Where the money is, and what it cannot tell you
Every visitor arrives with one question: what will it be worth. Published answers collapse two separate bets — how much money arrives, and where the cycle is when you look — into a single number and call the second a multiplier. This page keeps them apart, measures what history says about each, tests the model the way this site tests everything, and publishes the dates by which the assumptions will have been proved or broken.
Computed from the daily snapshot for 10 September 2026
Realised cap is $1.07T today at an MVRV of 1.44, the 35.6th percentile of every day since 2013. It grew 2.71× over the last three years, against a median of 2.67× for windows that started in the 2020–23 cycle and 16.1× for the first cycle measured.
Reconciliation on 2026-09-11: market cap ÷ supply = $76,675.77 against a published price of $76,675.77 (0.0%); realised cap × MVRV = $1.54T against a market cap of $1.54T. Realised cap is derived as market cap ÷ MVRV.
What this method would have said, and what happened
What this section is. Anyone can build a model that fits the past. The question is what it would have said at the time, before the answer was known. So: stand at a date in the past, use only the data that existed then, forecast the price three years ahead, and wait for that date to arrive. Then compare. Do it at every month since 2016 and you have 91 honest tests of the method this page uses.
Why the table stops in 2023. A three-year forecast can only be marked once three years have passed. The newest origin that can be scored is therefore exactly three years old — its target date is today. Origins after it are still running; their forecasts exist and their answers do not. That is not missing data, it is what waiting for the answer looks like.
The model itself: realised cap at the origin, times how much realised cap grew over comparable earlier windows, times where MVRV sat at the end of those windows. A calibrated model puts the actual price inside its own interquartile range about half the time.
The model put the actual price inside its own interquartile range 28% of the time, against roughly half for a calibrated model, and its misses run in one direction: it forecast too high by a factor of about 2.3 on average. The reason is the deceleration in the next panel — each cycle’s capital growth has been lower than the cycle the model trained on. That is what this history can support, and every number below should be read with it in front. The pooled figure flatters the recent record: of the last 18 origins in the table, 0 landed inside the range.
| Standing on the date the forecast was made |
Forecasting three years ahead |
It said, low 25th percentile |
It said, middle median forecast |
It said, high 75th percentile |
What happened the actual price |
Right? inside its own range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-04 | 2025-04 | $240k | $328k | $601k | $84k | no |
| 2022-05 | 2025-05 | $229k | $312k | $561k | $104k | no |
| 2022-06 | 2025-06 | $220k | $301k | $516k | $106k | no |
| 2022-07 | 2025-07 | $201k | $274k | $457k | $117k | no |
| 2022-08 | 2025-08 | $192k | $260k | $425k | $119k | no |
| 2022-09 | 2025-09 | $177k | $249k | $403k | $114k | no |
| 2022-10 | 2025-10 | $162k | $240k | $379k | $114k | no |
| 2022-11 | 2025-11 | $153k | $231k | $351k | $105k | no |
| 2022-12 | 2025-12 | $142k | $217k | $303k | $93k | no |
| 2023-01 | 2026-01 | $138k | $211k | $298k | $91k | no |
| 2023-02 | 2026-02 | $136k | $205k | $300k | $69k | no |
| 2023-03 | 2026-03 | $132k | $199k | $299k | $69k | no |
| 2023-04 | 2026-04 | $130k | $195k | $296k | $71k | no |
| 2023-05 | 2026-05 | $129k | $195k | $280k | $80k | no |
| 2023-06 | 2026-06 | $109k | $192k | $269k | $63k | no |
| 2023-07 | 2026-07 | $107k | $188k | $262k | $63k | no |
