1

I'm trying to understand the following two sites that display UTXO information. If I can figure out the method, that would be a bonus for this question but if I can't can someone explain why the two sites measure UTXO differently?

The following website I think adds utxo from the gensis block: https://statoshi.info/dashboard/db/unspent-transaction-output-set?panelId=6&fullscreen

This website's value is way higher than the one of the previous: https://charts.bitcoin.com/btc/chart/utxo-set-size#5moc

Am I missing that these are different charts? How can I reproduce them if I decide to create the charts myself?

1

How can I reproduce them if I decide to create the charts myself?

$ bitcoin-cli gettxoutsetinfo
{
  "height": 614643,
  "bestblock": "0000000000000000000323e3aff59d74ab52e74f4dc5cfb9696ddb69e9857d9c",
  "transactions": 38728071,
  "txouts": 65228219,
  "bogosize": 4902482106,
  "hash_serialized_2": "a153439cccb341a5ac149562c90bca499e3a809ccf2075e2de17bc2b9d83d0ee",
  "disk_size": 3922698456,
  "total_amount": 18182867.32125828
}

65M is most correct. It's unclear where the value of 106 Million could possibly be coming from.

The following website I think adds utxo from the gensis block

It doesn't really matter, there's 3 outputs which are "created" but are invalid, one in the genesis block and two in duplicated coinbase transactions. In the scale of the chain this is almost entirely lost to display precision anyway,

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    Note that the "txouts" value reported there excludes provably unspendable outputs (=OP_RETURN outputs, and outputs with sPK > 10000 bytes). – Pieter Wuille Jan 28 at 8:39
  • Hi @Anonymous, in reference to the first website where I said "adds utxo from the genesis block " I merely meant, it starts at the genesis block with start date in Jan 2009. The one that is in the 100M+ should be the same if the same method is being used. I'm curious what the 100M+ chart is doing as I have an interest in dissecting these differing interpretations. – LeanMan Jan 28 at 20:52
  • @Pieter Wuille, how can I calculate these additional values (i.e., provably unspendable outputs)? Thank you very much for your input. – LeanMan Jan 28 at 20:54
  • @LeanMan I suspect the 100M number is completely meaningless. – Anonymous Jan 29 at 1:07
0

As Anonymous said in the other answer, the Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) set has currently about 65 million unspent outputs. The UTXO set tracks all outputs that may still be spent in the future. I suspect that bitcoin.com (like another service last year) is falsely counting OP_RETURN outputs towards the UTXO set. While OP_RETURN outputs are transaction outputs that did not get spent, it is because they are provably unspendable and thus do not get tracked in the UTXO set.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thank you @Murch for your contribution. I'm interested in knowing various methods of interpreting utxo as varying sites have produced different sites. For example, blockchain.com updated their chart not too long ago. I am trying to understand why the change and feasibility of reproducing/exploring different interpretations of utxo. – LeanMan Jan 29 at 17:42
  • There's actually not all that much room for interpretation. The UTXO Set is clearly defined as the outputs holding spendable balances. You can choose whether you want to interpret the chart shown by bitcoin.com as either mislabeled or showing the wrong value. – Murch Jan 29 at 19:06
  • I do want to figure it out. I have reasons why its important. – LeanMan Jan 29 at 23:33
  • You can call that "different interpretations", but whatever the chart on bitcoin.com is counting is not only the UTXO Set. – Murch Jan 30 at 1:02
  • I do understand - why they call it utxo or whoever did it why they were confused is beyond me. It throws newbies off for sure. – LeanMan Jan 30 at 3:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.