Cryptocurrencies have not made it to the mainstream in the real sense. And, in the current scenario we are able to see that there is nothing called a safe haven asset. For now, it is good to have cryptocurrency a part of being a diversification element in the investment portfolio.

Frisco dAnconia, President, Africa Blockchain University tweeted an open concern: Will cryptocurrencies be a safe haven asset post-pandemic?

Sydney Ifergan responded stating: The world will need cash for the post-pandemic from my point of view we are doing a back step with crypto and getting a bit away from the real mass adoption.

To speak the truth, it seems like Bread is the safe haven for now. Post pandemic, there will be a need to establish an overall cooperation between government, taxes, and businesses to set the business sail well past the storm and getting back to normal.

Managing a pandemic using decentralized blockchain technology can enhance the richness and reliability of information like contact tracing and other stuff. However, when it comes to distributing funds, we are truly wondering because neither complete decentralization nor complete centralization would help. It just needs to be a mix of both. There is nothing called a one fit solution for all and we will forever need to tweak solutions and bridge solutions from two different worlds.

Sydney Ifergan opined, Cryptocurrency is going to make it to places and nations. We need to recollect how Nicolas Maduro rolled out the first cryptocurrency that is functioning and state backed. However, it is not going to happen during the Covid-19 pandemic for other nations.

Cryptocurrency cannot be called a completely free market thing. It is meant to lower the cost of transactions and to improve the speed of cross border transactions.

There needs to be a control system in place to ensure bad actors dont dominate the race. However, the control system should not be that which eats up the users themselves and that is the reason for why we need things decentralized and immutable. The decentralized and immutable situations are not about control, but are about true facts sustained as is. Any kind of manipulation is recorded and therefore we will be able to work with true data.

Some things like the pandemic need central control and a strategized approach. No system is completely fool proof. We need to strike a balance between the best of both worlds. We need to see if Venezuela survives with crypto despite the sanctions! That might be the first ever use case we are looking at if it wins with Venezuela- the story begins.

Go here to read the rest:
Will Cryptocurrency Be a Safe Haven Asset Post Covid-19 Pandemic - The Cryptocurrency Analytics

Apr 05, 2020 at 09:30 // News

For the past few years, YouTube has had a policy of banning and even deleting channels promoting, analyzing, or talking about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. While the platform itself states they are trying to protect their users against scams, some community members say it much resembles ordinary censorship.

For instance, in an operation dubbed crypto-purge, YouTube has managed to ban a number of videos citing rules breach. Among others, this operation affected a blogger named Chris Dunn who had over 200,000 subscribers. Coinidol.com, a world blockchain outlet, reported that Chris told his subscribers it was the right time for the public to start using a decentralized web, for he actually didnt breach anything, and the ban was nothing but a manifestation of hostility towards the crypto community.

Other channels such as Ivan on Tech and Cryptocurrency News Channel were also not spared, and their owners showed their concerns claiming that their videos were deleted for no good reasons, However, YouTube seemed to be fully satisfied with the warnings it sent to these two channels via the strike notices.

YouTube argues its decision to bring down these channels is reasonable because scammers are continuously taking advantage of the community. For instance, recently a group of fraudsters have started making fake live-stream activities illegally using celebrities names including Elon Musk and Daniel Craig.

Usually, such schemes are used to attract a users attention and make fraudulent schemes look more reliable. As a result, people trust projects that involve famous people and give away their money more easily.

While the above case seems to be a good argument to protect YouTubes policy, their actions towards the other cryptocurrency channels mentioned seem to look like censorship. Some channels simply try to raise awareness of people and educate them on blockchain and cryptocurrencies without promoting any projects or schemes. So, in this case, YouTubes actions might be interpreted as hostility towards the community.

The policy to ban such content has triggered many digital currency maniacs to seek safe haven in decentralized alternatives to YouTube so they can bypass censorship and distribute their content. Bloggers make money off their content, so banning it causes them financial losses. Naturally, no one wants that.