| 2023-08 | 2026-08 | $106k | $182k | $246k | $64k | no |
| 2023-09 | 2026-09 | $102k | $171k | $237k | $80k | no |
| Still running — 36 forecasts made since the last one that could be scored, shown with the date each comes due | ||||||
| 2023-10 | 2026-10 | $99k | $158k | $232k | still running — due 2026-10-06 | |
| 2023-11 | 2026-11 | $100k | $154k | $231k | still running — due 2026-11-05 | |
| 2023-12 | 2026-12 | $102k | $153k | $232k | still running — due 2026-12-05 | |
| 2024-01 | 2027-01 | $106k | $155k | $237k | still running — due 2027-01-04 | |
| 2024-02 | 2027-02 | $105k | $158k | $240k | still running — due 2027-02-03 | |
| 2024-03 | 2027-03 | $110k | $167k | $251k | still running — due 2027-03-04 | |
| 2024-04 | 2027-04 | $125k | $188k | $282k | still running — due 2027-04-03 | |
| 2024-05 | 2027-05 | $126k | $188k | $284k | still running — due 2027-05-03 | |
| 2024-06 | 2027-06 | $130k | $171k | $290k | still running — due 2027-06-02 | |
| 2024-07 | 2027-07 | $130k | $167k | $289k | still running — due 2027-07-02 | |
| 2024-08 | 2027-08 | $130k | $169k | $285k | still running — due 2027-08-01 | |
| 2024-08 | 2027-08 | $126k | $167k | $274k | still running — due 2027-08-31 | |
| 2024-09 | 2027-09 | $124k | $168k | $278k | still running — due 2027-09-30 | |
| 2024-10 | 2027-10 | $125k | $169k | $288k | still running — due 2027-10-30 | |
| 2024-11 | 2027-11 | $137k | $183k | $321k | still running — due 2027-11-29 | |
| 2024-12 | 2027-12 | $152k | $197k | $354k | still running — due 2027-12-29 | |
| 2025-01 | 2028-01 | $159k | $197k | $371k | still running — due 2028-01-28 | |
| 2025-02 | 2028-02 | $161k | $197k | $354k | still running — due 2028-02-27 | |
| 2025-03 | 2028-03 | $161k | $195k | $318k | still running — due 2028-03-29 | |
| 2025-04 | 2028-04 | $161k | $195k | $309k | still running — due 2028-04-28 | |
| 2025-05 | 2028-05 | $168k | $203k | $308k | still running — due 2028-05-28 | |
| 2025-06 | 2028-06 | $174k | $210k | $271k | still running — due 2028-06-27 | |
| 2025-07 | 2028-07 | $185k | $224k | $279k | still running — due 2028-07-27 | |
| 2025-08 | 2028-08 | $190k | $230k | $284k | still running — due 2028-08-26 | |
| 2025-09 | 2028-09 | $195k | $236k | $290k | still running — due 2028-09-25 | |
| 2025-10 | 2028-10 | $202k | $244k | $298k | still running — due 2028-10-25 | |
| 2025-11 | 2028-11 | $205k | $247k | $300k | still running — due 2028-11-24 | |
| 2025-12 | 2028-12 | $204k | $247k | $298k | still running — due 2028-12-24 | |
| 2026-01 | 2029-01 | $204k | $247k | $294k | still running — due 2029-01-23 | |
| 2026-02 | 2029-02 | $197k | $238k | $282k | still running — due 2029-02-22 | |
| 2026-03 | 2029-03 | $195k | $234k | $274k | still running — due 2029-03-24 | |
| 2026-04 | 2029-04 | $194k | $230k | $268k | still running — due 2029-04-23 | |
| 2026-05 | 2029-05 | $194k | $227k | $264k | still running — due 2029-05-23 | |
| 2026-06 | 2029-06 | $190k | $220k | $256k | still running — due 2029-06-22 | |
| 2026-07 | 2029-07 | $187k | $217k | $253k | still running — due 2029-07-22 | |
| 2026-08 | 2029-08 | $184k | $213k | $252k | still running — due 2029-08-21 | |
Bet one: how much money arrives
| Windows starting | p25 | Median | p75 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013-16 | 7.5× | 16.1× | 21.0× |
| 2017-19 | 4.0× | 4.5× | 6.0× |
| 2020-23 | 1.8× | 2.7× | 3.0× |
| All windows | 2.7× | 4.1× | 11.3× |
Realised-cap growth has fallen every cycle. The all-windows figure is dominated by years when bitcoin was a hundredth of its present size and is not a forward base rate. Growth over three-year windows and MVRV at their end correlate at -0.29: big inflows arrive at high prices, lift the cost basis, and when the cycle turns MVRV compresses onto it. The combination every large published target needs — high inflow and high endpoint MVRV — is the one history produces least.
