[rpz]

A number of replies are wondering if I am misunderstanding bitcoin’s UTXO model. Considering the amount of replies I’m going to assume that is the case :). Thanks to most of you for your kind replies!

With that being said I’m still confused about how blockchain.com is representing this data. Consider block 825075 on the bitcoin blockchain.

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/825075?page=1...

Not all of the transactions in this block show with multiple outputs where one output is the originating address. In fact if you sort by value ascending you’ll be able to see multiple transactions from the same address to the same address amount to $.13 with fees $2.86 transaction ids 78b1741ee0946380d9ee31d51d160a637394b24b5cfdc2871861d8e1db484d2f and 201a94087323d152911575ea029df9d1a0d46626a1b18211727be913d747e72f and so on.

Now, contrast those transactions with transaction f395de972c4ba3fea85a2c1621bfe9fa238950f6a2eb3d3b4932f7f620f63ce2

Why do they display differently on blockchain.com?

[ChainNet]

Not all transactions have multiple outputs as some deplete the UTXO with no remainder. The 2 single output transactions you mentioned are Bitcoin NFT mints. Their senders only care about including their data in a bitcoin block, they don't really care about the small value of the UTXO output being sent, that's why the overwhelming portion of transaction value is just miner fees.

The 3rd transaction you included is an ordinary bitcoin transaction that sends value.

[Taek]

Bitcoin ordinals - NFTs on the bitcoin blockchain. It's not about the value, it's about the image ascribed to the output.