Arkham Intelligence has publicly identified 70,816 additional Bitcoin (BTC) belonging to MicroStrategy.
The revelation further unravels MicroStrategy’s elusive holdings after Executive Chairman Michael Saylor’s outspoken commitment to wallet privacy.
Arkham Reveals $54.5 Billion in MicroStrategy Bitcoin
The latest revelation brings Arkham’s estimated total of identified MicroStrategy-owned Bitcoin to 525,047 BTC, worth approximately $54.5 billion. Notably, this represents 87.5% of the firm’s total BTC holdings.
The blockchain analytics firm highlighted that these BTC are spread across wallets that were not previously linked to MicroStrategy (now Strategy). This indicates the addresses are likely separate from the company’s known holdings with custodians like Fidelity Digital Assets and Coinbase Prime.
This disclosure follows Arkham’s earlier wallet-tagging efforts, which linked 107,000 BTC deposited into Fidelity’s omnibus custody to over 327,000 BTC in segregated holdings, including Coinbase Prime.
While Fidelity does not provide on-chain wallet segregation, Arkham’s analysis used proprietary heuristics to link addresses to MicroStrategy’s on-chain footprint.
While Arkham tags 454,231 BTC and an additional 70,816 BTC belonging to MicroStrategy, Bitcoin Treasuries shows 580,250 BTC.
The variance likely stems from differing methodologies. Bitcoin Treasuries relies on company-reported purchase disclosures. Meanwhile, Arkham scans for on-chain data and may aggregate multiple addresses controlled by the same entity.
Given third-party custodians, internal treasury management strategies, and the possibility of untagged wallets, full alignment between reported and discovered holdings may never be achieved. Still, there is some level of alignment.
Arkham’s Institutional On-Chain Tracking Defies Saylor’s Secrecy
The move directly challenges Saylor’s long-standing opposition to proof-of-reserves (PoR) disclosures. As BeInCrypto reported, the Strategy executive argued that revealing wallet addresses would create unnecessary cybersecurity risks.
“The current conventional way to publish proof-of-reserves is an insecure proof-of-reserves. No institutional-grade or enterprise security analyst would think that publishing wallets is a great idea,” Saylor argued.
He warned that publicizing cold wallet locations would only attract attackers. Saylor’s skepticism centers on the belief that transparency in wallet ownership offers negligible benefits while increasing the probability of coordinated cyberattacks.
Given the number of high-profile exchange breaches and ransom threats in crypto’s history, this argument has precedent.
Arkham’s announcement sparked intense debate. While some applauded the firm’s technical achievement and transparency push, others criticized the perceived violation of operational privacy. Meanwhile, others floated a middle ground.
“You can love or hate Saylor and what he’s doing (buying up and weaponizing Bitcoin with MicroStrategy holding way too much),” another user remarked.
Still, some highlight zero-knowledge proofs’ (ZKPs) ability to confirm Bitcoin reserves without disclosing wallet addresses. This could help Saylor prove solvency without revealing sensitive data, amid rising interest in cryptographic alternatives that preserve transparency and security.
The MicroStrategy expose aligns with Arkham’s broader push to demystify the blockchain’s most influential players. The platform recently introduced a KOL (Key Opinion Leader) Label that tracks wallets belonging to high-profile crypto personalities, influencers, and institutions.
“Influencers with more than 100K+ followers on Twitter/X are now tagged on Arkham with a new label: Key Opinion Leader,” read the announcement.
The label goes beyond identifying wallets tied to influential figures. It also reveals financial behavior and potential conflicts of interest in promotional campaigns.
Disclaimer
In adherence to the Trust Project guidelines, BeInCrypto is committed to unbiased, transparent reporting. This news article aims to provide accurate, timely information. However, readers are advised to verify facts independently and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content. Please note that our Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimers have been updated.