Author: Daii
Open your exchange app and look at your "BTC balance". You think that's Bitcoin itself? NO, that's just Bitcoin's "shadow".
Bitcoin is no longer what it used to be. You've heard its story: a total supply of 21 million coins, with halvings constantly reducing the new supply. It's like an incredibly hard "time rock," and you can even measure its rhythm with block height.
But in the real world, Bitcoin that is "traded, pledged, priced, and held" is not the same as on-chain UTXOs.
What is a UTXO? This is the subject of today's article—real Bitcoin, as opposed to shadow Bitcoin. You can think of it as the only truly "cash in your hand" in the Bitcoin world. More precisely, UTXO stands for Unspent Transaction Output. While it sounds technical, its meaning is actually quite practical: In the Bitcoin system, your balance isn't a number written in an account; it's more like a handful of "change." Each UTXO is like a denomination "change slip" or "cash voucher," stating that the money belongs to a specific address, and only the person with the corresponding private key has the right to spend it. When you "pay" Bitcoin, you don't deduct a number from your account. Instead, you hand over a whole set of UTXOs. The system treats these as "used" (no longer exists) and then generates new UTXOs: one part goes to the recipient, and the other part is returned to your address as "change." Therefore, what you truly own on the Bitcoin chain is not "the BTC number displayed to you by a platform," but a set of UTXOs that you can spend by signing with your private key. These are the true entities in the final settlement layer. What you see in exchange accounts, ETF shares, DeFi lending positions, and perpetual contract positions are mostly just "rights or exposures to BTC"—they look like balances, but are essentially just a line of numbers on contracts, vouchers, or platform ledgers. They are not real Bitcoins, but merely shadows of Bitcoin, at best only shadow Bitcoins. If you still find these abstract, let's not argue about the concepts yet, but look at three sets of numbers to reveal the "shadows". The First Ray of Light: The Main Force in Trading Isn't in Spot Trading [Image of a PNG file] In most people's intuition, "spot trading" is the true price, while "contracts" are merely shadows revolving around the spot market. However, when faced with data, this order is often reversed: derivatives are the main form of trading activity. Kaiko's annual review mentions that in 2025, approximately 75% of trading activity in the crypto market occurred in the derivatives market; for Bitcoin, perpetual contracts accounted for about 68% of Bitcoin trading volume. Meanwhile, the average daily trading volume of Bitcoin perpetual contracts is roughly between $10 billion and $30 billion, with some peak days seeing BTC perpetual contract trading volume on a single platform reaching the $80 billion level. (coinglass) This means that, often, the most "crowded" and "intense" place in the market is not the spot market, but the arena of leveraged exposure. The Second Ray of Light: ETFs Transform "Shadows" into Mainstream Financial Assets. If perpetual contracts are "trading shadows," then ETFs are "institutionalized shadows": they encapsulate BTC price exposure as securities, allowing large amounts of capital to enter in a familiar way. Taking Bitbo's ETF tracking data as an example, the total holdings of US spot Bitcoin ETFs reached approximately 1,301,880 BTC (worth approximately $121.27 billion) in early January 2026, of which BlackRock's IBIT held approximately 770,792 BTC. (bitbo.io)
These BTC may indeed be custodied on-chain, but for most holders, what you hold is not a UTXO, but fund units—you own the "right to the financial asset," not "control of the on-chain private key."
The third ray of light: Encapsulating BTC transforms "on-chain yield" into "on-chain credit."
The shadow doesn't only occur in centralized finance. There is also a whole industrial system on-chain that "turns BTC into composable assets": WBTC, cbBTC, etc., turning BTC into ERC-20 in the EVM world, allowing it to be lent, used for market making, as collateral, and stacked with yield.
For example, Coinbase's cbBTC, on its official proof-of-reserve page, shows a total supply of approximately 73,773.70 cbBTC as of the morning of January 6, 2026, and provides verifiable information on the corresponding reserves and on-chain addresses. (coinbase.com) WBTC remains another large-scale encapsulated BTC (the supply and demand will fluctuate over time depending on the source; for example, CoinGecko displays publicly available data on its circulating supply/supply). (CoinGecko) You'll find a very "modern" fact: the scarcer Bitcoin is, the more prosperous the credit structure surrounding it becomes. This is because scarce assets are best suited as collateral—they can inject "time value" into the spring of credit expansion. Having read this far, do you have a basic understanding of shadow Bitcoin? However, intuition alone is insufficient, as we cannot make decisions based on feelings. We need to understand the true nature of shadow Bitcoin. 1. What is Shadow Bitcoin? Discussions about "shadow Bitcoin" easily fall into the trap of a vague statement: it seems that anything not on-chain BTC is "fake money." This is inaccurate. A more professional approach is to break down "Bitcoin" into three rights—which one do you actually possess? Ownership (Finality): Can you control UTXOs on-chain using your private key to complete the final settlement? Redemption/Claim: Can you redeem a certain certificate for BTC (or equivalent cash)? What are the redemption path, rules, and priorities? Price Exposure: Do you just want to follow BTC's price fluctuations and don't care about redemption and final settlement? "Shadow Bitcoin," in essence, is: the market uses contracts, custody, securitization, and encapsulation to allow you to obtain redemption rights or price exposure without holding on-chain UTXOs. It's not a single species, but an entire niche. However, you should be familiar with the specter hiding behind Shadow Bitcoin—leverage. Some leverage you apply yourself, some is applied by others, and the lion's share of the profits goes to them, while you receive only a meager return disproportionate to the risk. Next, we will focus on the core concept of "leverage" and break down the "shadow" into layers, like peeling an onion.

