Bitcoin continues to attract worldwide attention, institutions continue to accumulate it, and a market cap above $1.7 trillion indicates how widely held Bitcoin has become. Yet when we look at actual network behavior, the signals don’t match the headlines. Over 60% of all BTC hasn’t moved in over a year, on-chain activity is declining (part of this decline related to ETF adoption), and miner fee revenue continues to fluctuate. For a system designed to move value rather than simply store it, this becomes a real problem in how it works.
So how far can a network go where most of the capital never circulates? After all, movement is what creates costs, creates demand for new tools and applications, and helps keep the network secure. Therefore, if the trend observed today continues, the underlying incentive model will not be up to the demands of the next stage of development.
Bitcoin Incentive Structure Reaches Its Limits
Bitcoin was never meant to stand still. It’s just not in his nature. Its architecture assumes one thing from the start: economic activity. This means that the network relies on transactions to pay miners and constant activity to keep the system running. But today the system faces a contradiction: a high-value network with low-value throughput.
Unlike Ethereum or Solana, where users interact with apps, staking tokens, or mint assets, Bitcoin’s usage is still geared toward long-term storage, as evidenced by how BTC remains unchanged. Yes, this behavior preserves individual wealth, but it starves the network. So the more people view BTC as an untouchable holy grail, the less reason there is to transact and the thinner the fee base becomes.
Now imagine this: It’s 2140 and the last Bitcoin has been mined. Subsidies are gone and the network must pay its security bills through transaction fees alone. But usage has not changed. There are fewer than 250,000 daily transactions, average fees under $2, while block rewards are drying up.
What happens then? Either miners turn off the machines, weakening security, or Bitcoin raises fees so high that everyday users are shut out entirely. It’s a dead end.
The more serious truth is that, even in 2025, this scenario is already starting to seem less hypothetical. Fee income now represents less than 1% of rewards, well below the 10-15% range needed to start relying less on broadcasts. This is why functional speed is the missing piece right now. Scarcity can support the price, even if only circulation ensures the viability of the network.
So, if movement is the missing piece, what will it take to get Bitcoin capital moving again? This is where new incentive models come into play.
Capital becomes productive or becomes a burden
Even if Bitcoin has value, it is no longer enough to allow the network to maintain itself in the long term. Its capital must become productive. . For the network to survive in the long term, its capital must become productive. This is where a new class of on-chain tools begins to form – those that activate BTC itself.
At the center of this shift is BTCFi – a financial layer emerging around Bitcoin’s most fundamental input: the hashrate. These protocols allow holders to lock their BTC into yield-generating products that directly support network security.
Naturally, this results in an incentive loop, where users help miners, miners secure the network, and the network returns value through sustainable on-chain rewards. For the first time on a large scale, Bitcoin’s raw calculation engine is connected to a financial mechanism that strengthens the system from the inside out, instead of relying on speculative hype.
Of course, some are skeptical. Analysts say BTCFi has yet to deliver on its promises because adoption is modest, liquidity is low, and the majority of BTC is still in cold storage. This is a fair and, to some extent, correct observation. However, this does not invalidate the management. This actually confirms the urgency.
Since Bitcoin was never designed to live in vaults, but rather to move, interact, and circulate, BTCFi is its natural next step toward actually using BTC.
A monetary revolution needs participants
If there’s a lesson to be learned from high-engagement ecosystems like TRON, it’s that activity doesn’t happen by accident. Networks thrive when participation is easy, incentives are visible, and value flows through the system rather than remaining on the margins.
The same goes for establishments. They don’t deliberately keep Bitcoin inert; they simply follow incentives formed over a decade of treating BTC as a macro hedge. This is why, as long as detention pays more than participation, trillions will remain in cold storage. Once the risk-adjusted on-chain return becomes undeniable, this behavior changes.
That’s the broader truth here. Bitcoin cannot survive into the next century as a museum piece. This must become an economy.