On April 1, a YouTube channel named Bitcoin for Beginners uploaded a video review on some available decentralized alternatives. Among the considerations were the usability, track records as well as the user interface of these alternatives. But the main advantage of such platforms is their decentralized nature. Thus, one can upload ones content without the fear of being banned as no one else can have access to it.

In his video, the author has mentioned the platforms LBRY, Dtube, Bitchute, PeerTube and BitTube as reliable and decentralized alternatives for all those considering to quit YouTube.

Link:
YouTube Scares Off Cryptocurrency Supporters by Banning their Content - Coin Idol

Atari has a troubled history. While the company was the driving force behind the early days of the gaming industry, theyve struggled since then.

Theyve recently tried to branch out into various areas. Atari has a hotel chain in the works, which Im sure will definitely still be happening in this pandemic. But their lousiest idea to date has to be their newest venture.

Atari has just launched a cryptocurrency casino. What could possibly go wrong?

Has Atari completely lost their minds? Its one thing to try and push out a modern VCS system. Its quite another thing to try and run hotels and an online casino with no history of doing either of those things.

Atari isnt even producing their new console all that well. Its gone through numerous delays, and they cant even seem to pay the designers properly. The designer of the VCS is suing them.

Is this a company you want to trust with a casino? Let alone with access to your crypto wallets? If mismanagement of the Atari VCS is annoying, imagine how dangerous mismanagement of an online casino could be.

Since the Atari casino isnt available yet, it isnt apparent how many people are going to buy into this idea. I have to assume that the folks who are deeply involved in crypto have a smarter head on their shoulders then to trust a company that has proven itself to be unreliable.

Perhaps the more baffling proposition is investing in Atari Token. This is their own crypto token, which Im sure will only go up in value. Just like their stock, which has only gone up over the past 20 years. (For legal reasons, that was sarcasm)

Maybe Im wrong. Perhaps the Atari Token and Casino will launch, and both be huge successes. I dont plan on being an early adopter, or a late adopter for that matter.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of CCN.com.

This article was edited by Aaron Weaver.

Last modified: April 4, 2020 11:02 AM UTC

More:
This Cryptocurrency Casino Is the Latest Terrible Idea by Atari - CCN.com

FOX Business Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on FoxBusiness.com.

Bitcoinis a cryptocurrency, or a type of digital currency that can be securely exchanged over internet platforms.

Bitcoin is used by nearly25 millionpeople worldwide and islargely believed the be the most popularcryptocurrency.

HOW DOES BITCOIN WORK?

The digital currency is worth nearly $6,500as of March 31, according to Google. It was worth nearly $10,000 in February.

A Bitcoin logo is displayed on an ATM in Hong Kong. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung, File)

Consumers can use Bitcoin to buygoods and services. Alternatively, Bitcoin can be traded for profit.

US GOVERNMENT AUCTIONING 4,000 BITCOIN WORTH $39M RECOVERED FROM CRIMINAL CASES

All transactions and balances are recorded on a digital public ledger called a blockchain. Blockchainsact asa list of records that contain data informationlike timestamps and transaction history.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX BUSINESS APP

Cryptocurrencies are also decentralized, meaning they are not controlled by any specific government or central banking system, unlike cash or debit and credit cards. They are insteadcontrolled by users and computer algorithms.

Other popular cryptocurrencies include Ethereum, XRP, Tether, Litecoin, Monero and EOS. EvenFacebookannounced plans to start a cryptocurrency called Libra --- an idea that came under strong government scrutiny andquicklylostsupport.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

This post contains material from a previous FOX Business article.

Excerpt from:
Is Bitcoin a cryptocurrency? - Fox Business

For years, the cryptocurrency industry has attempted to propagate a specific narrative around cryptocurrency, which is that it acts as a "safe-haven" asset, a way to park capital in the face of unpredictable, extreme market events, otherwise known as "black swan" events.

