Fresh on-chain data points to a shift in how ICP is being held, with a growing number of meaningful wallets above the 1,000 ICP mark reaching an all-time high, while wallets holding more than 100,000 ICP have fallen to an all-time low.
The figures suggest an ongoing distribution phase. Large early holders appear to have reduced exposure, while ownership is spreading across smaller but still committed wallets. That trend is often seen as positive for decentralisation, though it also changes the dynamics of liquidity and market influence, with fewer large wallets able to absorb sudden supply shocks.
Much of the early supply, including holdings linked to seed investors, has already moved into the market. At the same time, undisbursed voting rewards remain part of the system and will eventually enter circulation. The timing of that release, and the level of demand when it happens, will play a role in how smoothly the market adjusts.
Sustainability is now closely tied to how the network handles Node Provider rewards. This year, around 5.3 million ICP was paid out to node providers, while roughly 1.7 million ICP was burned through network activity. That gap highlights the importance of increasing usage that drives burns, or finding ways to offset rewards without relying on higher issuance.
Price behaviour adds further pressure. Because node providers are paid in a fixed dollar amount, lower token prices require more ICP to be minted to meet those obligations. Over time, that can dilute existing holders if price weakness persists. Supporters argue that greater price stability and a higher cycle burn rate would reduce this effect, helping issuance and demand move closer into balance.
There is also a longer-term question around retail participation. Broader ownership among mid-sized wallets suggests engagement beyond early insiders, yet sustaining that trend likely depends on clearer use cases, application growth and confidence that network economics are improving rather than drifting.
Data from IC Terminal captures a network in transition. The spread of holdings points to a more distributed base, while the decline in very large wallets reflects a market still working through early allocations. Whether this phase leads to a steadier footing will depend on how effectively rewards, burns and demand are aligned over the coming years.
Dear Reader,
Ledger Life is an independent platform dedicated to covering the Internet Computer (ICP) ecosystem and beyond. We focus on real stories, builder updates, project launches, and the quiet innovations that often get missed.
We’re not backed by sponsors. We rely on readers like you.
If you find value in what we publish—whether it’s deep dives into dApps, explainers on decentralised tech, or just keeping track of what’s moving in Web3—please consider making a donation. It helps us cover costs, stay consistent, and remain truly independent.
Your support goes a long way.
🧠 ICP Principal: ins6i-d53ug-zxmgh-qvum3-r3pvl-ufcvu-bdyon-ovzdy-d26k3-lgq2v-3qe
🧾 ICP Address: f8deb966878f8b83204b251d5d799e0345ea72b8e62e8cf9da8d8830e1b3b05f
🪙 BTC Wallet: bc1pp5kuez9r2atdmrp4jmu6fxersny4uhnaxyrxau4dg7365je8sy2q9zff6p
Every contribution helps keep the lights on, the stories flowing, and the crypto clutter out.
Thank you for reading, sharing, and being part of this experiment in decentralised media.
—Team Ledger Life
Community Discussion