Bitcoin Address Reuse Exposes Public Keys for 4.33M BTC
Bitcoin address reuse has left 4.33 million BTC—about 21.5% of circulating supply—with public keys visible on-chain, according to Glassnode. The reuse-linked balance has risen 14% recently.
Including structural exposure from legacy Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) and Taproot outputs, 6.26 million BTC, or 31.2% of supply, sits behind visible public keys. Glassnode analyst Rafael said this share is at its highest level since around 2016, up from 24.8% in early 2021.
Exchanges hold about 1.79 million BTC with visible keys. Glassnode estimates exposure at roughly 10% for Coinbase, 83% for Binance and 100% for Bitfinex. Around 1.10 million BTC attributed to Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto is held in P2PK outputs and cannot be moved without access to the controlling keys.
The data highlights address reuse and custodial security practices, but visible public keys do not by themselves mean funds are compromised. Large-scale migrations to fresh addresses would require planning and incur on-chain fees. The findings may prompt holders and exchanges to review Bitcoin storage and address-management practices.
Neutral
The report points to a growing security and privacy concern, but it does not document a breach, stolen funds or a flaw that enables immediate attacks. Public-key visibility is not equivalent to a compromised private key, so the figures alone do not establish a direct reason for traders to buy or sell BTC.
In the short term, discussion of exposed keys could raise scrutiny of exchange custody and prompt some holders to move coins to fresh addresses or cold storage. Large transfers may attract attention in on-chain data and create temporary uncertainty, but migration activity can also incur fees and does not necessarily indicate selling. Any price response is likely to depend more on broader market conditions, exchange flows and whether a concrete exploit emerges.
Over the longer term, the data may encourage better address hygiene and more careful planning by exchanges and large holders. Similar security warnings have often generated brief risk-focused discussion without producing sustained market moves unless followed by an actual incident or regulatory action. The report therefore signals operational and reputational risks, rather than a clear directional catalyst for Bitcoin’s price.