The theory could be seen as an argument from ignorance, because it was asserted that crypto was a safe haven primarily because that had not yet been proven false. Without a black swan event, it was easy to claim that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin would remain stable in the face of severe market downturns.

In just the past couple of months, this has all been turned on its head.

In late 2019, articles came out about a "mystery pneumonia," including quotes that "theres no need to panic" and that "it should be not serious [sic]." Soon, the virus spread, becoming an epidemic in China and now a global pandemic.

Investors have panicked, and perhaps rightfully so. The Dow experienced its largest drop since the 2008 recession, and entire industries are crashing down. For instance, the S&P 500 Airlines Industry Index has experienced a more dramatic decline than even after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Black swan events and viruses aren't new after all, that's why they have names. We've seen them before, from the Spanish flu to SARS to the Great Recession.

The difference here is that COVID-19 may be the most impactful pandemic we've seen during the digital economy. More and more markets are reliant on the digital economy, and cryptocurrency is more deeply intertwined with the digital economy than anything else.

Without a history of a pandemic in the digital economy to look back to, it's anyone's guess as to how cryptocurrency investors will continue to react to the coronavirus. Without a doubt, the market hasn't seen the full impact of COVID-19 yet.

Unfortunately, cryptocurrency markets have reacted similarly to traditional markets. While true safe-haven assets like gold have remained relatively steady in value, Bitcoin is plummeting alongside its traditional market counterparts.

If the safe-haven narrative is broken, then what's the true narrative? The reality is, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies hold value outside of being a safe haven.

For starters, crypto is just the tip of the iceberg, representing the beginning of the blockchain industry. Investors might be shocked at Bitcoin's recent performance, but keep in mind that Bitcoin does not reflect the industry as a whole.

Other blockchain innovations, such as tokenized fundsand "crypto for good" projects, march on, regardless of Bitcoin's volatility.

For the blockchain industry, this narrative shift is a good thing. The less of a focus on price, the better. The real narrative should focus on innovation and all the improvements blockchain can bring, rather than the ever-changing price.

This is all the more reason to shift our attention away from price for good. Of course, "innovation" is a vague term, and even more so in the blockchain world, so examples are called for.

We find examples aplenty from corporations to governments to startups. For example, Forbes lists 50 billion-dollar corporations innovating on the blockchain, counting giants from Amazon to Walmart. Governments from Dubai to Estonia have made blockchain a core part of their digital strategies.

Perhaps most importantly, everyday people are using the blockchain, and that isn't changing. Sure, price is still critical to pay attention to, and if you're going to invest, do it right and diversify, so you don't suffer from the immense volatility of a single asset, like Bitcoin.

However, price does not have to, and should not, dominate the blockchain narrative. In the future, I hope blockchain headlines will read along the lines of "You Can Contribute To Clean Energy With The Blockchain," and not "Bitcoin Price Is Up/Down."

We have a long way to go, but I believe cryptocurrency's status as a safe-haven asset being tested is helping, not hurting.

See the original post here:
Breaking The Safe-Haven Narrative Of Cryptocurrency: What's Next? - Forbes

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong says hes taking a Google or Amazon approach to distinguish solid projects and tokens from those with low value that could tarnish the entire industry.

In an ask-me-anything session for Coinbase Pro on YouTube, Armstrong responds to a question about why he decided to open up the leading US cryptocurrency exchange to more than just Bitcoin, and how he intends to spot low-quality coins and keep them out of the mix. Armstrong, who first explored Bitcoin in December of 2010 when he read the white paper, founded Coinbase in June of 2012.

Coinbase started and we were just Bitcoin, and there was really part of me that was hoping from a simplicity of the product point of view I was like, I really just hope everything is going to be Bitcoin, because then we dont have to give people this idea of choosing different ones or switching between them.

But after input from customers, the Bitcoin-only model changed.

