<p>Yes, this is correct: a dual funded lightning channel is still represented by a single UTXO. </p>

<p>Generally, we would expect each participant to contribute at least one input to the transaction that creates the dual-funded channel (each participant may also thus end up with a newly created change UTXO as well). This method allows two participants to interact trustlessly to create a dual funded channel. </p>

<p>Perhaps worth mentioning: with a slightly broader definition of ‘dual-funded’, we can imagine ways to create a dual-funded channel, without requiring inputs from both parties. These methods may require more trust between parties than the trustless setup mentioned above, but they may be of interest anyways. Examples:</p>

<ul>
<li>two parties share ownership of the BTC stored in a certain UTXO, and decide to open a channel using it as the only input </li>
<li>one party contributes a UTXO, while the other party makes an external payment to them. The initial channel balance is then split accordingly, to reflect this payment. </li>
<li>one party contributes a UTXO, while the other party makes an on-chain payment to them. As above, the initial channel balance is then split accordingly. This could be done atomically, which means participants will not need to trust each other. See: splicing in / out of channels. </li>
</ul>

<p>Those are just a few examples off the top of my head. I’m sure there are other ways to accomplish dual-funding as well. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-08T00:14:11.983Z
2019-11-08T00:14:11.983Z
chytrik
<p>Would a dual-funded channel be a single tx? The peers would cooperatively create a single tx with at least 1 input each. Is this correctly understood?</p>

<lightning-network>
Would a dual-funded channel be a single UTXO?
Bertram Lund
# Would a dual-funded channel be a single UTXO?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-11-07)

Would a dual-funded channel be a single tx? The peers would cooperatively create a single tx with at least 1 input each. Is this correctly understood?

**Tags:** lightning-network


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-11-08. Score: 2

Yes, this is correct: a dual funded lightning channel is still represented by a single UTXO.

Generally, we would expect each participant to contribute at least one input to the transaction that creates the dual-funded channel (each participant may also thus end up with a newly created change UTXO as well). This method allows two participants to interact trustlessly to create a dual funded channel.

Perhaps worth mentioning: with a slightly broader definition of ‘dual-funded’, we can imagine ways to create a dual-funded channel, without requiring inputs from both parties. These methods may require more trust between parties than the trustless setup mentioned above, but they may be of interest anyways. Examples:

* two parties share ownership of the BTC stored in a certain UTXO, and decide to open a channel using it as the only input
* one party contributes a UTXO, while the other party makes an external payment to them. The initial channel balance is then split accordingly, to reflect this payment.
* one party contributes a UTXO, while the other party makes an on-chain payment to them. As above, the initial channel balance is then split accordingly. This could be done atomically, which means participants will not need to trust each other. See: splicing in / out of channels.

Those are just a few examples off the top of my head. I’m sure there are other ways to accomplish dual-funding as well.


---

