By the numbers, Ethereum has quietly pulled far ahead of both Bitcoin and Dogecoin when it comes to the sheer count of on‑chain holders – at least if you measure “users” by non‑empty wallet addresses.
On‑chain analytics firm Santiment recently compared several major cryptocurrencies using the Total Amount of Holders metric. This indicator tallies how many addresses on a given blockchain currently contain a non‑zero balance. It doesn’t tell you how many individual people are involved, but it does show how widely a coin is distributed across wallets.
What “Total Amount of Holders” Really Measures
The Total Amount of Holders metric increases whenever:
– New investors buy a coin and receive it into fresh addresses.
– Former investors return to the ecosystem and fund new wallets.
– Existing users create additional addresses for portfolio management, accounting, or privacy.
Because all three processes usually happen together, a rising holders count is generally interpreted as a sign of net adoption: more addresses, more on‑chain activity, and a broader footprint of the asset across the network.
A decline in the metric, by contrast, suggests that some addresses have been emptied. That can happen when:
– Investors fully cash out and exit the asset.
– Users consolidate funds from many small addresses into a few larger ones.
– Old or inactive wallets are drained and abandoned.
Even though address data can’t perfectly map to real people, the direction of the trend still provides a valuable signal about the health and growth of a network.
Ethereum Dominates in Total Holders
According to Santiment’s latest data, Ethereum is the clear leader in this particular race:
– Ethereum (ETH): ~167.96 million non‑empty addresses
– Bitcoin (BTC): ~57.62 million non‑empty addresses
In raw address count, Ethereum hosts almost three times as many holders as Bitcoin. That gap is enormous, especially considering Bitcoin’s role as the original and most valuable cryptocurrency by market capitalization.
Why is Ethereum so far in front? The main reason is structural. Ethereum is not only a currency; it is the base layer for a massive ecosystem of:
– Decentralized finance (DeFi) applications
– NFT marketplaces
– Stablecoins
– Layer‑2 scaling networks
– On‑chain games and social applications
Every user who interacts with these applications must hold ETH in at least one address, even if only to pay transaction fees. Over time, this has created an explosion in the number of non‑empty wallets, many of which are linked to smart contracts, DeFi strategies, or automated systems rather than long‑term investors alone.
Stablecoins, DOGE, and XRP: The Next Tier
After Bitcoin, the drop‑off to the next largest network is once again dramatic. In third place by number of holding addresses is Tether (USDT), with about 9.63 million non‑empty wallets. That is a fraction of Bitcoin’s count and an even smaller fraction of Ethereum’s, but still puts USDT at the top of the altcoin pack.
From there, the competition becomes much tighter:
– Dogecoin (DOGE): ~8.13 million addresses
– XRP: ~7.41 million addresses
Dogecoin, born as a meme coin, actually commands one of the largest holder bases in the market. That broad address distribution reflects years of viral attention, tip culture, and low unit price, all of which made it easy for casual users to experiment with DOGE.
XRP, despite regulatory headwinds in key jurisdictions, maintains a comparably large user base by address count, thanks to its long history and persistent community support in payments and remittances.
How Bitcoin and Ethereum Adoption Are Moving
The dynamics between Bitcoin and Ethereum look very different when you zoom into the last year.
Santiment’s data shows that:
– Bitcoin’s Total Amount of Holders has been largely flat recently.
– Ethereum’s holder count has continued to climb, steadily widening the gap.
In other words, while Bitcoin’s address base is sizeable and relatively stable, Ethereum is still in an expansion phase in terms of wallet distribution.
This pattern is reinforced by another key indicator: Network Growth. This metric tracks the number of new addresses appearing on a blockchain each day.
For Ethereum, Network Growth has recently spiked. Santiment notes that the network is now seeing:
– About 163,000 new addresses per day, up from
– Around 124,000 in July
That is a substantial acceleration, signaling a meaningful wave of fresh participants, contracts, and accounts joining the Ethereum ecosystem.
Why Ethereum’s Address Count Keeps Surging
Several forces are likely driving Ethereum’s persistent lead in holders:
1. Smart Contract Flexibility
Ethereum’s programmable architecture lets developers deploy tokens, DeFi protocols, NFTs, and more. Every interaction with these tools typically requires an address holding ETH, expanding the total count almost automatically.
2. Layer‑2 Ecosystem
Many layer‑2 solutions settle back to Ethereum. Even when users move activity off the main chain for cheaper fees, they usually still maintain at least one L1 ETH address, which shows up in the holders metric.
3. DeFi and Yield Strategies
DeFi protocols often encourage users to split funds across multiple addresses to manage strategies, test dApps, or separate risk. This can inflate address numbers while still reflecting real, active use.
