The post Institutional ETF Demand Softens for Bitcoin and Ethereum appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. ETF net flows for both Bitcoin and Ethereum have stayed The post Institutional ETF Demand Softens for Bitcoin and Ethereum appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. ETF net flows for both Bitcoin and Ethereum have stayed

Institutional ETF Demand Softens for Bitcoin and Ethereum

  • ETF net flows for both Bitcoin and Ethereum have stayed negative since November, signaling reduced institutional participation.
  • Ethereum and Bitcoin prices in 2025 closely tracked shifts in U.S. spot ETF inflows and outflows.
  • On-chain data shows elevated stress, with sizable unrealized losses and continued long-term holder distribution.

Institutional fund flows into U.S. spot Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange-traded funds have remained under pressure since November, adding to signs of a broader liquidity contraction across the digital asset market, according to on-chain and ETF flow data from Glassnode.

Glassnode data indicate that the 30-day simple moving average (30D-SMA) of net ETF flows for both Bitcoin and Ethereum turned negative since early November and has remained below zero since then. The persistence of negative flows suggests muted participation and partial disengagement from institutional allocators, rather than a short-lived shift in sentiment.

The trend has coincided with declining price momentum across both assets toward year-end, highlighting the role ETF demand has played in shaping market structure throughout 2025.

Ethereum Price Closely Tracks ETF Flow Cycles

Ethereum’s price action during 2025 has mirrored shifts in the U.S. spot ETF activity. At the beginning of the year, ETH traded in the $4,000 to $4,500 range while ETF flows were positive. That dynamic changed in March and April, when ETF activity turned negative.

Source: X

During this period, Ethereum experienced one of its deepest sustained outflow phases on a 30-day average basis, coinciding with a price decline into the $1,500 to $2,000 range. The data shows reduced institutional demand during that phase.

From late May through August, ETF flows reversed and moved firmly into positive territory, peaking above 50,000 ETH on a rolling 30-day basis. This inflow period aligned with a strong price recovery, lifting ETH above $4,500 and toward $5,000. However, ETF flows turned negative again in October for a few days before returning to positive, and in November and December, they turned negative as ETH retraced toward the $3,000 range.

Bitcoin Reflects Similar ETF-Driven Structure

Bitcoin followed a comparable pattern. Early in 2025, BTC traded below $100,000 while ETF flows remained positive, supporting an upside momentum. That support weakened in March and April as sustained ETF outflows intensified, with the 30D-SMA reaching its deepest negative levels of the year. During this phase, Bitcoin declined toward the mid-$70,000 to $80,000 range.

Source: X

ETF demand recovered between May and October, with inflows exceeding 2,000 BTC on a rolling 30-day basis. Bitcoin responded by reclaiming the $100,000 level before momentum faded again in the fourth quarter. Renewed ETF outflows from November through December coincided with BTC slipping back toward the $90k to $80k area.

On-Chain Stress Metrics Remain Elevated

Additional on-chain indicators highlighted by CryptoVizArt show that long-term holder profit-taking has totaled approximately 3.8 million BTC since prices moved above the 2021–2022 all-time high. Although the pace of distribution has slowed, unrealized losses remain stabilized above roughly 5% of market capitalization.

At current levels near $90,000, an estimated 20% to 30% of Bitcoin’s circulating supply is held at a loss, a configuration that closely resembles market conditions observed in early 2022, according to the data cited.

Related: Crypto ETF Flows Diverge: Solana Gains While Bitcoin, Ethereum See Redemptions

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Source: https://coinedition.com/bitcoin-and-ethereum-etf-outflows-persist-as-liquidity-tightens/

Market Opportunity
Union Logo
Union Price(U)
$0.002804
$0.002804$0.002804
-1.30%
USD
Union (U) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
Egypt to invite investors for projects in ‘golden triangle’

Egypt to invite investors for projects in ‘golden triangle’

Egypt is preparing a list of projects to show potential investors in its promising “golden triangle” area, home to nearly half the Arab country’s gold deposits.
Share
Agbi2025/12/25 04:09
OpenVPP accused of falsely advertising cooperation with the US government; SEC commissioner clarifies no involvement

OpenVPP accused of falsely advertising cooperation with the US government; SEC commissioner clarifies no involvement

PANews reported on September 17th that on-chain sleuth ZachXBT tweeted that OpenVPP ( $OVPP ) announced this week that it was collaborating with the US government to advance energy tokenization. SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce subsequently responded, stating that the company does not collaborate with or endorse any private crypto projects. The OpenVPP team subsequently hid the response. Several crypto influencers have participated in promoting the project, and the accounts involved have been questioned as typical influencer accounts.
Share
PANews2025/09/17 23:58