A $1 billion Bitcoin (BTC) transaction has become conspicuous not because of its size but because its sender spent far too much on fees.
Someone could have sent 94K BTC for $35
Social media users were guessing at the origin and destination of the funds on Sept. 6, which involved 94,504 BTC ($1.018 billion).
According to Twitter-based monitoring resource Whale Alert, the transaction did not involve known wallets or those belonging to a specific cryptocurrency-related organization, such as an exchange.
“Institutions building inventory for their market-making needs going forward,” commented Max Keiser on the giant transaction. He added:
“This = effective ‘put’ on the BTC price at $9,000 (as I’ve been reporting for several yrs now). Ie, institutions are net-buyers of any BTC that shows up at $9k. Risk/reward now for buyers is excellent.”
Its sender, who may have been sending funds to themselves, nonetheless selected a very high fee rate.
At 480 satoshis per byte, the fee totalled around $700.
Bitcoin fees can vary depending on how quickly a sender wishes a transaction to be processed by miners. Many wallets allow manual fee-setting; the more money paid, the fewer blocks a user must wait for a transaction confirmation.
Under current conditions, getting a transaction included in the next block — maximum ten minutes — is just 23 satoshis per byte, meaning the $1 billion sender overpaid 20 times. The funds could have settled in around 10 minutes paying a fee of just $35.
Bitcoin’s low fees era continues
Bitcoin fees have remained low in 2019 despite the cryptocurrency’s rapid rise in price.
As Cointelegraph reported, the situation marks a stark contrast to 2017, when Bitcoin circled all-time highs and fees grew in step. At the time, developers of projects such as the controversial Bitcoin Cash (BCH) aimed to take users away with the promise of lower fees.
The total hash rate of Bitcoin — the amount of computing power involved in the mining process — continues to reach new highs, and is now more than 1000% larger than in September 2017.
Mystery 94K BTC Transaction Becomes Richest Non-Exchange Address
The recipient wallet of the massive 94,504 Bitcoin ($1.031 billion) transaction is the top richest Bitcoin address that is not reportedly associated with any crypto-related company, according to data from monitoring resource Bitinfocharts.
A third of the coins came from Huobi
According to data by London-based blockchain data provider TokenAnalyst, at least one third of the mysterious transaction directly originates from Huobi exchange. Another analyst, blockchain data and metrics firm Glassnode tweeted that at least 73,000 BTC from the transaction originate from Huobi.
According to an earlier tweet by Crypto Herpes Cat, at least two Bitcoin wallets involved in the notable transaction belong to Huobi. One of the specified wallets is directly involved in the transaction.
Cointelegraph has reached out to Huobi for comments, to which the exchange’s representative responded:
“As we don’t generally disclose information about transactions, we can only confirm that this transfer of funds did not involve Huobi’s own funds and that, with exchanges as big as ours, large transactions like this one can and do occur from time to time. Our security team has been monitoring the situation carefully and has found no evidence of any compromises in account security. All client funds remain safe and secure.”
Rumors run wild
As reported earlier today, crypto monitoring resource Whale Alert stated that the much-discussed transaction did not involve any known wallets or those belonging to any specific crypto exchange or any crypto-related firm.
Some analysts suggested that funds may be tied to institutional trading platform Bakkt, which starts accepting client deposits today.
Meanwhile, Huobi, which is ranked 20th biggest crypto exchange by adjusted daily trading volume at press time, was reported to have seen the highest number of withdrawals from the alleged crypto Ponzi scheme PlusToken by Aug. 23.
Huobi did not respond to Cointelegraph’s inquiry about the transfer by press time.