Skip to content
Pico y Pala – Bitcoins, Ethereum, Ripple,…

Bitcoin Versus Sats Denomination: Why Not Each?


Maybe the easiest way to denominate bitcoin is a separation that shows each BTC and sats.

Bitcoin is divisible right down to the eighth decimal place. These subunits are referred to as “satoshis” or simply “sats.” One satoshi is 0.00000001 btc. Sadly that is inconceivable to learn for small sat values. And as time goes on, all of us anticipate bitcoin to maintain appreciating to the purpose the place smaller sat-denominated transactions will turn out to be the norm. So I’m usually on group #SatsTheStandard; as an alternative of 0.00001042 btc, we will as an alternative show:

1,042 sats

However for big quantities we’ve the alternative drawback. Think about organising a transaction for 615,395,023 sats! At a fast look, did I simply sort in 61 btc, 6.15 btc or 0.61 btc? I actually don’t wish to be off by an element of ten right here! If I decelerate and focus a bit and do not forget that 1 btc is 100,000,000 sats, carry the decimal place, and… ah, 6.15 btc! However even that little bit of additional effort is disconcerting to should expend once I’m shifting this a lot worth. No good.

For those who’re a wholecoiner (i.e., you maintain not less than one full bitcoin in worth) or near it, you could have the identical readability drawback when reviewing your complete steadiness.

However all bitcoin wallets I’ve seen power you to resolve on one denomination or the opposite, irrespective of how ill-suited both may be in sure circumstances.

Btc-Sats Hybrid To The Rescue!

Why not each?

I suggest a show compromise:

₿6.15 | 395,023 sats

The primary two digits after the decimal level nonetheless have a lot worth that they need to keep on the btc-denominated facet. The remaining six digits of sat worth will cowl the everyday vary of day-to-day, sat-denominated quantities that we’ll get used to seeing in our future hyperbitcoinized lives.

No data is thrown away. The massive btc-denominated facet would all the time use two decimal locations like we’re all already accustomed to with our native fiat currencies. And on the sats-denominated facet, 100 thousand sats is visually very straightforward to discern from a thousand sats or just a few hundred sats.

Easy. Simple to learn. Elegant, even.

Specter Desktop Mockup With Btc-Sats Hybrid Versus The Present Show Choices

That divider is the “vertical bar” character or “pipe” in programmer-speak. Look simply above your return key. It’s a part of the usual ASCII character set. It’s not unique. It’s already in your keyboard and in your telephone. Your Coldcard can already show it. And, as within the mockup above, it may be coloured for added impact. Programmers will gripe that the pipe character already has particular that means in code, however this ain’t code, nerds!

Coming Quickly To A DIY Open-Supply {Hardware} Pockets Close to You?

Whether or not the ₿ image ought to come earlier than or after the quantity is debatable, however I feel having it in entrance affords the most effective readability and it instantly conveys what the upcoming numbers imply. If the font getting used can’t show the ₿ image, we will fall again to “btc:”

6.15 btc | 395,023 sats

If the sat-denominated facet is lower than 100,000, there’s no cause to show main zeros:

₿6.15 | 4,820 sats

₿6.15 | 74 sats

When the entire quantity is lower than 10 million sats, the btc-denominated facet will be eradicated totally:

4,820 sats

Although important sticklers could want explicitly seeing the zeroed-out btc-denominated facet:

₿0.00 | 4,820 sats

All good.

If house is at an absolute premium, the “sats” will be dropped however the house ought to be preserved earlier than and after the pipe character (in any other case it’s too exhausting to differentiate it from a one):

₿6.15 | 395,023


There are not less than 80 infuriating nations that swap their durations and commas. A Large Mac in Germany is 5,16 € (the house between the quantity and the image is annoying, too). Actually, Eurozone? Wonderful. I don’t find it irresistible however the btc-sats hybrid show can accommodate decimal dividers the way in which they’re used to seeing them:

₿6,15 | 395.023 sats

For all non-Michael Saylor transactions, we’ll solely see one comma and one interval on this show format. So the locale-specific confusion can be fairly restricted. And if I’m being sincere, I’m not even that mad about how this appears because the left-right division supplied by the pipe character is doing a lot heavy lifting; my eye barely registers that the comma and interval are swapped.

And in the event that they actually need to maneuver the ₿ image and add an pointless house, okay:

6,15 ₿ | 395.023 sats

Have at it, Europe.

The Japanese counting system naturally lends itself to four-digit separators. That is clearly an enormous mess. However, in the event that they so select, they’ll group the sats-denominated facet that approach with minimal confusion for the remainder of the world:

₿6.15 | 39,5023 sats

Information Enter Issues

So after we sort in our transaction quantity, the primary six digits may first fill the sat-denominated facet:

6 sats

61 sats

615 sats

6,153 sats

61,539 sats

615,395 sats

₿0.06 | 153,950 sats

This final row that all of a sudden bumps out to the btc-denominated facet is our “oh shit!” second if we’ve mistyped our quantity. It’s screaming: “Yo, at this quantity — 0.01 or extra of a bitcoin — begin paying super-close consideration!”

Or maybe extra doubtless, UI implementations can explicitly separate the 2 sides, like the way in which an online type isolates beginning day, month and 12 months. So you possibly can confidently begin typing the massive bitcoin-denominated facet:

₿__ | __ sats

₿6.15 | __ sats

After which subsequent digit entries mechanically leap to the opposite facet:

₿6.15 | 3 sats

₿6.15 | 39 sats

₿6.15 | 395 sats

₿6.15 | 3,950 sats

₿6.15 | 39,502 sats

₿6.15 | 395,023 sats

Different Approaches

Now, in fact, there have been different solutions. Bitcoin Journal just lately revealed the “Satcomma Commonplace” which provides three-decimal groupings on the sats facet:


The comma at one million satoshis right here basically serves the identical objective as my pipe character. And satcomma has the benefit of serving to individuals see that 99,999,999 sats will spherical as much as 1 bitcoin. However for my eyes there’s simply an excessive amount of crammed collectively right here. And math lecturers will simply straight up refuse to show college students to learn denominated values this fashion. It additionally retains the localization bugaboo alive and nicely:

6,15.395.023 ₿

As a tech nerd that appears to me like an invalid IP handle.

Others have argued for simply utilizing an area to separate the 4 digits on the sats facet:

₿6.1539 5023

Or to make use of areas in lieu of the satcomma’s commas:

Display Mock From Bitcoin Design

These approaches are lifeless on arrival so far as I’m involved. It orphans and unanchors these digit groupings. There’s a cause why telephone numbers (867-5309) hyperlink their teams.

One other method that I do help is simply to set a show threshold. Above, say, 0.01 btc, present the quantity in btc phrases. Under the edge, present it as sats. And let the consumer set their very own threshold. I nonetheless don’t like seeing all eight digits after the decimal level in a pure btc-denominated show however this dynamic threshold-based method continues to be an enchancment over a btc-only or sats-only international setting.

Are We Go For Launch?

I contribute code to the superior Specter Desktop open supply multisig pockets undertaking in addition to to the world’s coolest little open-source {hardware} pockets, SeedSigner. If there’s sufficient enthusiasm, I’ll write PRs (“pull requests” — proposed adjustments to the code) to every undertaking to incorporate the btc-sats hybrid as an non-compulsory show setting.

So what do you suppose? Are you on group #BtcSatsHybrid?

Tweet your ideas, reference the hashtag and tag me @KeithMukai.

This can be a visitor put up by Keith Mukai. Opinions expressed are totally their very own and don’t essentially mirror these of BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Journal.