The “whale awakening” in figures
In July 2025, analysts observed eight Satoshi-era wallets, each containing 10,000 BTC, transfer their holdings for the first time in 14 years.
Overall, 80,000 Bitcoin (BTC) (approximately $8.6 billion at that time) shifted out of long-dormant addresses in a single instance of activity on the blockchain. Investigators traced these coins back to 2011, when they were acquired for less than $210,000 total, indicating a return of nearly 4,000,000%.
In July 2025, two separate wallets, each holding 10,000 BTC and inactive since 2011, were also activated. With Bitcoin priced at around $108,000, each address suddenly boasted over $1 billion in value.
Data from Lookonchain and Whale Alert show that over 62,800 BTC left wallets older than seven years in early to mid-2025, more than double the amount during the same time frame in 2024, as reported by MarketWatch.
Indeed, this whale awakening is characterized by the movement of very old coins, a gradual decline in long-term holder balances from record highs, and a shift in the typical whale profile.
For regular users, this raises important questions: Who truly owns Bitcoin, how concentrated is that ownership, and how do dormant balances interact with liquidity when they become active?
Did you know? One recent study revealed that just 83 wallets collectively hold around 11.2% of all BTC supply, and the top four wallets alone control about 3.23%.
How analysts gauge whales and dormancy
Bitcoin’s architecture makes dormancy detectable. Each coin resides in a UTXO, or unspent transaction output, with a timestamp indicating when it last moved, creating a ledger that functions as a timeline of coin “ages.”
A fundamental tool is HODL Waves. Developed by Dhruv Bansal at Unchained Capital and later formalized by Glassnode, HODL Waves categorizes coins into age bands (e.g., 1 day-1 week, 1-3 months, 1-2 years, and 5+ years). It visually represents the thickness of each age band over time, akin to geological layers showing trends in holding and spending behavior.
Within that chart are metrics related to coin age:
“Coin days destroyed” (CDD) and similar metrics, utilized by CryptoQuant, Bitbo, and others, multiply the quantity of coins moved by their dormancy period, granting extra significance to very old coins.
Santiment’s “age consumed” and “dormant circulation” models apply similar principles across various assets. Significant spikes often signal the spending of long-held coins, as outlined in Santiment Academy.
To differentiate whales from typical traders, analytics companies classify holders based on both holding duration and entity type.
For instance, Glassnode’s long-term holder (LTH) framework categorizes coins as long-term once held for approximately 155 days, reflecting behavioral thresholds in historical data presented in Glassnode Insights and documentation.
These metrics are entity-adjusted. Clustering algorithms estimate which addresses belong to the same real-world entity before evaluating balances and ages.
Did you know? Different onchain analytics firms set varying whale thresholds. Some focus on entities holding 1,000+ BTC, while others examine ranges such as 100-10,000 BTC.
All these tools are descriptive. They provide insights into how concentrated holdings are, the ages of that supply, and when old coins become active again. They do not, however, instruct anyone on how to manage their funds.
Insights from 2024-2025 on whale reactivation
With this toolkit in mind, the central question is whether this cycle is fundamentally different or merely louder in terms of dollar activity.
Onchain series point to a significant shift in onchain behavior:
Glassnode’s long-term holder supply, tracking coins held for around five months or more, reached record levels in late 2024 before starting to decline into 2025.
Concurrently, its illiquid supply metric ceased its upward trend and began to fall, suggesting that some of the most stubborn long-term coins are finally shifting after years of net accumulation.
Meanwhile, HODL Wave charts indicate a slight dip in the 5+ year supply band, while the 6-12 month and 1-2 year bands have become more populated.
This pattern typically emerges when ancient coins are spent once and subsequently settle into newer wallets. A portion of the older layer is removed and reallocated as fresh ownership without necessarily going directly to exchanges.
High-profile instances align with this trend:
The Satoshi-era clusters that released tens of thousands of BTC after more than a decade of inactivity are part of a steady increase in reactivated seven-to-10-year-old coins.
Numerous “sleeping beauty” wallets from 2011 to 2013, each containing 1,000-10,000 BTC, have emerged in dashboards throughout 2024 and 2025, supporting the notion of an awakening of early cycle supply rather than mere isolated incidents.