2. The Ghost Behind Shadow Bitcoin—Leverage
If "shadow Bitcoin" is a series of layers of packaged "rights and exposures," then leverage is what makes these shadows suddenly grow fangs.
... It's most like an invisible wind: normally it just creates ripples on the water's surface, which everyone thinks is "liquidity"; but once the wind turns into a hurricane, the ripples instantly become walls of waves, capsizing what you thought was a sturdy boat. Even more troublesome is that the wind doesn't just come from the sails you raise yourself—often, the platform raises the sails for you, and you have no idea where the rope is attached. Let me first put leverage in a more precise framework: it's not as simple as a "multiple." The essence of leverage is using the same underlying asset, under different ledgers and different rules, to repeatedly generate "tradable exposure" and "collateralizable credit." Explicit leverage allows you to manipulate larger notional positions with a small amount of margin; implicit leverage is the system (platform) using your assets to create a larger balance sheet, concentrating profits at a few points and spreading tail risk to participants like you. To survive in the shadow industry, you must first understand two key aspects. 2.1 The First Vision: Explicit Leverage, Like a Knife Many people believe that contracts are simply about "betting on price movements." But the real magic of the contract market lies in its ability to transform Bitcoin into "infinitely replicable notional exposure." Kaiko's 2025 research presents a stark reality: derivatives already account for over 75% of all trading activity in the crypto market, while perpetual contracts account for approximately 68% of Bitcoin trading volume (and continue to rise since 2024). In other words, the most crowded and intense activity in the market is not in spot trading, but in perpetual contracts. (Kaiko) This is the first form of operation for the "shadow factory": it's not that there are more Bitcoins, but rather that the notional positions surrounding Bitcoin have become extremely large. What you see are trading volume, funding rates, and liquidation data; they are essentially different facets of the same thing: the same underlying asset, churned on leverage. AMINA Bank's summary of the derivatives market in Q3 2025 provides more specific quantitative metrics: the average daily trading volume of derivatives in the quarter was approximately $24.6 billion, with perpetual contracts accounting for 78% of trading activity. It also points out that derivatives trading volume on several major exchanges consistently exceeded spot trading volume, with the ratio ranging from approximately 5 to 10 times. (AMINA Bank) This isn't just "excitement," it's structure: when the primary trading occurs in the leveraged market, short-term price behavior increasingly resembles the "price of leveraged products" rather than the "price of spot commodities."

You don't need to believe in abstract theories; just look at one extreme event.
... AMINA's report documented a liquidation deleveraging event in September 2025: approximately $16.7 billion in positions were liquidated within 24 hours, affecting over 226,000 traders; long positions accounted for a staggering 94% of the liquidated positions, and the report explicitly mentioned leverage as high as 125 times in the market. (AMINA Bank)
In October of the same year, Reuters also reported on another, even more dramatic, deleveraging event: in a panic triggered by a macroeconomic policy shock, over $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated, described as one of the largest liquidations in crypto history. (Reuters)
You'll find that the world of explicit leverage is very "rational": large positions will be liquidated, high leverage will be wiped out, and extreme funding rates will eventually revert to normal. It's like a knife—sharp, but at least you can see where the blade is.
The real danger in the era of shadow Bitcoin is never the knife you hold yourself, but the fact that someone has actually put the knife in your hand and signed a waiver for you when you think you are watching the show from the sidelines.
2.2 The second image: Hidden leverage, like a ghost

