Spent Volume in Loss: Long- vs Short-Term Holders
- 1M1M
- 3M3M
- 6M6M
- 1Y1Y
- ALLALL
- ValueValue
- ShareShare
About this metric
What it measures
Spent Volume in Loss: Long- vs Short-Term Holders counts BTC spent below previous last-move cost and splits the volume at about 155 days of coin age. Long-term holders and Short-term holders show the respective daily BTC amounts, while Total combines them without weighting by the dollar loss.
How to read it
A rise in Short-term holders points to underwater turnover in recently moved supply; a rise in Long-term holders shows older supply being transferred below cost. The long-term series peaked near 242,945 BTC on November 28, 2014, while the short-term peak was about 4.09 million BTC on June 16, 2011. Their very different histories make within-cohort comparisons more useful than one shared volume threshold.
The figures do not count unique holders or measure their loss depth, and repeated spending can inflate volume. The age cutoff classifies coins rather than owners' intentions. Internal transfers can be recorded as below-cost spending, so compare the pattern with realized USD losses and broader activity before attributing it to capitulation.
- Frequency
- Daily (UTC 00:00)
- Asset
- BTC
- Category
- Cohorts
- Type
- Breakdown
- Unit
- BTC
- Data since
- 2009-01-12
- Latest data
- 2026-10-27
FAQ
Does more STH loss volume mean short-term holders lost more money?
Not necessarily. This chart counts BTC, so many coins moving just below cost can exceed a smaller amount moved at a deep loss. USD Realized Loss by holder cohort measures the financial shortfall.
Why can LTH loss volume rise months after a price high?
Coins can reach the roughly 155-day threshold while remaining underwater. If they then move below their previous cost, the volume is attributed to long-term holders even if the owner originally intended a short holding period.
How do the two holder groups relate to Total?
Their daily loss volumes sum to Total, apart from display rounding. Each qualifies only coins spent below cost; profitable transfers by either cohort are left out.
