Weekly data shows larger outflows from spot Ethereum ETFs than spot Bitcoin ETFs
Daily figures published by Farside Investors show that U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs recorded combined net outflows of about $320.1 million during the full trading week from Oct. 12 to Oct. 16. Over the same stretch, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs posted net outflows of about $228.4 million.
The source makes an important point about timing and definitions. These are complete weekly figures through Oct. 16, not "Oct. 19 flows." Farside’s daily numbers are usually updated the following day, and the first data point for a new week typically appears after Monday’s close. It also notes that net outflows refer to the net value of creations and redemptions in fund shares, which is different from changes in a fund’s net assets because net assets also reflect price moves in the underlying asset.
Once fund size is taken into account, the contrast becomes much sharper. ChainCatcher, citing SoSoValue data, said that as of Oct. 16, spot Ethereum ETFs held $14.946 billion in total net assets, equal to 5.07% of Ethereum’s market capitalization. Spot Bitcoin ETFs held $104.290 billion, or 6.35% of Bitcoin’s market capitalization. On that basis, last week’s outflows amounted to about 2.1% of assets for ETH products and about 0.2% for BTC products, a gap of nearly tenfold in intensity.
Key takeaways from the week
- From Oct. 12 to Oct. 16, spot Ethereum ETFs saw net outflows of $320.1 million, while spot Bitcoin ETFs saw net outflows of $228.4 million.
- Ethereum-side outflows were highly concentrated in BlackRock’s ETHA, which lost about $299 million over five trading days, accounting for more than 90% of the total.
- On the Bitcoin side, IBIT lost $165.4 million, roughly 70% of the category’s weekly outflows.
- Measured against assets under management, Ethereum’s weekly redemption pressure was about 2.1%, versus about 0.2% for Bitcoin.
- Yahoo Finance data cited in the source shows ETH ETFs posted cumulative net outflows of $954.8 million from Oct. 1 to Oct. 16, equal to about 6.4% of net assets, with only one day of net inflows during that period: Oct. 13.
- For the week through Oct. 18, ETH fell 3.6%, while BTC fell 1.4%.
- Using $14.946 billion as the base, a 3.6% weekly decline in ETH would reduce net assets by about $540 million from price action alone, more than the roughly $320 million in actual redemptions.
Daily flow breakdown: Ethereum had only one positive day
Spot Ethereum ETF flows by day
According to Farside’s records, spot Ethereum ETFs posted net outflows of $85.4 million on Oct. 12, then switched to net inflows of $24.8 million on Oct. 13, the only positive day so far in October. Outflows widened to $129.5 million on Oct. 14, the largest single-day outflow of the week, followed by $60.3 million on Oct. 15 and $69.7 million on Oct. 16. The five-day total came to $320.1 million in net outflows.
Bitcoin ETFs followed a different pattern
Spot Bitcoin ETFs moved on a different rhythm. They posted net outflows of $65.4 million on Oct. 12, net inflows of $175.7 million on Oct. 13, net outflows of $261.4 million on Oct. 14, a small net inflow of $5.1 million on Oct. 15, and net outflows of $82.4 million on Oct. 16. The five-day total was $228.4 million in net outflows.
The source says the two categories only moved in sync on Oct. 14, when both saw large outflows. On the other four trading days, direction and magnitude diverged. In the source’s reading, that points to asset-level differentiation rather than a simple week of weaker macro risk appetite across the board.
Fund-level split: ETHA drove most of the Ethereum-side selling
Ethereum flows were highly concentrated
The structure of Ethereum ETF outflows was unusually concentrated. BlackRock’s ETHA saw outflows of $75.1 million on Oct. 12, $109.8 million on Oct. 14, $44.4 million on Oct. 15, and $69.7 million on Oct. 16. Across the five trading days, that added up to about $299 million, or more than 90% of all net outflows from spot Ethereum ETFs.
Other Ethereum funds showed a different pattern. Fidelity’s FETH posted small net inflows of $8.1 million on Oct. 13 and $2.4 million on Oct. 15. Grayscale’s ETHE recorded an outflow of $18.3 million on Oct. 15. The Grayscale ETH Mini Trust saw an outflow of $10.3 million on Oct. 12, an inflow of $16.7 million on Oct. 13, and an outflow of $18.8 million on Oct. 14.
Bitcoin flows were also concentrated, but less extreme
On the Bitcoin side, IBIT posted $165.4 million in net outflows over five days, while FBTC lost $60.2 million. Of that FBTC figure, $152.7 million came on Oct. 14 alone. Bitwise’s BITB posted a small net inflow of $2.2 million.
The source argues that this split matters. When flows in an ETF category are dominated by a single fund, repositioning by a small number of large holders can be enough to turn the entire curve negative. That is a different signal from broad-based retail redemptions. Yahoo Finance, as cited in the source, also attributed selling pressure in ETHA to larger holders cutting exposure.