Wed always go talk to our customers, and we see what they want. And it became clear at a certain point that more and more of them wanted to use Ethereum.

We kind of resisted for a while, but then we were like, alright, lets put the second one in there. And then there was a third, then there was a fourth. And now its getting into this place where I dont know how many if we fast forward five years, Im not sure how many protocols there are going to be globally used. That might end up being like fiat currencies, where there are five or six majors and a whole bunch of minor ones. But I do think there will be millions of tokens.

There could be a token for every company or side project or GitHub repo or nonprofit. So I think that ship has sailed at this point. Were going to be in a world with many, many tokens

How do we add the ones that dont tarnish the brand or the whole industry? Because there are a lot of projects out there that are just probably outright scams. Thats not good for anybody. So heres the way I think about this now. I think about it a lot like Google or Amazon.

Armstrong says the general idea is to list everything thats not a scam or harmful to people, while also giving traders and investors the tools to evaluate different tokens and coins.

A good example is Amazon. There might be a product on there that has two out of five stars, and you can choose whether or not to buy it. But if its not like a fraudulent product or something, theyre not actually going to remove it, right?

Similarly, Google theyre going to index the whole web. If they didnt index the whole web and show results for the whole web, it would be an incomplete search engine. But if there is some site that has malware or the HTTPS certificate has expired or whatever, they might show you a warning, and theyre not going to let you do something that actually hurts you.

But theyre not going to try to tell you what you should or should not look at or use on the internet, unless they think its really dangerous. They just think its low-quality. They might rank it lower or give it a lower rating. So thats, I think, the world were moving to with Coinbase, and hopefully that is the best of both worlds.

l

Featured Image: Shutterstock/Yevhen Vitte

See the rest here:
Brian Armstrong: Cryptocurrency Boom Will Spawn Millions of Tokens - The Daily Hodl

A survey released on April 2 and conducted by peer-to-peer Bitcoin (BTC) marketplace Paxful revealed growing positive sentiment in terms of cryptocurrency adoption in India.

Paxful's survey of investors between the ages of 1855 revealed that 75% of them had invested in cryptocurrencies.

Prior to the Reserve Bank of India'scrypto ban lifting, Paxful said that trade volume in the P2P marketplace in January exceeded $3 million, taking into account that 93.8% of respondents invested in cryptos before the ban.

According to the study, 78.5% of respondents prefer to use cryptocurrencies to transfer money quickly and easily, since they believe that the traditional banking system is corrupt, while 64.8% believe that it is a way to achieve financial freedom.

Speaking with Cointelegraph, Paxfuls CEO Ray Youssef said that, now that crypto business can receive banking series in the country, the cryptocurrency space will see significant growth:

Momentum will rise either way. Even when the cryptocurrency banking ban was in place, the Indian crypto community was actively trading and investing. It is good that they are heavily calling on regulation, with the barriers lifted, the momentum has multiplied manifold with million-dollar investments and support.

Youseff also explained that the growing mobile technology revolution in India has caused an older segment of the population to know and learn about the cryptocurrency market.

The report ensures that the future of cryptocurrencies in India looks bright, as 43.50% of respondents look forward to an increase in jobs and the ability to take on entrepreneurial endeavors thanks to the crypto market. Youssef commented on the growing trend shown by the survey:

The lift of the ban on cryptocurrency barriers is just the beginning of their crypto journey. Indias monthly and weekly crypto volumes are rising up every week. In just the last few days we have heard of million-dollar funds dedicated to blockchain and cryptocurrency in India. With the easing of restrictions and growing adoption, we believe the numbers are set to go higher for the foreseeable future before we start seeing a consolidation period in India.

Read the original post:
Survey Reflects India's Strong Sentiment Towards Crypto Before and After Ban - Cointelegraph

Ripple is adamant that XRP is decentralized. The evidence disagrees.

XRP is a cryptocurrency aimed at reducing the friction between foreign exchange transactions. Like the oil in a car, it helps banks transfer money by increasing the availability, or liquidity, of seldom-used currency pairs.