The most dangerous thing about hidden leverage is that it often appears disguised as "returns".
... When you deposit BTC, you see "Earn," "investment," and a stable annualized return; but in an accounting sense, you may have already handed over control, or even ownership, of your assets to the platform. From that moment on, the balance you see on the platform is more like an IOU: normally it's equivalent to BTC, only when a run occurs do you realize it's a debt certificate, not the actual on-chain asset. Celsius' bankruptcy case made this boundary very clear. Investopedia quoted the court ruling, stating that the judge believed Celsius' terms transferred ownership of assets to the platform after users deposited them into their Earn accounts; at the time Celsius filed for bankruptcy, the Earn accounts held approximately $4.2 billion in assets, involving approximately 600,000 users. (Investopedia) Multiple legal institutions offer a more direct interpretation of the same ruling: the terms "unambiguously" transfer ownership of the digital assets deposited by users into their Earn accounts to Celsius, placing users in the position of unsecured creditors in bankruptcy. (Sidley Austin) This is the prototype of "risk-return asymmetry": returns are paid to you in the form of a few percentage points annualized, while the risk is a tail-end event at the balance sheet level. Once triggered, your returns become meaningless within seconds, and your principal has to wait in line for its fate. FTX, on the other hand, demonstrates another face of hidden leverage: it's not that the terms are cleverly written, but rather that the funding path is deliberately made a black box. The CFTC's indictment states that clients' fiat currency assets were typically held in bank accounts under Alameda's name, commingled with Alameda's own assets; FTX's internal ledger system used the "fiat@ftx" account to reflect clients' fiat currency balances, which at one point reached approximately $8 billion. The SEC's enforcement announcement also explicitly accused FTX of misappropriating client funds and concealing this from investors. Against this backdrop, many exchanges began introducing Proof of Reserves (PoR) after 2022, attempting to prove "I haven't used client assets." This is certainly better than complete opacity, but it is often misunderstood as "audit = security." The interpretation by accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) emphasizes a key point: A Proof of Asset Receipt (PoR) is typically more like a snapshot of assets at a specific point in time, and is not equivalent to a full audit, nor does it necessarily cover the liabilities side and overall solvency. (PwC) In layman's terms: PoR is more like counting the rice in the kitchen at a certain moment, rather than checking the entire balance sheet of the house. You can think of PoR as a "kitchen inventory": you see how much rice is left in the rice bin, but you don't know how many people are queuing up for food outside, let alone whether the chef has mortgaged the pot to someone else. It can improve transparency, but it cannot replace the solvency guarantee in the sense of a balance sheet, much less the repayment ability under stress testing. A more "modern" upgrade of implicit leverage is that it enters two more powerful machines: one is composable credit called DeFi, and the other is institutionalized funding channels called ETFs. They make the shadow more standardized and larger in scale, and are more easily mistaken for the "original entity". Let's look at the encapsulation first.

Coinbase's cbBTC reserve proof page, when refreshed on January 6, 2026, showed: reserves of approximately 76,230.31 BTC, corresponding to a supply of approximately 76,219.49 cbBTC, and emphasized a 1:1 ratio.
... Coinbase holds BTC in custody, providing backing. (Coinbase) This kind of transparency is progress because you can at least see "how thick this shadow is." But you still need to remember: transparency does not equal risk-free; it only moves risk from a "complete black box" to "observable but still bearable." Now let's look at WBTC. In August 2024, BitGo announced the migration of its WBTC-related business to a multi-jurisdictional, multi-institutional custody structure and established a joint venture arrangement with BiT Global. (The Digital Asset Infrastructure Company) Similar structural changes immediately trigger a chain reaction in DeFi risk control layers. For example, discussions emerged on the Aave governance forum about "the need to reassess the risks of WBTC integration." (Aave) This precisely illustrates that the risk of encapsulating BTC lies not only in the "1:1" ratio, but also in whether changes to the custody and governance structure will alter your future exit rights. Finally, let's look at ETFs.

