For today’s subscriber-exclusive post, I will be providing an update on the first instalment of the rich-list case study series on VIDT Datalink.
The approach for this instalment is almost identical to that of the previous post, except that we are now taking note of the relevant details (remember: the current date, address rank, the address balance on the date preceding the first transaction of the specified period, the current address balance and, finally, the net change in balance across the period) for the period that has elapsed between that first post and today. This will give us 18 new days-worth of data and activity to evaluate, and the final post in this series will be published in another fortnight.
The only difference in our approach on this second evaluation is that there may well be changes to the rich-list itself, not just the activity of the holders. This is why it is important to keep a record of the addresses that comprise the top 20, as they may well change over any given time period. As we will see from today’s evaluation, there are plenty of changes to be noted since the first instalment was published.
I’ll refrain from any further preamble and crack on:
- As we know, we begin with a screenshot of the addresses and balances comprising the top 20:
- We now must follow the approach as before and weed out the inactive addresses and the team-owned and exchange-owned addresses, as these are not relevant for our purposes. Inactive now means those addresses with no activity between the previous evaluation (30th October 2020) and today’s evaluation. If we open a tab for each address in the top 20, we find that there are 9 inactive addresses and 6 addresses labelled either VIDT Datalink or an exchange.
- It was also correctly pointed out by a reader that address #1 with 9,000,000 VIDT is likely a team address or an exchange address that has simply not been labelled as of yet, particularly when one looks at the transactions:
- Given the above, it seems likely that the #1 address is not a private individual (and given the significant percentage of supply in this one address, it makes perfect sense for it not to be).
- As such, we find ourselves with 4 active, private and individual addresses: address #9, #11, #12 and #19. Moreover, keen eyes will notice that some of the addresses from the 30th October are no longer there, but more on that a little later. What you need to do here is simply make a note of which addresses have remained in the top 20 and whether they have changed position and which addresses are new to the list. This is noted down alongside all of the relevant details (listed above and in the previous post) that we are interested in for the 4 active addresses.
- My results for the period between 30th October 2020 and 18th November 2020 are as follows:
- #1: N/A (likely team address or exchange address, but unlabelled)
- #2: N/A (Binance)
- #3: N/A (Inactive)
- #4: N/A (VIDT Main Wallet)
- #5: N/A (Inactive)
- #6: N/A (Inactive – previously was address #7, where the previous address #6 has dropped down to #13 and been labelled as Kucoin 3)
- #7: N/A (Inactive – previously was address #8)
- #8: N/A (VIDT Bridge Wallet – previously was address #9)
- #9: +134,388 VIDT (Previously address #15 and has added from Binance since)
- #10: N/A (Inactive – previously address #11)
- #11: -38,255 VIDT (Previously address #10)
- #12: -1 VIDT
- #13: N/A (Kucoin 3 – previously #6 and has replaced VIDT Distribution Wallet, which is no longer visible in the list)
- #14: N/A (VIDT Validation Wallet)
- #15: N/A (Inactive – previously #18)
- #16: N/A (Inactive – previously #20)
- #17: N/A (Inactive but new to the list due to dropped addresses and balance reductions)
- #18: N/A (Hotbit – previously #16)
- #19: +97,540 VIDT (New to the list)
- #20: N/A (Inactive but new to the list)
Now to draw some conclusions:
Firstly, we can make the assumption that many of the largest holders are still content with their present holdings, seeking neither to accumulate nor distribute at current prices, with 9 addresses inactive over the period between 30th October and 18th November. Further, 7 addresses either team-controlled or exchange addresses. Of the 4 private addresses with meaningful balance changes, we can see that 2 have experienced net inflows and 2 net outflows over the given period. There were also 3 new addresses in the list. Most importantly,, the cumulative net change in balance of these addresses is +193,672 VIDT over the given period. This equates to 0.39% of the circulating supply.
A last note is that 20th-richest address now holds 255,793 VIDT, as opposed to 330,055 VIDT in the first instalment, so, although the top 20 has had net inflows during that period, the threshold for entry into the top 20 has reduced by ~75k VIDT.
I hope the second post of this series has been a valuable read.
I look forward to writing up the final instalment of this rich-list case study in a fortnight.
As ever, if you have any comments or questions, feel free to leave them below.