By lubricating these gears, Ripple claims that it can help reduce the cash that money transmitters and banks need to have on-hand. This cash is then freed up, allowing the company to invest it or use it for other purposes, saving them money.

There is, however, substantial controversy around XRP. The main company behind the cryptocurrency, Ripple, claims that it is decentralized.

XRP Ledger is inherently decentralized, said Ripple CTO David Schwartz. By design, the XRP Ledger is alsoif not more sodecentralized than both Bitcoin and Ethereum.

To further emphasize the decentralized nature of its cryptoasset, the company has attempted to distance itself from XRPs creation. XRP ledger existed before Ripple the company, said Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse. We own a lot of XRP. But its a little bit like saying, Exxon owns a lot of oil.

Like Exxon, Ripple is merely the company that is delivering XRP to the financial engines in need of lubrication, or so they claim. Yet, theres substantial evidence suggesting that XRP is, in fact, almost wholly controlled by Ripple.

Unlike what executives would like investors to believe, Ripple was not gifted XRP from the people who created it. XRP and its ledger were launched in 2013 by current Ripple executive chairman Chris Larsen, as well as Jed McCaleb and Arthur Britto, who later split from the project.

The digital asset was initially created under a corporation known as Newcoin in 2012. A month later, the company was renamed to OpenCoin. Finally, in 2013, the company was renamed again to Ripple Labs and incorporated in California.

This was then merged as a subsidiary under a Delaware corporation known as Ripple Labs in 2014, the same Ripple that operates today.

Further evidence that Ripple created XRP is a trademark filed in 2013, roughly six months after the network was launched. Though originally registered by OpenCoin, Ripple is the current owner of the trademark.

Even the company itself has, in the past, said that it created XRP. For all intents and purposes, Ripple appears to have created XRP.

The line of succession is clear. As said by Preston Byrne, an attorney that specializes in blockchain technology: Yes, Ripple created XRP, they own most of it and it was issued after company formation.

In 2012, Ripple founders Chris Larsen, Jed McCaleb, and Arthur Britto signed an agreement allocating 80% of the total XRP supply to the company while the remaining 20% was split between the three founders.

A few months later XRP Ledger was launched and 100 billion XRP was created and divided between the founders and the company.

These coins were sold over the years to fund the development of the company, secure partnerships, and pay market makers to improve exchange availability. Some seven years later, the company still has control of more than 60 billion of these tokens, more than half the supply. If these were sold at current prices, theyd be worth more than $15 billion.

These coins are sold regularly every quarter, usually to the tune of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. Ripple, company insiders, and their partners largely control the XRP supply.

Many investors are frustrated that these sales suppress potential price appreciation. And, theyre probably right.

The final factor that points to the centralization of the XRP Ledger is how its blockchain operates.

Like Bitcoin, the XRP Ledger is composed of a collection of nodes, computers that run the software supporting a blockchain.

However, unlike Bitcoin, XRP does not select blocks of transactions through proof-of-work, a lottery where tickets are acquired using computer power. Instead, it uses its own systemthe Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm, or RPCA.

Another feature that sets proof-of-work and RPCA apart is that nodes running RPCA are uncompensated. Theyre volunteers that incur thousands of dollars of expenses a year (assuming theyre not one of Ripples own nodes).

Out of nearly 1,000 nodes, a group of 33 are selected by the whole group to finalize transactions. This smaller group is called the Unique Node List, or UNL. When 80% of these 33 come to an agreement, a transaction is finalized.

But heres where the problem arisesRipple, the company, selects the default Unique Node List. When a volunteer spins up a node, these are the ones voted for by default to finalize transactions. Theoretically, different nodes outside of those recommended by Ripple could be selected, but thats seldom the case.

Since the launch of the ledger, there are few documented cases of nodes outside of the default UNL gaining access to one of the privileged spots. On top of that, Ripple directly controls six of these nodes and indirectly controls at least four more through grants.

