EconoMonitor

Great Graphic: Bitcoin Concentration

The emergence of the bitcoin is a big story of 2013.   One currency strategist from a large bank says fair value is $1300.  Another currency strategist has suggested that central banks don’t want to be the last to use it and may put it into reserves, which would challenge the US dollar.
I remain skeptical of both of those claims.  That a fair value can be assessed is incredulous.  It has no intrinsic value.  It generates no income/earnings stream. It has limited utility, that just got even smaller when China’s largest internet platform indicated it would no longer facilitate the use of bitcoins.    That the bitcoin (or any so-called digital currency) will be a reserve asset is incredible in the sense that it lacks credibility. The market is too small (overall size and trading volume), too shallow (no bonds, let alone seasoned bond market, or interest bearing securitie), too volatile and does not improve, existing currencies (as it too is not backed by gold or silver).  The bitcoin should not even be spoken of in the same breath as central bank reserves.
This Great Graphic was posted on Business Insider by Rob Wile.  It  shows the distribution of bitcoin ownership, as estimated by a Finnish entrepreneur who is active in the bitcoin network.  He, in turn, used data provided bybitcoinrichlist.com, that analyzed the master ledger of bitcoin (called the block chain).  The reporter, Rob Wile, then checked that estimate with one of the earliest designers of bitcoin applications, who generally agreed.
As Dec 3,  with about 12 mln bitcoins having been “mined” and assuming $1000 a coin, this is what the distribution of ownership looks like.  The 47 largest holders, each with at least $10 mln of bitcoins, accounted for nearly 29% of the ownership.  Another 21.5% is accounted for by 880 people, with at least $1 mln in bitcoins.  This means that although as many as a million people may have bitcoins or fractions thereof, 927 people own half of all the bitcoins then available.
The next 10,000 own 25%, leaving every one else with about 25%.  Note too that some 500,000 bitcoins have either been confiscated by governments or the owner’s password has been lost (and apparently the missing coins are in bitcoin heaven).
Such a concentrated ownership speaks to limitations on the ability of bitcoins to reach a critical mass in terms of the network effect required to be money.   Not only are there quite limited number of businesses that will accept bitcoins (some US stores are not even equipped to accept food stamp debit cards issued by the government, let alone digital money), but the ownership structure itself limits the widespread use of bitcoins.
A critical imbalance to the recent economic crisis was the concentration of income and wealth.  The bitcoin phenomenon has replicated the disparity of the social order from which it arose.  Clearly, as more transactions take place on the internet, there is some need to improve payments.  Sending money abroad, such as worker remittances, is also duly expensive.  Bitcoins and digital money is a wake up call to the credit card companies, consumer units of banks, and the like.  They will respond to the competitive challenge.
Green stamps, anyone ?

This piece is cross-posted from Marc to Market with permission.

3 Responses to “Great Graphic: Bitcoin Concentration”

ohitunaDecember 13th, 2013 at 12:15 pm

I'd take this graphic with a grain of salt. Alot of the 47 slice and likely a bit of the next two are really "lost". Think about this: The coins of the first 186 blocks—basically the first 186 bunches of 50 btc minted–have been transferred 0 times, the next couple thousand blocks are largely the same story, for a number of reasons these are lost or will never be spent. second, when bitcoin "crashed" from 30$ to 3$ without making gains back for a while, I know of alot of users that didn't bother backing up wallets, left coins in now defunct online wallets and sites. similarly, alot of btc has been taken into possession by the FBI. Alot of those supposed 47 don't have access to those coins, will likely never spend most or all (i.e. Satoshi l, Hal Finney, types) or are holders of stolen btc from sites like sheep online or inputs.io(I'm probley getting the names wrong) and these users likely will avoid cashing out large amounts at a time(think bank robbbers).
The wealth concentration is likely much more natural. Does anyone really think that those who got thousands of bitcoins when they cost next to nothing or could be mines easily wouldn't have already sold at least the bulk of there holdings at $30 in 2011, $200 in April, $1000 now? Look at recent data for btc days destroyed and for April and back in 2011 and you can get an idea that yes people that aren't rich won't pass up on the opportunity to live comfortably, generally speaking.

pladohDecember 17th, 2013 at 6:19 pm

"That a fair value can be assessed is incredulous. It has no intrinsic value. It generates no income/earnings stream. It has limited utility" compare that to our current virtual fiat currency (US DOLLAR) that is factually inflationary and backed by nothing. Since bitcoin is deflationary it will increase in value since supply is limited. The federal reserve is literally stealing our value from our money by increasing the supply. My bitcoin have earned me several hundred thousand dollars so you are clearly wrong in your second point. Limited utility? sooo… are you implying that money is useful as an alternative to toilet paper? or as fire starter? because that does have bitcoin beat. except for the fact that the people mining bitcoin have ammassed 9,000,000 GH/s of hashing power, a number that trumps many of the top supercomputers available combined. So bitcoin has proved to be more useful than US currency on total yield of useful resources. and to tackle a huge misconception in your article approximately 5% of USD exists in actual bills, the rest is all digital. digital currency is already something our society depends on. Bitcoin just has created an alternative digital currency, one that doesn't rob you every time you try to store it or retrieve it.

pladohDecember 17th, 2013 at 7:59 pm

"That a fair value can be assessed is incredulous. It has no intrinsic value. It generates no income/earnings stream. It has limited utility" compare that to our current virtual fiat currency (US DOLLAR) that is factually inflationary and backed by nothing. Since bitcoin is deflationary it will increase in value since supply is limited. The federal reserve is literally stealing our value from our money by increasing the supply. My bitcoin have earned me several hundred thousand dollars so you are clearly wrong in your second point. Limited utility? sooo… are you implying that money is useful as an alternative to toilet paper? or as fire starter? because that does have bitcoin beat. except for the fact that the people mining bitcoin have ammassed 9,000,000 GH/s of hashing power

Most Read | Featured | Popular

Blogger Spotlight

Otaviano Canuto

Otaviano Canuto is Senior Advisor on BRICS Economies in the Development Economics Department, World Bank, a new position established by President Kim to bring a fresh research focus to this increasingly critical area. He also has an extensive academic background, serving as Professor of Economics at the University of Sao Paulo and University of Campinas (UNICAMP) in Brazil.

Economics Blog Aggregator

Our favorite economics blogs aggregated.