Bet two: where the cycle is when you look
This is the larger of the two levers. Across the interquartile range alone, the same realised cap is worth 1.7× more at the top than at the bottom. Any published range that holds it near a single value is hiding its main uncertainty, and none says which value it chose.
The surface
Read across a row: what more money buys at a fixed point in the cycle. Read down a column: what the cycle does to a fixed amount of money. The column span is about 4.1×; the row span is about 3.0×. Where the cycle is when you look matters at least as much as how much money arrived.
| MVRV at horizon | +$0.50T | +$1.00T | +$1.30T | +$2.00T | +$3.00T | +$5.30T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 (trough) | $77k | $101k | $116k | $150k | $199k | $311k |
| 1.3 | $100k | $131k | $150k | $195k | $258k | $405k |
| 1.7 (median) | $130k | $172k | $197k | $255k | $338k | $529k |
| 2.2 | $169k | $222k | $255k | $330k | $437k | $685k |
| 3.0 | $230k | $303k | $347k | $450k | $597k | $934k |
River (Sam Baker), 2 Sep 2026 publishes $250k to $840k over 3-5 years on advisor adoption 20-40% of portfolios at 2-4%, $1.3-5.3T inflow, x3 multiplier. On this surface that requires MVRV at the horizon of 2.16 at its low inflow and 2.70 at its high — the upper quarter of MVRV’s history, assumed rather than stated.
Who holds the coins
| Category | BTC | Share of supply | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| US spot ETFs | 1,167,518 | 5.81% | SEC 10-Q/10-K XBRL, us-gaap:CryptoAssetNumberOfUnits |
| Listed treasury companies | 846,000 | 4.21% | SEC XBRL where filed; see fetch/treasuries.py |
| Sovereigns, on-chain | 0 | 0.00% | published reserve addresses, read on chain |
| Tracked total | 2,013,518 | 10.03% | of 20.08M |
The sovereigns row reads zero because the pipeline has not yet resolved a primary source for it; the file says which. These are the buyers who were not in the 2013–2023 windows the model trained on. If their share crosses the tripwire below, the historical base rates stop applying and no backtest can say what replaces them. That is the strongest argument against every number on this page, and it is measurable.
Tripwires
| Assumption tested | Condition | Reads now | Check by | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inflow above the recent cycle capital arriving faster than any window of the 2020-23 cycle; River's high case in play | realised cap above $1.6T | $1.07T | 2027-03-12 | not yet |
| Inflow below the low case even River's low case is not arriving | realised cap below $1.3T on the check date | $1.07T | 2027-03-12 | pending until check date |
| Buyer mix has changed structurally new holders at scale; the historical deceleration may not apply | tracked ETF + treasury + sovereign share above 12% of supply | 10.03% | 2027-09-11 | not yet |
| Endpoint timing assumption every published range that held MVRV near constant was wrong about timing | MVRV outside 1.3-2.2 at the horizon | 1.441 | 2029-09-11 | pending until horizon |
What this does not show
Realised cap is derived, not read: Coin Metrics publishes no direct series on the tier this site uses, so it is market cap divided by MVRV. The reconciliation line at the top shows the identity holding to the cent, and a test asserts it on every run.
Four cycles. The growth distributions above are drawn from thousands of overlapping windows and a handful of independent regimes. The walk-forward is the honest measure of what that history can support, and it says the model overshoots.
The holder table lists only what the pipeline reads from a filing or an address. Treasury companies that disclose only in prose, and governments that hold coin without a published address, are absent by design. The residual is everyone else, and it is most of the supply.
Why no number
The surface has thirty cells and every published target sits in one of them. Reading a cell without its row and column is reading a forecast without its assumptions, which is what every published target asks you to do.
The precision on this page is not in a prior. Realised cap is observable daily. Six months from now the inflow tripwire will have been checked and the surface will have lost half its columns to evidence rather than assumption. That is the only kind of precision available here, and it arrives on a schedule.
What bitcoin did with no model attached at all is on the base rates page, and what the site said on each past day is in the forward record.
Recomputed daily by fetch/flows.py and published as flows.json. Method on the methods page.