Bitcoin’s Mining Difficulty Rises for the First Time in 57 Days, BTC Hashrate Slipped 1.7% Lower in Q2

Bitcoin

The mining difficulty tied to the Bitcoin network increased for the first time in 57 days, rising 1.74% higher than the last two weeks. Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s hashrate has been below average as the network’s computational power is down 1.7% lower in the second quarter than in Q1 2022. After reaching 292 exahash per second (EH/s) on June 8, Bitcoin’s hashrate today is coasting along below the 200 EH/s mark at 182 EH/s.

Bitcoin’s Difficulty Increases, Making It More Difficult to Discover Block Rewards for the Next 2 Weeks

Following the three consecutive difficulty adjustment algorithm (DAA) reductions over the last six weeks, the DAA has shifted upwards for the first time since June 8. On August 4, at block height 747,936, the difficulty increased by 1.74%, bringing the metric up from 27.69 trillion to the current 28.20 trillion.

The DAA, or difficulty epoch, changes every 2,016 blocks or roughly every two weeks. The DAA increases when the 2,016 blocks are discovered too fast and the metric decreases when the discovery time is too slow. Satoshi Nakamoto’s design makes it so roughly every ten minutes, a new BTC block is found as the DAA system is modeled by a Poisson distribution scheme.

Since the 1.74% increase on Thursday, it is now harder to find a bitcoin block than it was during the last two weeks. Prior to the rise, the DAA shifted downwards three times in a row after June 8. Currently, the network’s 28.20 trillion difficulty metric is 9.76% lower than the all-time high in mid-May when it tapped 31.25 million.

With lower BTC prices and the latest difficulty increase, the changes could affect miners negatively during the next two weeks. At press time, the network’s computational power is under the 200 EH/s zone, as it’s coasting along at 182 EH/s today.

The overall Bitcoin hashrate slipped 1.7% lower in Q2 2022 compared to the first quarter, according to statistics compiled by stockapps.com’s fintech expert Edith Muthoni. “In the second half of the second quarter, Bitcoin’s overall hash rate grew more irregular and variable,” Muthoni notes in her research. “This behavior indicates miners are struggling to adapt to the changing market conditions.”

At 182 EH/s, Bitcoin’s hashrate is 37% lower than the 292 EH/s all-time high posted on June 8. Second quarter data indicates that Foundry USA was the top mining pool, capturing 22.27% of Q2’s overall hashrate. Foundry discovered 2,843 BTC blocks out of the 12,766 blocks found in Q2.

Antpool followed Foundry with 14.77% of the global hashrate as the pool discovered 1,885 blocks during the three-month period. The third largest mining pool in Q2 2022 was F2pool, with 14.31% of the global hashrate, as it mined 1,827 out of the 12,766 blocks discovered in the second quarter.

Tags in this story
Antpool, Bitcoin Miners, Bitcoin mining, block height 747936, Blocks, BTC blocks, BTC Mining, BTC Mining pools, DAA, DAA decrease, DAA rise, difficulty, difficulty increase, F2Pool, Foundry, Hashpower, Hashrate, mining, Mining Pools, Poisson distribution, Satoshi Nakamoto’s design

What do you think about Bitcoin’s difficulty rising 1.74% higher? Let us know your thoughts about this subject in the comments section below.

Jamie Redman

Jamie Redman is the News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open-source code, and decentralized applications. Since September 2015, Redman has written more than 5,700 articles for Bitcoin.com News about the disruptive protocols emerging today.




Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Read disclaimer