4. NFT & Social Adoption
NFT users and on‑chain identity or social apps often create fresh wallets for different collections or personas, which again adds to the count.
Interpreting the Numbers: Addresses ≠ People
While the “Total Amount of Holders” is a useful adoption proxy, it comes with important caveats:
– One person can control many addresses
Power users, institutions, and exchanges may operate thousands or even millions of addresses. This overstates how many unique individuals are involved.
– One address can represent many users
Large custodial platforms aggregate funds from many customers into a limited set of wallets, understating user counts.
– Empty vs. non‑empty
The metric only tracks addresses with a non‑zero balance. Dormant or wiped accounts fall out of the statistic even if they still technically exist on‑chain.
Because of these limitations, comparisons between Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dogecoin, and others should be viewed as relative indicators of network breadth, not as precise user census data.
What Does This Mean for Bitcoin?
Bitcoin’s roughly 57.62 million non‑empty addresses and flat growth pattern suggest a network that is mature and widely held, but no longer experiencing explosive onboarding through new wallets.
That is not necessarily bearish. It often reflects:
– Higher average wealth per address, especially as long‑term holders consolidate.
– Institutional adoption via large custodians, which can reduce address proliferation.
– Greater emphasis on security and consolidation, as users move away from tiny, scattered wallets.
In parallel, Bitcoin’s role has increasingly centered on being a long‑term store of value and macro hedge rather than a foundation for thousands of applications. That narrative supports deep but relatively stable ownership rather than constant address creation.
Dogecoin’s Surprisingly Large Footprint
Dogecoin’s position, with more than 8 million non‑empty addresses, is striking for a coin that started as a joke. Several factors help explain this spread:
– Ultra‑low unit price for most of its history, making it easy for newcomers to buy small amounts.
– Widespread brand recognition and viral marketing.
– Use in tipping, small payments, and experimental transactions.
– Longstanding support on major exchanges and payment apps.
From an adoption standpoint, Dogecoin’s holder count indicates that meme coins with strong cultural cachet can carve out genuine on‑chain presence, even if their technical capabilities are modest compared with smart contract platforms.
Comparing Adoption Quality, Not Just Quantity
Raw address numbers tell only part of the adoption story. When comparing Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Dogecoin, it is useful to think in terms of what people are actually doing with those addresses:
– Bitcoin: primarily long‑term holding, savings, settlement, and large transfers.
– Ethereum: active participation in DeFi, NFTs, tokens, layer‑2s, and programmable money.
– Dogecoin: speculative holding, community use, and low‑stakes experimentation.
A higher holder count may point to:
– Lower barriers to entry (small purchase sizes, low fees).
– Broad distribution across many small balance wallets.
– Strong network effects driven by apps, communities, or culture.
But it doesn’t automatically mean deeper economic value per user.
How Traders Can Use Holder Metrics
For investors and traders, the Total Amount of Holders and Network Growth metrics can serve as early‑stage adoption signals:
– Consistent growth in non‑empty addresses may indicate a healthy inflow of new participants, supporting long‑term demand.
– Sharp declines can flag periods of capitulation, user exit, or heavy consolidation.
– Divergences – for example, growing holders but falling prices – can highlight accumulation phases where newer participants are quietly entering the market.
In Ethereum’s case, steadily rising holders and a spike in daily new addresses point to an ecosystem still drawing in fresh capital and experimentation, even through volatile price cycles.
Market Context: Bitcoin Price Snapshot
At the time captured in the data, Bitcoin was trading around 87,500 dollars, showing a modest 2% decline over the previous week. Short‑term price action, however, often moves independently from slow‑burn adoption indicators like address growth.
For a long‑term view, metrics such as holders count, Network Growth, and address distribution offer a more structural perspective on how deeply each cryptocurrency is embedding itself into the digital economy.
The Bottom Line
– Ethereum leads the market in non‑empty addresses by a wide margin, with about 168 million wallets, reflecting its multi‑purpose role as a smart contract and DeFi hub.
– Bitcoin maintains a large, stable base of around 58 million holders, consistent with its status as the dominant store‑of‑value asset in crypto.
– Dogecoin and XRP follow closely behind USDT in holder counts, underscoring how meme appeal and long‑term presence can translate into broad distribution.
– Address metrics aren’t perfect, but together with Network Growth they paint a clear picture: Ethereum’s network is expanding fastest in terms of wallet‑level adoption, while Bitcoin and Dogecoin show more mature or niche but still substantial user bases.
For anyone tracking the evolution of major cryptocurrencies, the story told by addresses is clear: capital and experimentation continue to cluster around programmable platforms like Ethereum, even as Bitcoin retains its central role as the original digital asset and Dogecoin holds on to its surprising mass‑market reach.