Importantly, the movement of dormant coins does not necessarily imply selling. Firms specializing in address tagging can often recognize exchange wallets, crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and over-the-counter (OTC) entities. In various high-profile cases, dormant coins transitioned into other self-custody addresses, multisig arrangements, or internal restructuring objectives without an immediate surge in exchange inflows tied to those specific movements.
In some instances, movements coincided with legal disputes, tax situations, or corporate actions, suggesting custody reshuffles rather than short-term trading.
A cautious interpretation of these patterns suggests:
A record large base of long-term holders has accumulated over past cycles
A visible yet controlled drawdown of that base
A gradual distribution of extremely old coins into newer ownership.
This combination is what analysts refer to as a whale awakening, a period in which historical supply shifts gradually and can be tracked in real time onchain.
Potential reasons for current whale activity
Onchain data cannot convey intentions, but it can illustrate where whale behavior aligns with clear incentives and pressures. Several explanations are consistent with the evidence and analyst insights.
Profit-taking during high liquidity
Glassnode and other sources indicate that long-term holder supply frequently peaks during or just before new all-time highs, then shifts into a distribution phase. At these junctures, realized capitalization and market value to realized value (MVRV), concepts defined by Coin Metrics and popularized by Nic Carter and colleagues, show that long-term holders enjoy substantial unrealized gains.
For early adopters who have retained their holdings for seven to 10 years, even minor sales could represent significant historical profits for long-term holders without fully exiting Bitcoin.
Rebalancing of portfolios and venues
Some dormant coins have been traced into institutional custody, multisig setups, or ETF custodians, signaling a transition from private cold storage to regulated entities. Cross-chain flow trackers have also detected old BTC moving alongside new investments in ETH or other prominent assets, indicating internal reallocations rather than total exits.
Triggers from legal and administrative factors
Tax events, legal actions, inheritance arrangements, and corporate reorganizations can all necessitate the mobilization of coins that have remained untouched for a decade. It’s not unusual for whale transactions to coincide with legal disputes or regulatory measures, showcasing how court orders and compliance requirements can activate dormant balances even when the investment strategy remains unchanged.
Structural effects related to age
As noted by Unchained Capital’s “Geology of Lost Coins” framework notes, each cycle contributes to a thicker layer of long-dormant coins. Some are genuinely lost, while others belong to individuals, businesses, or estates.
Over time, more of those holders experience moments of rebalancing, succession, or custody enhancements, leading to more awakenings each year, even if they still constitute a small fraction of total supply.
It’s important to note that none of these factors exclude others, and none can be definitively proven from the ledger alone. Onchain data can specify which coins were transferred and their destinations, but it cannot disclose the rationale behind the transactions.
Did you know? As of mid-2025, credible onchain estimates suggest that 2.3 million-3.7 million BTC, accounting for about 18% of the total supply, is irretrievably lost due to forgotten keys, destroyed wallets, or otherwise inaccessible addresses.
How everyday users should interpret the whale awakening
For most individuals, whale metrics are best regarded as tools for transparency and context.
When encountering headlines about whales selling, contextual inquiries often arise:
Are coins moving to exchange wallets, ETFs, OTC desks, or primarily into new self-custody and multisig addresses?
Does the activity align with broader trends in long-term holder supply, illiquid supply, and age bands, or is it an isolated anomaly?
Are metrics like CDD, age consumed, spent output profit ratio, and MVRV indicating a regime change, or are they simply responding to a fleeting surge of old coins changing hands?
It’s also wise to keep in mind the limits of attribution:
Labels like “exchange,” “ETF,” “government,” or “whale” rely on heuristics and clustering. Different analytics firms may classify the same entity differently, and some substantial holders remain unlabeled.
Any narrative surrounding who is moving coins is, at best, an informed approximation constructed atop the raw ledger.
What whale metrics cannot accomplish is reliably forecasting what a specific holder intends next or guaranteeing that historical patterns of dormancy and reactivation will persist. Developing foundational knowledge of onchain concepts, coupled with independent research, a clear understanding of personal risk tolerance, and professional advice where appropriate, is a more dependable approach than attempting to predict why significant holders move their coins.