Why the comparison with Bitcoin looks worse after adjusting for size
Comparing only the dollar totals tells only part of the story. The reason the $320.1 million outflow from Ethereum ETFs stands out more than the $228.4 million outflow from Bitcoin ETFs is that it happened in a much smaller asset pool.
SoSoValue data for Oct. 16 put total net assets in spot Ethereum ETFs at $14.946 billion and total net assets in spot Bitcoin ETFs at $104.290 billion, making the Bitcoin pool roughly seven times larger. Dividing weekly net outflows by each category’s asset base gives an outflow rate of about 2.1% for ETH products and about 0.2% for BTC products. Put differently, Ethereum products lost a share of assets close to ten times larger than Bitcoin products over the same week.
Penetration rates offer another angle. ETH ETF holdings were equal to 5.07% of Ethereum’s market capitalization, while BTC ETF holdings were equal to 6.35% of Bitcoin’s market capitalization. The source says Bitcoin’s ETF channel has become a more mainstream allocation route, while Ethereum’s institutional base through ETFs remains thinner. That means a similarly sized institutional rebalance can have a larger marginal effect on Ethereum.
On a cumulative basis, Farside data cited in the source shows spot Ethereum ETFs have seen about $12.968 billion in net inflows since launch, versus about $56.949 billion for spot Bitcoin ETFs. Last week’s outflows did not change those cumulative totals much on their own. The bigger issue is pace: since the start of October, ETH ETF net outflows have reached $954.8 million, about 7% of cumulative net inflows, in less than three weeks.
Net redemptions are not the same as shrinking net assets
This is one of the easiest mistakes to make when reading ETF flow data. Changes in an ETF’s net assets come from two sources: net creations and redemptions in fund shares, and price changes in the underlying asset. Farside tracks the first category, which reflects actual money moving in or out. Headlines about assets under management shrinking often refer to the combined effect of both.
The source uses last week’s numbers to illustrate the difference. Starting from a base of $14.946 billion, a 3.6% drop in ETH during the week through Oct. 18 would reduce net assets by about $540 million from price action alone. Actual redemptions over the same period were about $320 million. That means looking only at net asset changes could lead readers to mistake price-driven losses for capital flight and overstate the severity of redemptions. The source adds that this is only a methodological estimate, and actual figures can differ because of daily subscription and redemption timing as well as the path of prices.
The reverse can also happen. In a strong rally, net assets can still rise even if redemptions continue, masking the fact that money is leaving. The source’s conclusion is straightforward: use creations and redemptions to judge demand, and use net assets to judge the value of holdings. One cannot replace the other.
Why redemption pressure appears heavier on the Ethereum side
The source lists several possible explanations, while stressing that they are correlations rather than proof because Farside’s data records amounts, not motives.
The first is price performance. For the week through Oct. 18, ETH fell 3.6%, while BTC fell 1.4%. The article also gives spot market reference prices at the time: Ethereum was around $2,343.76, down 3.14% over 24 hours, with a market capitalization of about $286.3 billion; Bitcoin was around $82,918, up 1.01% over 24 hours, with a market capitalization of about $1.67 trillion. Yahoo Finance interpreted ETH’s larger decline as a sign of selling pressure beyond the broader market move.
The second is the longer performance profile. According to the Yahoo Finance figures cited in the source, as of Oct. 17, ETH was down 18.4% year to date, up 29.3% over the past 90 days, and down 1.1% over the past month. The source says that in a setup where the medium-term rebound is positive but the year-to-date return remains deeply negative, institutional holders may be more inclined to trim into strength than add exposure.
The third is substitution in allocation routes. Ethereum holders now have more ways to earn yield, including staking and other on-chain yield products, which may divert some demand that might otherwise have come through ETFs. The source points to Interactive Brokers launching ETH staking this month as one example. ETF shares do not generate yield on their own, while staking products offer nominal yield, and that difference can matter more when prices are flat or falling.
What to watch next week
The source highlights five items to monitor.
- Whether ETHA can stop the outflows. The fund accounts for more than one-third of Ethereum ETF net assets, and it contributed more than 90% of last week’s net outflows. Its direction largely determines the category’s overall curve.
- Whether net inflows can appear on consecutive days. Between Oct. 1 and Oct. 16, only Oct. 13 was positive. Two or three straight days of inflows would be an early sign of a trend reversal. A single positive day carries limited weight in this structure.
- Watch intensity, not just dollar totals. Dividing weekly net outflows by total net assets gives a cleaner measure. If the ratio stays above 1%, redemption pressure is still elevated. A move back below 0.5% would be closer to a normal fluctuation range.
- The relative direction versus Bitcoin. If BTC turns positive while ETH keeps bleeding, that would point to asset-level divergence. If both move together, macro risk appetite is a more likely explanation. The source names the U.S. Federal Reserve’s Oct. 27-28 policy meeting as the most likely macro trigger in this cycle.
