The cryptocurrency world has no shortage of drama, and November’s biggest spotlight—aside from the ETH 2.0 staking hype—was undoubtedly the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) hard fork. As a direct descendant of Bitcoin (BTC), any major development in the BCH ecosystem naturally draws significant attention from investors, developers, and enthusiasts alike.
In this comprehensive guide, we’ll walk through the origins and implications of the latest BCH hard fork, explore what it means for your holdings, and discuss strategies to protect your assets during such volatile events. Whether you're holding BCH or simply observing the blockchain evolution, understanding this fork is crucial.
The Evolution of Bitcoin Cash: A History of Hard Forks
Some may ask: Didn’t BCH already fork two years ago? Why is it happening again?
Yes, BCH did undergo a major split in November 2018—but that doesn’t mean further divisions aren’t possible. In fact, Bitcoin Cash has scheduled protocol upgrades twice a year, on May 15 and November 15. These routine updates typically involve technical improvements and don’t affect users directly or result in new tokens.
However, when deep ideological disagreements arise within the community, those updates can escalate into full-blown hard forks—exactly what happened this time.
To date, Bitcoin has experienced three major hard forks:
1. The Birth of Bitcoin Cash (2017)
On August 1, 2017, a long-standing debate over block size limits culminated in a split from the original Bitcoin chain. This created Bitcoin Cash (BCH), designed to support larger blocks (initially 8MB) to enable faster and cheaper transactions. This marked the first major divergence—the birth of “second-generation” Bitcoin.
2. The BCH Civil War (2018)
On November 15, 2018, internal conflicts within the BCH community led to another dramatic split. Disagreements between key figures like Roger Ver and Craig Wright resulted in two competing chains:
- BCH ABC (later BCHA) – supported by the original development team.
- BCH SV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision) – promoted by Craig Wright’s faction.
This fragmentation weakened BCH’s market position but highlighted the decentralized nature of blockchain governance.
3. The 2025 Fork: Enter BCHA and BCHN
Fast forward to the most recent fork on November 15, 2025. Once again, ideological differences sparked a new division—this time centered around funding models for ongoing development.
👉 Discover how blockchain forks create new investment opportunities today.
The IFP Proposal: Why Developers Needed Funding
At the heart of the 2025 fork was the Inflationary Faucet Protocol (IFP)—a controversial funding mechanism proposed by the Bitcoin ABC development team behind BCHA.
Unlike Bitcoin or Ethereum, which have established developer ecosystems and funding sources, BCH developers work without salaries or guaranteed income. This volunteer-based model puts immense pressure on contributors who must balance coding with making a living.
The IFP aimed to solve this by allocating 8% of each block reward to a development fund. In essence, it functioned as a “tax” on miners to ensure sustainable growth and innovation on the network.
From a user perspective, the change had no direct impact—wallet balances remained unchanged, and transaction functionality stayed the same. Similar models exist elsewhere; for example, Zcash allocates 20% of block rewards to its founding team and investors.
Yet, miners saw this as an unfair redistribution of revenue. Key influencers like Roger Ver, once a staunch BCH advocate, publicly opposed IFP, arguing it undermined miner incentives and decentralized principles.
Enter BCHN: The Miner-Backed Alternative
With strong resistance from mining pools and prominent community members, a new coalition emerged: Bitcoin Cash Node (BCHN).
Launched in February 2025, BCHN positioned itself as the anti-IFP alternative—a version of BCH that preserved the traditional reward structure while maintaining protocol upgrades.
Despite being newer, BCHN quickly gained broader support:
- Major exchanges like Poloniex and MXC listed pre-fork trading pairs.
- Miners shifted hashing power to the BCHN chain.
- Influential figures such as Litecoin creator Charlie Lee and Bitmain co-founder Jihan Wu expressed cautious endorsement.
Market data reflected this shift dramatically:
- BCHD (Bitcoin Cash Node) traded at ~$237
- BCHA (Bitcoin ABC with IFP) hovered near $16.8
This price disparity signaled a clear market preference—users and miners favored decentralization over developer-controlled funding.
👉 Learn how to track real-time price movements during crypto forks.
What Should You Do With Your BCH?
For average holders, hard forks can be both risky and rewarding. While they don’t require immediate action, being proactive can help you protect value and potentially profit from the event.
Here are key considerations:
1. Hold Through the Fork
If you held BCH in a personal wallet before the fork timestamp, you likely received an equal amount of both resulting tokens (e.g., BCHN and BCHA). Exchanges handle distribution differently—some credit both tokens automatically; others only support one chain post-fork.
Always verify which chain your exchange recognizes.
2. Use Hedging Strategies
To minimize risk during volatility:
- Buy $100 worth of BCH
- Simultaneously short $100 worth of BCH via futures or margin trading
This market-neutral strategy locks in your fiat value regardless of price swings. Any newly issued forked tokens become pure profit if they retain value.
3. Avoid Holding on Unsupported Platforms
Some platforms delist minority chains quickly. If you believe in the long-term potential of a less popular fork (like BCHA), consider withdrawing to a self-custody wallet before the split.
FAQ: Your BCH Fork Questions Answered
Q: Will I automatically receive new coins after the fork?
A: It depends on where you hold your BCH. On supported exchanges, yes—you’ll usually get both chains credited. In private wallets, you’ll need to use compatible software to access both tokens.
Q: Is BCHA dead now that BCHN dominates?
A: Not necessarily. While BCHN holds majority hash power and market support, BCHA still has developer backing and ideological significance. Smaller chains can survive and innovate independently.
Q: Could this happen again in the future?
A: Absolutely. As long as there are competing visions for scalability, governance, and funding, hard forks will remain a feature—not a bug—of decentralized networks.
Q: Which chain should I keep?
A: Most experts recommend holding the chain with stronger network security (hash rate), exchange listings, and community adoption—currently BCHN.
Q: Are hard forks good for crypto?
A: Yes—they allow experimentation without disrupting existing networks. Forks like Litecoin, Bitcoin SV, and Ethereum Classic all emerged from disagreements but contributed to broader innovation.
Q: Can I lose money during a fork?
A: Yes, especially if prices drop across both chains due to uncertainty. Additionally, holding unsupported tokens may make them difficult to trade later.
Final Thoughts: Decentralization in Action
While some media outlets declared BCHA “dead” after losing the hash war, its existence underscores a vital truth: blockchain is about permissionless innovation.
The IFP debate wasn’t just about money—it was about sustainability. Can open-source projects thrive without reliable funding? Will miners always dictate protocol direction?
These questions don’t have easy answers. But one thing is certain: the spirit of Bitcoin lives in these conflicts, where ideas compete freely and users vote with their nodes and wallets.
Whether you’re team BCHN or believe BCHA represents a bold vision for developer empowerment, one takeaway stands out—in crypto, change is inevitable, but opportunity follows closely behind.
👉 Stay ahead of the next crypto fork with advanced trading tools.
Disclaimer: This article reflects general market observations and informational analysis. It does not constitute financial advice or endorsement of any project. Always conduct independent research before making investment decisions.