Taking the prospectus of Blackstone iShares Bitcoin Trust as an example, it clearly states that the trust only accepts subscription and redemption requests from Authorized Participants.
... (BlackRock) This means that most ordinary investors hold security shares and price exposure, rather than the right to directly demand redemption of BTC. ETFs making shadow Bitcoin a mainstream financial asset isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it also reinforces a reality: you're one step further away from the "final settlement of UTXOs"—you possess a financial rights structure, not on-chain control. Therefore, you'll find that the most terrifying aspect of implicit leverage isn't its "level," but rather that it often appears in the form of "promises": instant deposit and withdrawal, redemption at any time, 1:1 asset ratio, and transparent reserves. Therefore, the smoother the promise and the easier the exit, the more you should ask yourself: what risks were traded for this certainty? Where are the risks hidden? Who will cover them?
2.3 Leverage Paradox: The scarcer Bitcoin is, the more prosperous its shadow becomes; the more prosperous the shadow becomes, the more the system needs a "cleansing day"

Scarce assets are naturally suitable as collateral.
... Here's a paradox you've already vaguely touched upon: the stronger the collateral, the more aggressive the credit expansion; the greater the credit expansion, the more sensitive the system is to price fluctuations; and once price fluctuations trigger liquidation mechanisms, leverage is wiped out in a "waterfall" fashion. BIS research describes the same thing in more academic terms: in the DeFi lending system, higher leverage weakens system resilience and increases the proportion of "debt close to liquidation"; leverage levels are driven by factors such as LTV requirements, borrowing costs, and price volatility. (Bank for International Settlements) Imagine this simply: when your house is repeatedly mortgaged and remortgaged, the more debt the same house supports, the more banks will swarm to you for money if house prices fall even slightly—BTC, repeatedly used as collateral in DeFi, follows the same logic. Translating this into "shadow Bitcoin language," it means: When BTC is repeatedly used as collateral, the system becomes increasingly like a giant, intricate spring; the spring allows you to jump higher, but it also determines the speed at which you fall. Therefore, the true meaning of "the ghost behind shadow Bitcoin is leverage" is not simply advising you to stay away from contract trading. It's a reminder that even if you never touch contracts, as long as you put BTC into a profit-generating system, you must ask—is this system adding leverage for you in ways you can't see? If so, who gets the leveraged profits, and who ultimately bears the tail risk of leverage? At this point, you might ask: since shadows are unavoidable and leverage is ubiquitous, how can ordinary people establish an executable survival strategy between "profit demands" and "exit risk limits," instead of dancing on gut feeling?
3. Survival Strategies in the Shadow Age—How to Avoid Being Devoured by the Shadow?

By now, you probably understand one thing: Shadow Bitcoin is not a "conspiracy," but a structural fact (division of labor).
3.1 First, establish the rules: Which type of BTC do you actually want?

The biggest cognitive trap in the shadow era is treating all forms of "BTC balance" as the same thing.
... The BTC you see in trading, the shares you see in ETFs, the wrapped BTC you see in DeFi, and the notional positions you see in perpetual contracts essentially correspond to different rights structures. You need to ask yourself a very practical question first: What is the meaning of this money? 3.1.1 If what you want is "final settlement ownership," then what you want is on-chain BTC that can be controlled with a private key for UTXOs; this isn't an emotional "belief," but a boundary between law and technology—it determines whether you are an "asset owner" or an "unsecured creditor" when the system malfunctions. The Celsius case vividly illustrates this boundary. The court ruled that when users deposited assets into Celsius's Earn account, ownership of the assets would be transferred to the platform according to the terms of the agreement. At the time of Celsius's bankruptcy filing, the Earn account involved approximately $4.2 billion in assets and about 600,000 users. These users became unsecured creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings and could only wait in line for distribution. (Investopedia) This isn't a moral issue of "whether the platform is bad or not," but rather a contractual issue of which rights you relinquished. 3.1.2 If you want "price exposure," you can choose a more institutionalized and familiar tool, such as a spot Bitcoin ETF. Its advantages are compliance and ease of trading. However, it also clearly tells you: you are buying securities shares, not control of on-chain private keys. Taking BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) as an example, as an ordinary trader, you cannot ask BlackRock to deliver BTC to you in the primary market, because only authorized institutions have the authority to do so. You can only buy and sell shares in the secondary market, essentially exposing yourself to price fluctuations. (BlackRock) 3.1.3 If you're looking for "yields," then you need to be extremely clear-headed: BTC returns are almost never "risk-free interest," but rather you are acting as a risk bearer within a certain system. In the central bank system, interest comes from credit expansion; in the shadow Bitcoin system, returns also often come from the expansion and re-collateralization of the credit chain—only the path has changed to exchanges, lending protocols, market making, and re-collateralization. BIS's research on DeFi leverage provides a crucial baseline: on mainstream DeFi lending protocols, overall leverage (assets/equities at the wallet level) typically ranges from 1.4 to 1.9, but the leverage of the "largest and most active users" is higher. Simultaneously, higher borrower leverage weakens the resilience of the lending system and significantly increases the proportion of "debt nearing liquidation." (Bank for International Settlements) In simpler terms: the returns you see often correspond to a segment of the system leveraging, betting on volatility, and snowballing through collateral. You profit from transaction fees and interest rate spreads, but you bear the cascading effects of tail events. Only by clearly distinguishing these three needs can you move on to the next step: revenue sharing.
3.2 Revenue Sharing Mindset: Split BTC into three ledgers, and the shadows are no longer a mess

