For much of this month, bitcoin have traded around the mid $60,000s. That’s how cute it is.
What’s interesting is an evolving split in coin ownership that could shape what happens next.
Data from Santiment shows that the number of wallets holding less than 0.1 BTC, a level typically associated with retail investors, has increased by 2.5% since the largest cryptocurrency hit record highs in October. The growth has pushed the so-called shrimp’s share of the supply to the highest since mid-2024.
In practice, however, it is the larger holders known as whales and sharks who tend to set the tone for price direction. Those investors, with wallets of between 10 and 10,000 BTC, went the other way, falling about 0.8%.
It’s the kind of split that tends to produce choppy, frustrating price action rather than pure trends.
Retail provides a floor and can fuel short-term momentum. Contests that stick around require bigger players who are prepared to buy whatever is on offer.
The discrepancy is particularly notable because the picture looked different just a few weeks ago.
After bitcoin cratered toward $60,000 on Feb. 5 — down more than 50% from its October peak — Glassnode’s Accumulation Trend Score rose to 0.68, the strongest broad-based reading since late November, CoinDesk reported earlier this month.
Glassnode’s metric measures the relative strength of accumulation across different wallet sizes by taking into account both unit size and the amount of BTC accumulated over the past 15 days. A score closer to 1 signals accumulation, while a score closer to 0 indicates distribution.
During the flash, the 10-to-100 BTC cohort was the most aggressive dip buyer, and the data suggested that the market was shifting from capitulation to something more in sync.
Santiment’s broader lens complicates that reading. Its 10-to-10,000 BTC band captures a much wider cross-section of large holders than Glassnode’s dip-buying cohort, and across this range, net positioning since October remains negative.
One way to reconcile the two: Mid-sized wallets may have really bought the panic, while the largest holders continued to distribute to each recovery, pulling the total down.
This matters because bitcoin does not need retail to emerge. Retail is already here.
What it needs is for the distribution from large wallets to stop, or better yet, reverse. Without it, any convention risks being sold out by the very cohort that must ensure a structural demand if it is to succeed.
The shrimp do their part. They are waiting for the whales to come along.
