Nice comparisons.

That is definitely something that makes me feel optimistic about HIVE in comparison to other tokens. Especially with 50/50 Author/Curator split, whales are motivated to support content creators that may have little "skin in the game"... at first. Many become hooked by the gamification present in the system here. At least, I have seen it happen in previous bull markets on STEEM. (2017) It's the catch-22, we need a bit of token value rise to attract new users, and we need new users continually so that the token value increases enough that it's worth people's time being active here.

I still believe that if we put more focus on gamification and UX in front-ends, people will want to use HIVE over traditional social media. Without that (it being a super-modern, aesthetically-pleasing and simple experience) people will mostly focus on the monetary aspects, even though it is the social interaction that creates value in the first place.

Great one!

I wanted to go trough something similar to this... and probably will do some time in the future.

The last 3 to 4 years, with 100 million of steem distributed did a great job in decentralization of the chain, although the start was very bad with a lot of centralization. 80% in on subject. Now days that subject has around 25% share, but on the old chain. Here its non existant. The largest stakeholder, freedom has around 5% share, the second one around 2%. For example block.one on eos also has around 5%, and the next close ones in the range 4 to 5%. But a lot od the coins overall are in few hands as you noted.

Not totaly sure about bitinfocharts, I use it as well but some numbers looks outdated.

Another great source of info is coinmetrics.io

A nice way to think about "flattening the curve" ... thank you!

I like the comparison.

Some people think decentralization is a point when it's actually a spectrum.

You don't hear people like Hoskinson say he is trying to ``achieve decentralization``. He's trying to make his project ``more decentralized`` than other projects out there.

The distribution of HIVE is good compared to other blockchains and it is getting better every day.

Hey I followed and upvoted you. And you?

You can learn Honey Hunters Community Page to subscribe.

https://esteem.app/hive-176028/@golden.future/honey-hunters-community-page-subscribe-for-membership

Very interesting that most of the crypto space is controlled by a relatively few people.

Ok for TRON and ETH (although probably not up to date as it's sourced).

But for others (BTC, BCash, LTC), the limit you set is way too high. My limit for Hive was 1 HIVE, so you should convert that to USD, and use that as the limit. It's 1500 satoshis for Bitcoin. And of course this goes in the favor of Hive/Steem again, making it look even better distributed.

BUT ... BTC, LTC, BCash or ETH are not DPOS chains, therefore stake is a bit irrelevant in these systems. What is interesting to chart would be the hashing power, because it's what controls the chain! Also important to note that Steem/Hive is a blockchain focused on improving distribution, through proof-of-brain, despite what all the powerful people on this chain say about it, it's working fair. The main issue on steem is that not 100% of the inflation goes to rewards, 10% goes to witnesses, and 15% to SPS I believe. This reduces the efficiency of the system.

Let's not talk about EOS, we all knew it was a scam. Let's just hope Dan Larimer comes back to reason and build decentralized social media again (VOICE ???)

If you want to properly analyze all the coins distributions, looking it as "Top X% controls Y%" is a bit weak. Instead, we should try to find the closest [zipf law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law) parameter. The lower this parameter is, the better the overall distribution. It honestly would deserve a small website, or maybe coin market cap could do it.

One thing you did not point out in your post is the difference in barrier to entry. There is a big difference between someone trying to acquire a lot of BTC versus trying to acquire hive. The higher point of entry is a big factor IMO. Saying that we stand up well against others is simply sugar coating that all coin distribution across the ecosystem is bad. We need a lot fo work

Great post @taskmaster4450. Looking at cryptocurrencies from a distribution point of view is a new thing for me, so kudos to you.

HIVE has among the best distribution in crypto and it will only get better as time goes by. 

Heimin is just salty that Avalon is launching soon and his token price will be between 0.000001$ and 0.0000000001$

Good point! Trend > Status.

Looks like I am pretty close to that 1%

Definitely in the top 5% even though you don't mention that number. 

While it looks "bad" anyone who wants to put an extra $500 USD into this equation can easily be in those top numbers. 

All the same, this disgusting distribution - the terrible distribution is a stone on the neck of HIVE - it will always be a problem.

Great analysis. Thank you

I appreciate his posting this information and I am curious to know why he is being downvoted so heavily (I hope everyone can refrain from downvoting people into oblivion just because we disagree with them), but the numbers themselves seems a bit misleading. 

As I pointed out in a reply, most of the top 10 accounts are exchanges and have exponential amounts of hive and that seems unavoidable.  As long as they are not participating in governance and voting, I think we need to count them differently when we look at the health of the ecosystem. 

The chart looks awful but I suspect it will look much better when you adjust it this way