bitunix

Exchange-to-Exchange Transfer Volume

Range
  • 1M1M
  • 3M3M
  • 6M6M
  • 1Y1Y
  • ALLALL
Scale
  • LinearLinear
  • LogLog
Latest
4.76K
2026-10-27 · 4,760.9078 · BTC
1D change
-23.18%
Prev. 6.2K
7D change
+25.76%
Prev. 3.79K
30D change
+140.40%
Prev. 1.98K
4Y percentile
20%
All history 37%
All-time high
137.38K
2020-03-13 · -96.53%
1Y range
884.1 – 30.03K
Since 2012-02-18
Loading data…

About this metric

What it measures

Exchange-to-Exchange Transfer Volume adds up the BTC moved on-chain from one identified exchange to another each day, in BTC. It measures gross cross-venue transfer value rather than exchange trading volume or net inflow to all exchanges combined.

How to read it

Elevated volume means more BTC is being redistributed between trading venues, potentially for liquidity, collateral or settlement. The series peaked at about 137,375 BTC on March 13, 2020, while its 2021 daily high was about 81,533 BTC; large cross-venue movements can therefore occur in very different price environments.

A large transfer may be operational and does not prove a new trade or fresh capital entering exchanges. Repeated transfers count again, and unidentified exchange addresses can affect coverage. Compare transfer count to distinguish a few large movements from frequent small ones, and net flow to assess the combined sector.

Frequency
Daily (UTC 00:00)
Asset
BTC
Type
Single value
Unit
BTC
Data since
2012-02-18
Latest data
2026-10-27
Data points
5,366

FAQ

Why is inter-exchange volume not the same as exchange trading volume?

This series counts BTC transfers confirmed on the blockchain between venues. Exchange trading volume counts executed trades, most of which settle on internal ledgers without a separate on-chain transfer.

Can high inter-exchange volume coexist with little total net flow?

Yes. When both sides are identified, one venue's outgoing BTC is another's incoming BTC. Gross transfer volume can be large while the combined exchange sector has little net inflow or outflow.

What does rising volume with falling transfer count suggest?

With consistent coverage, it means more BTC is moving through fewer transfers, so the average amount per transfer is larger. It does not reveal who initiated the movements or why.