What if someone doesnt like this state of affairs? Schwartz says that someone could fork away from the XRP Ledger should they disagree with the company. That is possible, on paper. But, because of the control Ripple exerts over the ledger this has never happened.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin has had over 100 forks while Ethereum has had at least six forks. These are a testament to the decentralization of the two projects.

Its likely that the answer to whether XRP is decentralized or not could have huge legal ramifications for Ripple (and investors).

If these coins were issued to raise money, then it could attract unwelcome attention from regulatorsthe Securities Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

If the SEC, for example, were to deem XRP a security it could have dire consequences for its usefulness for exchange transactions. In fact, one such case is moving through the California court system right now.

It also has a large impact on investors. If Ripple were to decide one day that it would stop working on XRP, then the token may as well be worthless. In contrast to Bitcoin, because of its many contributors, the loss of any one company would not sink BTC.

In all, these factors point to one conclusion. Ripple experts have enough control over XRP where it would not be considered decentralized.

Original post:
Is XRP Decentralized? Ripple's Involvement in the Cryptocurrency - Crypto Briefing

Although nobody knows yet what the outcome of the global coronavirus crisis will look like, there is one conclusion on which everyone seems to agree. The economic fallout is going to be significant. Last week, the US government signed off on a $2 trillion relief bill, and governments around the world are printing money in an attempt to stave off a pending financial crisis.

No cryptocurrency has ever gone through a full economic cycle. Bitcoin was born from the depths of the 2008 global financial crisis. Famously, Bitcoin's genesis block contains the headline from The Times on the date that creator Satoshi Nakamoto mined the first ever Bitcoin: "Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks."

So, until now, despite rampant speculation, it's been difficult to predict what might happen to cryptocurrencies when the economy takes a nosedive. However, the last couple of months, as the coronavirus has unfolded, have given us an idea of a few significant trends.

The idea of Bitcoin as "digital gold" has been around for a while. It's true that the two assets share some similarities: a price driven by the forces of supply and demand and limitations on supply, for example. However, whether or not investors would treat Bitcoin as a "safe haven" investment during times of turmoil in the stock market hadn't been proven.

On March 12, as the global stock markets plummeted and circuit breakers halted trading on the NYSE, the price of cryptocurrencies also took a nosedive. Bitcoin lost more than 40% of its value the biggest single-day percentage drop in price since 2013.

However, on that day, gold held its price. Critics were quick to point out that the "digital gold" theory had been debunked, but perhaps they were a little too quick. Over the days that followed, gold recorded its sharpest drop in a single week, losing around 12% of its price.

Since then, the price of both assets has recovered somewhat, although Bitcoin to a lesser extent than gold, after recording a more significant decrease. Nevertheless, according to data aggregator Skew, Bitcoin and gold are showing record correlation levels of more than 50%, perhaps demonstrating that in times of economic uncertainty, the concept of Bitcoin as digital gold is more accurate than it initially seemed.

March 12 was a pivotal moment on the cryptocurrency markets across derivatives, too. Before the coronavirus started to take hold, Bitcoin futures had been enjoying something of a moment. According to Skew, total open interest had more than doubled from around $2.2 billion in November 2019, to $5 billion in mid-February.

On March 12 and 13, as the price of Bitcoin dropped precipitously, crypto exchanges liquidated millions of dollars' worth of long positions.

Market leader BitMEX came under particular fire, as it had experienced two 25-minute outages meaning traders had no access to their accounts to top up margin or take any actions to hedge their positions. Traders on BitMEX saw over $1.5 billion of positions liquidated in the space of two days.

Since mid-March, open interest in both crypto-backed futures and options has taken a hit across the board, decreasing back to the same levels seen six months ago.

This drop illustrates the extent of investor panic, withdrawing from speculating even with short positions. It will be intriguing to see how quickly the crypto derivatives markets recover from this blow over the coming months, given that 2019 was a period of massive growth in these markets.

