Report date: 2026-10-21 · Sources checked: October 24, 2026 (Korea time). Prices, balances and product terms refer to the cited reporting cutoff.
Acquisition costs are frequently used to explain potential Bitcoin resistance. October 21 coverage of Glassnode research highlighted an estimated $87,700 cost basis for the cohort holding coins for six to twelve months.
The interpretation is that holders may sell when a recovery lets them exit near break-even. This is a dated cohort estimate, rather than a live quote or a confirmed quantity of sell orders.
On this page
How a cost basis becomes a resistance hypothesis
The behavioral explanation is straightforward: some holders at a loss may reduce exposure when price recovers toward their entry level. It does not follow that every holder makes the same choice. Objectives, liquidity needs, taxes and other investments differ.
An on-chain cost-basis measure examines that possibility at a cohort level. It is different from an order book showing visible sell orders. A line representing estimated acquisition cost does not automatically execute a sale when the market reaches it.
The original Glassnode report is dated October 14 and rounds the cohort figure to about $88,000. The $87,700 cited at the start of this article comes from the October 21 follow-up report. Values with different dates and rounding should not be treated as one live quotation.
What on-chain cost estimates cannot show
On-chain analysis uses recorded blockchain movements to estimate the condition of holder groups. It is not an account ledger that perfectly distinguishes exchange-internal trades from transfers between one owner’s wallets.
A concentration of estimated acquisition costs can therefore identify an area of interest. It does not establish that every holder will make the same decision at that price.
Measuring the distance between the two estimates
The reported $81,500 and $87,700 estimates are $6,200 apart. Moving from the lower to the higher requires approximately 7.61%; moving back from the higher to the lower is approximately a 7.07% decline. The same dollar gap produces different percentages because the denominator changes.
| Comparison | Calculation from the reported figures |
|---|---|
| Difference between estimates | $6,200 |
| $81,500 to $87,700 | About +7.61% |
| $87,700 to $81,500 | About −7.07% |
These are distances between cohort measures, not return targets or forecasts of the next trading range. A brief crossing of a line is also insufficient to establish a durable trend. Subsequent price behavior and actual trading activity provide additional context.
Keep the definitions alongside the figures
The same coverage put the estimated US spot ETF cost basis around $81,500. The figures describe different groups and should not be combined into one market-wide purchase price.
For a follow-up, establish the indicator’s date and cohort definition first. Then examine whether price crossed the zone and whether trading volume and subsequent demand supported that move. A past cost estimate becomes useful only when interpreted alongside current market behavior.
A cohort average is not every member’s break-even. Imagine one person buying 1 BTC at $60,000 and another buying 1 BTC at $100,000. Their simple weighted average is $80,000. At that market price one has a gain and the other a loss; neither individually breaks even.
Actual estimates are more complex, but the same distinction applies. Assuming an entire cohort sells immediately near its average adds a behavioral assumption. Several indicators converging at a level still do not directly reveal resting sell orders.
Use the level as a hypothesis to observe: subsequent trading, persistence after a crossing and changes in other cohorts can support or weaken that interpretation. It is not a confirmed wall of executable supply.
Cohorts and their averages change
A six-to-12-month cohort is not a permanent list of the same wallets. As time passes, holdings can age into or out of that range. A changing cohort estimate therefore does not necessarily mean the same people bought additional coins that day.
Record the full metric name and date when comparing observations. ETF cost basis, age-cohort cost basis and a market-wide estimate are not interchangeable. The analysis offers a hypothesis about supply near break-even. Evaluating it requires attention to the cohort definition and subsequent price behavior, rather than treating one line as a complete trading rule.
Sources and further material
Related reading
Do Bitcoin ETF flows lead prices? DWF Labs studies 694 sessions
Bitcoin put trading rises: hedging demand is not a certain price forecast
