bitunix

Transfer Volume in Loss

Range
  • 1M1M
  • 3M3M
  • 6M6M
  • 1Y1Y
  • ALLALL
Scale
  • LinearLinear
  • LogLog
Latest
68.92K
2026-10-27 · 68,916.0992 · BTC
1D change
-5.55%
Prev. 72.96K
7D change
+13.37%
Prev. 60.79K
30D change
+389.60%
Prev. 14.08K
4Y percentile
60%
All history 35%
All-time high
3.6M
2011-12-07 · -98.09%
1Y range
7.89K – 368.33K
Since 2009-01-03
Loading data…

About this metric

What it measures

Transfer Volume in Loss sums the BTC moved each day at a price below the price when those coins last moved on-chain. That prior movement price acts as a cost proxy; the result is a BTC amount rather than a dollar loss or a share of supply.

How to read it

Higher readings show more below-cost BTC moving, while lower readings indicate less loss-classified movement. The 2022 high was about 1.40 million BTC on June 13, compared with about 726,294 BTC at the 2020 high on March 12. Such readings describe intense loss-side activity without establishing that a market low has formed.

This series is not labeled entity-adjusted: self-transfers and wallet operations can affect both volume and the last-move cost proxy. The same BTC may move repeatedly, and a price rebound can reduce the loss category without reducing total activity. Compare with profitable volume and an entity-adjusted view before interpreting the scale.

Frequency
Daily (UTC 00:00)
Asset
BTC
Type
Single value
Unit
BTC
Data since
2009-01-03
Latest data
2026-10-27
Data points
6,507

FAQ

Does transfer volume in loss show how many dollars Bitcoin holders lost?

No. It sums the BTC amount moved below its previous on-chain price. Dollar losses depend on the difference between the previous and current prices for each amount.

How does loss transfer volume differ from supply in loss?

Loss transfer volume is activity during a day. Supply in loss is the stock of coins whose cost proxy is above current price, including coins that did not move.

Is this the same as entity-adjusted LTH or STH loss volume?

No. Those series apply an ownership adjustment and split activity into holding cohorts. This broader last-move-based series should not be treated as their directly interchangeable total.