Key Takeaways
- About 99.85% of Bitcoin’s hashpower remains on the main chain, leaving an estimated 0.15% on the BIP-110 fork.
- The minority chain has fallen more than 80 blocks behind, making it increasingly difficult to remain synchronized.
- Supporters are already discussing alternatives, including changing the proof-of-work algorithm, as overtaking Bitcoin appears increasingly unrealistic.
The BIP-110 minority fork is rapidly losing ground after splitting from Bitcoin’s main chain. By the latest count, the alternative chain had mined only a handful of blocks while Bitcoin continued advancing, leaving the fork more than 80 blocks behind.
The divergence has been amplified by Bitcoin’s latest mining difficulty adjustment.
Because the BIP-110 chain inherits the same network difficulty but controls only a tiny fraction of Bitcoin’s total computing power, new blocks arrive far more slowly, making it increasingly difficult for the fork to remain operational.
The dynamics reflect how minority forks face significant challenges when they lack sufficient mining support.
Saylor: Only 0.15% of Hashpower Backed the Fork
Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor argued that the fork has received almost no meaningful support from miners.
According to Saylor, 99.85% of Bitcoin’s global hashpower remained on the original chain, leaving just 0.15% on the BIP-110 network.
At that pace, he estimated the minority chain could take roughly 25 years to reach its first mining difficulty adjustment, highlighting how difficult it would be for the network to become self-sustaining.
Saylor’s comments reinforce the view that miners overwhelmingly rejected the proposal despite the fork’s launch.
Supporters Admit the Challenge Ahead
BIP-110 supporter Matthew Kratter acknowledged that the minority chain would require a “massive change” to catch Bitcoin’s main network.
Some supporters have since begun discussing whether changing the proof-of-work algorithm could provide a path forward by attracting dedicated miners rather than competing directly with Bitcoin’s SHA-256 hashpower.
The fork originated from BIP-110’s attempt to temporarily restrict the inclusion of non-financial data in Bitcoin transactions.
While advocates argue the proposal better preserves Bitcoin’s role as a monetary network, its limited mining support has raised questions about whether the chain can survive without significant new participants.
With virtually all economic activity and mining power remaining on Bitcoin’s primary network, the immediate outlook appears heavily tilted toward the status quo.
Unless the minority chain attracts substantially more miners or adopts a different technical strategy, its growing block deficit is likely to continue.
The experience also reflects a broader reality of Bitcoin governance: protocol changes require overwhelming ecosystem support, not just technical proposals.
Bitcoin Price Outlook: Little Immediate Impact Unless Hashpower Shifts
For now, the BIP-110 fork appears to have limited implications for Bitcoin’s price because virtually all mining power remains on the main network.
Michael Saylor’s estimate that 99.85% of hashpower continues securing Bitcoin suggests the market overwhelmingly views the original chain as canonical, reducing the risk of a meaningful network split.
Historically, Bitcoin has absorbed contentious forks without lasting price damage when economic activity, exchanges, and miners remained aligned behind a single chain, as seen during SegWit and later with Bitcoin Cash.
The bigger risk would emerge only if the minority chain unexpectedly attracted significant mining power, exchange listings, or institutional support.
At present, neither appears likely. Instead, traders are likely to remain focused on macro drivers such as ETF flows, monetary policy, and onchain demand rather than the fork itself.
Unless the BIP-110 chain can materially increase its hashrate or economic adoption, the episode is more likely to be remembered as a governance experiment than a catalyst for Bitcoin’s next major price move.
Research on contentious Bitcoin forks also suggests that economic adoption, not hashpower alone, ultimately determines whether a competing chain becomes viable, reinforcing the point that the main chain currently retains the advantage.
Top Trending Crypto Articles
The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as, financial advice. We do not make any warranties regarding the completeness, reliability, or accuracy of this information. All investments involve risk, and past performance does not guarantee future results. We recommend consulting a financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
Giuseppe Ciccomascolo began his career as an investigative journalist in Italy, where he contributed to both local and national newspapers, focusing on various financial sectors.
Upon relocating to London, he worked as an analyst for Fitch's CapitalStructure and later as a Senior Reporter for Alliance News. In 2017, Giuseppe transitioned to covering cryptocurrency-related news, producing documentaries and articles on Bitcoin and other emerging digital currencies. He also played a pivotal role in establishing the academy for a cryptocurrency exchange website. Crypto remained his primary area of interest throughout his tenure as a writer for ThirdFloor.
