Holder Concentration

Who actually owns the .eth namespace, and does the premium tier filter for individual users or get hoarded by power holders?

Buckets every wallet holding ≥1 currently-active .eth 2LD into a tier by names-held (1, 2–5, 6–10, 11–50, 51–100, 100+). Cross-tabbed against length so you can see who controls each pricing tier.

What this tells you:

Concentration shape - the long tail. How many wallets hold >100 names, and what share of supply do they control?
Premium-tier hoarding - if 3-char names are dominated by 100+ wallets, the price didn't filter for individual utility users.
Per-tier commitment proxy - mean / median expiry-remaining months. Are power holders sitting on long renewals or rolling year-by-year?

Snapshot taken 2026-09-20T03:18:02.103Z

Active 2LDs

808,965

Distinct holders

379,192

Names per holder (avg)

2.13

Wallets by names-held tier

How many wallets sit in each "names held" tier, the share of supply they control, and how long their names have left on average.

Tier	Wallets	% of holders	Active names	% of supply	Mean expiry remaining (months)	Median expiry remaining (months)
1 name	305,166	80.48%	305,166	37.72%	42.7	16.4
2–5 names	59,508	15.69%	157,022	19.41%	49.6	20.7
6–10 names	7,510	1.98%	55,782	6.90%	41.0	15.3
11–50 names	5,814	1.53%	118,821	14.69%	31.4	11.1
51–100 names	711	0.19%	49,494	6.12%	23.6	9.7
100+ names	483	0.13%	122,680	15.17%	23.0	8.9
Total	379,192	100.00%	808,965	100.00%

% of holders + % of supply tell different stories. A handful of 100+ wallets controlling 17%+ of names is the canonical concentration signal - a tiny sliver of holders, a meaningful slice of supply.

Names by tier × char length

Of the names each tier holds, which length tiers do they own?

Tier	3 chars	4 chars	5 chars	6–9 chars	10+ chars	Total
1 name	654	2,159	38,557	158,080	105,716	305,166
2–5 names	797	2,307	16,659	73,564	63,694	157,021
6–10 names	316	1,007	6,002	25,229	23,228	55,782
11–50 names	601	1,947	14,497	54,198	47,578	118,821
51–100 names	197	884	6,708	22,835	18,870	49,494
100+ names	285	1,270	16,443	56,565	48,117	122,680
Total	2,850	9,574	98,866	390,471	307,203	808,965

Tier composition per char bucket

Of all active names in each length bucket, what fraction is held by each tier? The premium-tier hoarding question lives here.

3 chars

23%

28%

11%

21%

10%

2,850

4 chars

23%

24%

11%

20%

13%

9,574

5 chars

39%

17%

15%

17%

98,866

6–9 chars

40%

19%

14%

390,471

10+ chars

34%

21%

15%

16%

307,203

1 name2–5 names6–10 names11–50 names51–100 names100+ names

Methodology

Population: every domain row at depth = 2 with parent_node_string = 'eth' whose expiry_timestamp is in the future. Excludes names in grace and dead names - only the actively-held set.
Owner identification: domains.effective_owner_address. NameWrapper-controlled names attribute to the wrapped owner; vanilla registrar names attribute to the controller-set owner. Both unify here.
Tier definition: each wallet's count of currently-active 2LDs places it in exactly one tier (1, 2–5, 6–10, 11–50, 51–100, 100+). 'Wallets' = distinct addresses; 'names' = the count of 2LDs they collectively hold.
Expiry-remaining stats: months from now until each name's current expiry. Doesn't account for renewals that may happen between now and then - purely a lower-bound on each name's locked-in time.
Same wallet may behave like 'one user with many names' or 'one custody vault for many people' - addresses don't tell you. Read concentration as a structural property of the dataset, not a per-person count.