There is no BRC-20
Ethereum has a well-known token standard called ERC-20, and people arriving from that world assume there must be a BRC-20 to match. There is not, and this document exists to say so plainly and stop the confusion spreading further.
Summary
- Why
- Developers and projects were adopting the label "BRC-20" to borrow legitimacy from Ethereum's ERC-20, even though Bitcoin SV's UTXO model has no equivalent structure, and this caused confusion about what actually exists.
- What
- BRC-20 is a clarifying document stating that no BRC-20 token standard exists on Bitcoin SV, and that tokenization proposals should be judged on merit rather than borrowed naming.
- How
- It explains that Bitcoin SV's UTXO-based architecture has no account-based equivalent to ERC-20, so any tokenization proposal gets its own sequential BRC number and must be evaluated on its own technical merits.
What this lets you do
- Recognize that no BRC-20 standard exists on Bitcoin SV
- Avoid assuming a project named BRC-20 inherits ERC-20 semantics
- Evaluate tokenization proposals on their own technical merits
- Expect future tokenization standards to get their own sequential BRC number
Written by claude-sonnet-5 from the specification text. Where the two differ, the original is correct.
Reference for an AI
Everything an assistant needs to answer questions about BRC-20 accurately, including what it depends on.
The specification
Abstract
This document serves to clarify that there is no BRC-20 standard for tokenization on Bitcoin SV. While Ethereum has the ERC-20 standard for account-based tokens, there is no equivalent for UTXO-based systems such as Bitcoin SV. In order to avoid confusion and prevent people from conflating ERC-20 with BRC-20, it is necessary to clarify that BRC-20 does not exist on Bitcoin SV. Instead, proposals for tokenization should be judged on their own merits. Being associated with ERC-20 will not make any specific tokenization proposal better, and there is not a desire to confer greater legitimacy to one proposal or another.
Motivation
As the Bitcoin ecosystem continues to mature and grow, there is an increasing desire to create standards for tokenization. However, it is important to recognize that the architecture of Bitcoin is fundamentally different from that of Ethereum. While Ethereum is an account-based system, Bitcoin is a UTXO-based system. This means that there is no direct equivalent for something like ERC-20, which defines account-based tokens on top of Ethereum. The goal of this document is to prevent unnecessary confusion.
Arguments
-
UTXO-based systems are fundamentally different from account-based systems. While Ethereum has the ERC-20 standard for account-based tokens, there is no equivalent for UTXO-based systems such as Bitcoin. Tokenization will necessarily require a different approach, one which should not be conflated.
-
Avoiding confusion is essential. If there were a BRC-20 standard for Bitcoin SV, it would likely be confused with the ERC-20 standard on Ethereum. This could lead to a lack of clarity and understanding among developers and users, which could ultimately harm the growth and adoption of tokenization in both Bitcoin and Ethereum.
-
Proposals for tokenization should be judged on their own merits. The absence of a BRC-20 standard on Bitcoin SV does not mean that tokenization is not possible. Instead, proposals for tokenization should be evaluated based on their own technical merits and practical considerations. A proposal called BRC-20 will not be better on account of its name.
In summary, there is no BRC-20 standard for tokenization on Bitcoin SV. While there may be a desire to create such a standard, it is important to recognize that the architecture of Bitcoin is fundamentally different from that of Ethereum. Instead of trying to emulate the ERC-20 standard, proposals for tokenization should be evaluated based on their own technical merits and practical considerations. This approach will ultimately lead to a more mature and professional ecosystem for tokenization.
As with any other BRC, tokenization proposals will be assigned sequential numbering.