Fewer Bitcoin Moves From Vintage Wallets in October—A Signal to Hold?

From Oct. 1 to Oct. 31, 2024, a total of 1,970.401 $BTC was spent from vintage wallets originally created between 2010 and 2017, according to the latest metrics.

Dormant Bitcoin Wallets Show Restraint

In September, long-quiet bitcoin wallets suddenly woke up, releasing 4,066.81 $BTC back into the crypto stream. While bitcoin ($BTC) prices rose by 10.76% through October, fewer vintage bitcoins were on the move. Data shows that 1,970.401 $BTC—worth around $137 million—transferred to fresh addresses, hinting at possible sales.

According to btcparser.com, a total of 64 such transactions occurred, with most of the sum stemming from addresses dating back to 2011. Notably, seven legacy Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) addresses from that year spent a combined 442.76 $BTC. Meanwhile, just one transaction popped up from 2010, with a single party moving 50 $BTC from a wallet created on July 12.

In 2012, just two bitcoin transactions surfaced, one of them moving 399 $BTC—valued at $27.7 million. Legacy addresses from 2013 showed ten transactions, but only 108.42 $BTC changed hands. Sleeping bitcoin wallets from 2014 woke up to transfer 249.21 $BTC over eight separate transactions. In 2015, there were just four notable transactions, modestly moving 80.001 $BTC.

As far as wallets from 2016, October saw 13 transactions, shifting 188.27 dormant bitcoins. Meanwhile, 2017 ranked second last month for $BTC spending, with 440.73 $BTC moved across 19 unique transactions. October saw fewer moves from dormant bitcoin wallets, even with prices on the rise—hinting that early adopters may be holding back intentionally.

Rather than a quick sell-off, these veteran holders seem to be calculating the potential for future gains, taking a patient approach that balances their faith in bitcoin’s economic promise with a measured eye on timing. They say, “bitcoin is going to the moon,” but with these early coins hitting the market, each seller seems to have their own unique lunar price in mind.

Another intriguing detail: the transfers from 2011 and 2012 appeared linked, possibly pointing to the same entity cashing out funds via Bitstamp.