Foundry USA and AntPool Now Control Over 51% of Bitcoin’s Global Hash Rate – Should We Worry in 2025?

• Why Are Foundry USA and AntPool’s Hash Rates a Hot Topic?
• Could Bitcoin Actually Face a 51% Attack?
• Historical Precedent: The Ghost of GHash.io
• Industrial vs. Protocol Centralization: What’s the Difference?
• Why a 51% Attack Is Still Unlikely in 2025
• The Bigger Picture: What’s Next for Bitcoin Mining?
• FAQ: Your Burning Questions Answered

Recent blockchain data reveals that Foundry USA and AntPool collectively dominate 51.57% of Bitcoin’s hash rate, sparking debates about centralization risks. While a 51% attack remains unlikely due to the decentralized nature of mining pools, the trend toward industrial consolidation raises long-term concerns for Bitcoin’s ethos. Here’s a DEEP dive into the implications, historical precedents, and why the community isn’t panicking—yet.

Why Are Foundry USA and AntPool’s Hash Rates a Hot Topic?

As of August 2025, Foundry USA controls 33.63% of Bitcoin’s mining hash rate, with AntPool close behind at 17.94%. Together, they command over half the network’s computational power—a threshold historically linked to potential 51% attacks. Foundry’s streak of mining six to eight consecutive blocks recently has added fuel to the fire. But is this a genuine threat or just FUD? Let’s break it down.

Could Bitcoin Actually Face a 51% Attack?

A 51% attack WOULD require a single entity (or colluding group) to control >50% of the hash rate, enabling double-spending, transaction censorship, and chain reorganization. However, Foundry and AntPool aren’t monolithic entities; they’re pools aggregating individual miners globally. Coordinating thousands of independent miners for an attack is logistically implausible—and economically suicidal. As the BTCC team notes, "Miners would flee to other pools immediately, cratering the attackers’ revenue."

Historical Precedent: The Ghost of GHash.io

This isn’t Bitcoin’s first rodeo. In 2014, GHash.io briefly crossed the 51% threshold, triggering community backlash. Reddit and BitcoinTalk erupted, urging miners to decentralize. Within weeks, GHash.io’s share dropped below 50%—no attack occurred. The takeaway? Social pressure and economic incentives act as natural checks.

Industrial vs. Protocol Centralization: What’s the Difference?

Bitcoin’s protocol remains decentralized, but mining has industrialized. Rising costs and competition have consolidated power among five pools controlling ~80% of the hash rate (per CoinMarketCap data). Foundry and AntPool’s dominance reflects this shift—not a flaw in Bitcoin’s design. Smaller miners struggle to compete, risking further centralization. "It’s a capitalist inevitability," admits a BTCC analyst, "but it’s worth watching."

Why a 51% Attack Is Still Unlikely in 2025

1.Aligning Foundry and AntPool’s miners would be like herding crypto cats.
2.Attacks would tank Bitcoin’s value—and miners’ profits.
3.The 2014 GHash.io episode proved miners self-correct.

The Bigger Picture: What’s Next for Bitcoin Mining?

With hash rate concentration at ATHs, regulators might scrutinize pools as "too big to fail." Some propose protocol tweaks (like Stratum V2) to redistribute power. For now, the network chugs on—but the conversation about sustainable decentralization is far from over.

FAQ: Your Burning Questions Answered

Is Bitcoin’s hash rate dominance a new problem?

No. Pool centralization has fluctuated since 2014, but the network’s resilience hasn’t been breached.

Could Foundry and AntPool merge to launch an attack?

Theoretically yes, practically no. The reputational and financial fallout would be catastrophic.

How can small miners survive?

Options include joining smaller pools or advocating for mining protocol reforms.