Stablecoins were another asset class that was burgeoning before panic surrounding COVID-19 took hold. Because they're pegged to fiat currencies such as the USD, stablecoins had become the go-to currencies for traders entering and exiting positions. In 2019, the most popular stablecoin, Tether (USDT), had doubled its market cap from $2 billion to $4 billion, and overtaken Bitcoin as the most traded cryptocurrency.

During the market turmoil in March, while the rest of the market tanked, Tether came out smelling of roses. The market cap of USDT gained a further $1.5 billion in the second half of March alone, as Tether Limited attempted to mint enough stablecoins to meet the demand of investors keen to convert their gains or losses to a more predictable asset.

Sam Bankman-Fried, CEO of FTX Exchange and rapidly becoming something of a sage on crypto-Twitter, attributed Tether's March explosion to a flow of OTC originating in Asia, along with investors converting their Bitcoins to Tether as a means of hedging and reducing risk.

The cryptocurrency markets are always notoriously volatile, even when the rest of the economy is sailing in smooth waters.

However, the events in March have provided a flavor of what we can expect from the crypto markets once the traditional markets experience tumult. Whether these trends continue to play out as the coronavirus bites harder, remains to be seen.

Original post:
3 things that happen to the cryptocurrency markets during times of economic uncertainty - Big Think

Investing has never been easier now that on-chain metrics enable market participants to determine who is on the other side of the trade. While this is only possible in the cryptocurrency market, IntoTheBlock maintains that this data can empower investors worldwide.

Contrary to popular belief, one of the biggest advantages of the cryptocurrency market is transparency. Through on-chain analytics anyone can determine how many investors are in a given asset, when they bought, and what their cost basis is. These key datasets are essential to determine which digital asset to invest in.

IntoTheBlock uses machine learning and statistical modeling to provide a view of a crypto assets profitability and capital stack. Bitcoin, for instance, is a great example of decentralization, which makes it ideal to consider as an investment vehicle, according to the firm.

The flagship cryptocurrency only has one whale that holds 1.4 percent of its circulating supply. This address has approximately 255,100 BTC and belongs to Singapore-based cryptocurrency exchange Huobi. The other 98.6 percent of the total Bitcoin in circulation is distributed among investors and retail investors. The former holds 10.1 percent while the latter keeps 88.5 percent.

Not only Bitcoin is decentralized, but the amount of holders in the network is at all-time highs, according to IntoTheBlock.

The Ownership by Time Held model estimates that nearly 30 millon addresses have a balance in Bitcoin. Currently, almost 63 percent of those addresses are holding 10.8 million BTC for more than a year. This represents a 23.7 percent growth since last year.

IntoTheBlock added:

To give you more accurate information about this we can see that the number of Bitcoins that hasnt been moved in over 5 years is up from 3.6m BTC on April of 2019 to 3.95m BTC on April of this year.

Other assets such as Maker do not provide the same levels of decentralization as Bitcoin and most of its investors will be in the red if they were to sell their tokens today.

In fact, IntoTheBlocks Global In/Out of the Money model shows that 89 percent of the addresses holding MKR are losing money while only 3 percent of addresses are in the money.

On-chain metrics also reveal that of the 57,520 addresses holding Maker, just 13 of them control almost 65 percent of the circulating supply. And, there is one address that holds nearly 25 percent of the circulating supply.

IntoTheBlock maintains that this could suggest that if anyone were to buy MKR, there is one major address would probably be the one dumping their tokens at a profit.

The ability to determine how centralized an asset is, how large holders can manipulate its price, or how confident investors are is only possible with this new asset class. Although this is not enough data to consider whether or not a given cryptocurrency provides a good investment opportunity, counter-party analysis makes this decision easier.

Continue reading here:
These are the main factors to consider before investing in the cryptocurrency market - CryptoSlate