3.3 Imposing Rewards: Incorporating "Exit Rights" into Your Operational Process

Talking about survival strategies, if it's just about concepts, easily becomes empty rhetoric. Truly effective strategies in the shadow era must be integrated into daily processes, as mechanically as brushing your teeth.
... I suggest you treat "exit rights" as the first principle of your earnings calculation: Before participating in any structure that generates BTC earnings, run through the exit path like a fire evacuation drill. You need to know how you'll leave in the worst-case scenario. For any platform where you plan to deposit BTC to earn interest, ask yourself three questions: When I want to withdraw, will it be a "click and go" process, or will I have to wait for manual review? In extreme market conditions, does it have a history of "suspending withdrawals"? If it suddenly shuts down its website today, do I have other ways to get my money back?
The exit rights of ETFs are clear: you can sell your shares during trading hours, but you generally cannot demand that the fund deliver the BTC directly to you; the creation and redemption of products like IBITs are executed by authorized participants, and ordinary investors trade secondary market shares. (BlackRock)
This means it is suitable as a "price exposure tool," but not as a "final settlement tool." If you think of ETFs as "equivalent to BTC," you have already misunderstood the rights structure.
Wrapped BTC (such as cbBTC, WBTC) offers another exit right: you rely on a custodian or mechanism to redeem the wrapped tokens back to the native BTC. cbBTC's increased transparency lies in its provision of proof of reserves and verifiable addresses, allowing you to see the approximate correspondence between supply and reserves.
(Bitbo) But you still need to remember: transparency doesn't equal risk-free; it simply moves risk from a "complete black box" to "observable but still bearable." When you move to deeper levels like lending, restaking, and structured returns, exit options are often directly tied to market volatility: a sharp market move might cause your position to be liquidated first, or the protocol's liquidity pool to thin out, or the cross-chain bridge to become congested. Ultimately, you'll find yourself not "exiting," but "being exited." This is why I advised you to keep your profit account as a "small position": you're not chasing the biggest generator; you're leaving yourself a way out at any time. Regarding Bitcoin profits, it's actually quite simple: holding is victory, the longer you hold, the greater the victory. You don't need to lose sleep over small gains. Of course, this goes against human nature and will be very difficult. I also find it difficult to completely achieve this. If you're a newcomer, you'll actually have your own advantages; you'll be hesitant to act out of fear. Therefore, I suggest you check out my Zhihu column "Airdrop Reference," which contains two beginner tutorials: buying Bitcoin and sending it directly to a cold wallet.
Conclusion
Shadow Bitcoin isn't a scam; it's a structure: if you pursue liquidity, returns, and convenience, you'll inevitably enter the shadow system. The real danger isn't in the shadow itself, but in forgetting that it's a shadow—mistaking "right of redemption" for "ownership," "promise" for "guarantee," and "annualized return" for "security."
Just remember this:
Returns aren't free; interest is simply the premium you receive for bearing the system's risk.
You can make money in the shadows, but you must adhere to the bottom line: Bitcoin only becomes Bitcoin when the private key is in your hands; otherwise, it's just someone else owing you a promissory note. In the shadow world, the best survival strategy is never about running faster, but about being able to exit at any time. Before evaluating any platform/product, ask yourself: In the worst-case scenario, how many clicks will it take to turn it back into an on-chain UTXO?