<p>The <a href="https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#listunspent" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code>listunspent</code></a> rpc call returns all unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) tracked by this wallet. This includes the UTXOs that can be spent by this wallet, but also UTXOs that belong to watch-only addresses tracked by this wallet.</p>
<p>When <code>spendable</code> is false, this wallet does not have the private key to spend the UTXO. This is e.g. the case for watch-only addresses.</p>
<p>When <code>solvable</code> is false, the wallet does not know how to spend the UTXO, regardless of whether it has the corresponding private keys. It follows that any output that is <code>solvable</code> false will also be <code>spendable</code> false.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-25T23:53:48.893Z
Spendable being false is implied by solvable being false. So perhaps he does have the private key, but not the necessary redeemscript?
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-26T01:30:08.073Z
Is there possible the case that spendable is true and solvable is false? Just out of curiosity.
fluter
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-03-09T18:24:52.130Z
"It is not possible for a script to be spendable but not solvable" - achow101 bitcoin PR review club March 9 2022 https://bitcoincore.reviews/19602
vnprc
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-03-10T00:12:45.100Z
why wouldn't the wallet know how to spend an utxo?
Mercedes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2017-11-25T17:30:32.827Z
2022-03-09T20:09:13.387Z
2022-03-09T20:09:13.387Z
Murch
<p>I noticed a transaction whose spendable and solvable are both false, what does this mean and why?</p>

<pre><code> {
    "txid": "c940241a0ef626e865e2004bc120536fb7868d510115e923c76d5e658a97f6d5",
    "vout": 0,
    "address": "mnbFFLXUqTPBweLm6w1GA2ZAJQbrTndEGC",
    "account": "",
    "scriptPubKey": "76a9144d98b2350032c849ac6e6e7ad0eb88e00fd7fbff88ac",
    "amount": 1.10000000,
    "confirmations": 132,
    "spendable": false,
    "solvable": false
},
</code></pre>

<p>Is this means this utxo is invalid somehow so cannot spend it?</p>

<p>Also, this is on testnet.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-22T03:36:11.080Z
Could you tell us how you produced this output? That doesn't look like a transaction to me, but rather like a transaction output with some added data.
Murch
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-22T03:52:11.857Z
sorry my bad word, i meant utxo, not entire transaction. I used `bitcoin-cli.exe -conf="${pwd}\bitcoin-testnet.conf" -testnet listunspent` to list outputs in my local testnet node.
fluter
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-22T04:30:44.750Z
i do not see anything strange with it. you can spend it with a private key of mnbFF...
amaclin
<transactions><wallet>
Why outputs' spendable and solvable are false?
fluter
# Why outputs' spendable and solvable are false?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-11-22)

I noticed a transaction whose spendable and solvable are both false, what does this mean and why?

```
 {
    "txid": "c940241a0ef626e865e2004bc120536fb7868d510115e923c76d5e658a97f6d5",
    "vout": 0,
    "address": "mnbFFLXUqTPBweLm6w1GA2ZAJQbrTndEGC",
    "account": "",
    "scriptPubKey": "76a9144d98b2350032c849ac6e6e7ad0eb88e00fd7fbff88ac",
    "amount": 1.10000000,
    "confirmations": 132,
    "spendable": false,
    "solvable": false
},

```

Is this means this utxo is invalid somehow so cannot spend it?

Also, this is on testnet.

**Tags:** transactions, wallet

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Could you tell us how you produced this output? That doesn't look like a transaction to me, but rather like a transaction output with some added data.  
> **username_0**: sorry my bad word, i meant utxo, not entire transaction. I used `bitcoin-cli.exe -conf="${pwd}\bitcoin-testnet.conf" -testnet listunspent` to list outputs in my local testnet node.  
> **username_2**: i do not see anything strange with it. you can spend it with a private key of mnbFF...  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-11-25. Score: 8 | Accepted answer

The [`listunspent`](https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#listunspent) rpc call returns all unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) tracked by this wallet. This includes the UTXOs that can be spent by this wallet, but also UTXOs that belong to watch-only addresses tracked by this wallet.

When `spendable` is false, this wallet does not have the private key to spend the UTXO. This is e.g. the case for watch-only addresses.

When `solvable` is false, the wallet does not know how to spend the UTXO, regardless of whether it has the corresponding private keys. It follows that any output that is `solvable` false will also be `spendable` false.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Spendable being false is implied by solvable being false. So perhaps he does have the private key, but not the necessary redeemscript?  
> **username_0**: Is there possible the case that spendable is true and solvable is false? Just out of curiosity.  
> **username_4**: "It is not possible for a script to be spendable but not solvable" - achow101 bitcoin PR review club March 9 2022 https://bitcoincore.reviews/19602  
> **username_5**: why wouldn't the wallet know how to spend an utxo?  

---

