooled custody, wallet migrations and a few large outputs can shape the total. History before the band could exist consists of structural zeros, lowering full-history percentile benchmarks.
- Gyakoriság
- Napi (UTC 00:00)
- Eszköz
- BTC
- Kategória
- On-chain mutatók
- Típus
- Egyetlen érték
- Egység
- BTC
- Adatok kezdete
- 2009-01-12
- Legfrissebb adatok
- 2026-10-28
- Adatpontok
- 6,499
GYIK
Does 3y–5y spent volume track coins held through a full halving cycle?
The age range overlaps the roughly four-year interval between halvings, but output age alone does not establish investor identity or intent. Some outputs qualify after less than a full cycle, and custodial balances can represent many users.
Why can activity from mature coins be concentrated in a single day?
A large output held for years can be spent in one transaction, or a custodian can reorganize several old outputs together. The daily amount does not say how many independent holders acted.
How do early zeros affect the historical percentile?
No output could be three years old before 2012, and the early years contribute many zero observations. A full-history percentile therefore compares recent activity with a period when this age segment could not yet exist, so it can overstate how unusual a recent value is.