- Any divergence between price and flows. If ETH stabilizes in price while ETF money continues to leave, that usually means spot demand is absorbing ETF selling pressure. The source says that structure is healthier than a setup where both price and flows fall together.
The article also notes that price action often moves ahead of published flow data, so spot ETH trading can serve as an intraday reference while waiting for official ETF updates.
James Mitchell: the bigger signal is that the two flow curves are starting to separate
In James Mitchell’s view, the real message in last week’s data is not simply that "ETH outflows exceeded BTC outflows." It is that the drivers behind the two flow curves are beginning to diverge. Only one day in the week, Oct. 14, saw both categories post large outflows at the same time. On the other four days, direction and magnitude did not match.
He said that through most of 2024 and 2025, the two curves moved closely together because they were driven by the same pool of capital allocating to crypto as a broad asset class. When that synchronicity weakens, it suggests institutions are starting to make decisions based on asset-specific fundamentals rather than treating the sector as one block. In his reading, that raises the bar for Ethereum.
Mitchell also pointed to two areas where the market could misread the data. The first is focusing only on absolute dollar amounts. A comparison of $320.1 million versus $228.4 million does not look dramatic at first glance, but once those figures are divided by asset bases of $14.946 billion and $104.290 billion, the intensity gap approaches tenfold. The second is treating a decline in net assets as the same thing as capital flight. Based on last week’s figures, price action alone would have cut net assets by about $540 million, more than the roughly $320 million in actual redemptions. Mixing the two together would materially overstate the severity of outflows.
He said the next phase should be tracked through three relationships: how far ETHA’s single-fund flow pattern diverges from the broader category, which would help distinguish concentrated repositioning from broad withdrawal; whether weekly outflows as a share of net assets can fall from 2.1% to below 1%, which would offer a quantitative sign of easing pressure; and whether the gap between ETF penetration rates, 5.07% for ETH and 6.35% for BTC, continues to widen, which would suggest a longer-term reallocation of institutional weight between the two assets rather than a one-week fluctuation.
At a cross-asset level, Mitchell compared the setup to the early stage of divergence within a single sector in traditional markets. If capital stops moving under the single label of "crypto assets" and starts distinguishing between Bitcoin’s store-of-value narrative and Ethereum’s usage narrative, the valuation logic for the two assets may gradually decouple. He said that process is healthy for long-term pricing, but during the transition, the side without broad allocation support is likely to face larger swings.
Key points from the article’s FAQ section
How much left ETH ETFs and BTC ETFs last week?
Based on Farside Investors’ daily data, U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs saw about $320.1 million in net outflows from Oct. 12 to Oct. 16, while U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw about $228.4 million in net outflows. Ethereum’s daily sequence was outflows of $85.4 million, inflows of $24.8 million, outflows of $129.5 million, outflows of $60.3 million, and outflows of $69.7 million. Oct. 13 was the only positive day for ETH ETFs in October.
Why does the article say Ethereum’s outflow intensity was nearly ten times Bitcoin’s?
Because the asset bases are very different. SoSoValue data for Oct. 16 put spot Ethereum ETF net assets at $14.946 billion and spot Bitcoin ETF net assets at $104.290 billion. Dividing weekly net outflows by those totals gives about 2.1% for Ethereum and about 0.2% for Bitcoin. When dollar outflows are in the same range, the smaller product line is under much heavier pressure in relative terms.
Which fund accounted for most of the selling?
On the Ethereum side, the answer was BlackRock’s ETHA, with about $299 million in outflows over five trading days, more than 90% of the total. Fidelity’s FETH posted small inflows, while Grayscale’s ETHE lost $18.3 million. On the Bitcoin side, IBIT lost $165.4 million and FBTC lost $60.2 million, with concentration around 70%. The source says heavy concentration in one fund usually points to repositioning by a small number of large holders rather than broad-based redemptions.
What is the difference between net outflows and shrinking fund size?
Net outflows measure the net value of creations and redemptions in fund shares, which reflects actual money entering or leaving. Changes in net assets also include price moves. Using $14.946 billion as the base, a 3.6% drop in ETH during the week through Oct. 18 would reduce net assets by about $540 million, more than the roughly $320 million in redemptions. Looking only at shrinking net assets would overstate redemption pressure.
Why was redemption pressure heavier for Ethereum than for Bitcoin?
The source points to several related factors: ETH fell 3.6% for the week through Oct. 18, while BTC fell 1.4%; as of Oct. 17, ETH was down 18.4% year to date; and staking plus other on-chain yield channels may be diverting some demand that might otherwise have gone into ETFs, while ETF shares themselves do not generate yield. The article also stresses that these are correlation-based explanations because the flow data records amounts, not reasons.
Where can these figures be checked, and how often are they updated?
Farside Investors provides daily net inflow and outflow data broken down by fund, usually updated the next day, with no weekend updates. That means a full week’s data is only complete by the following Monday. SoSoValue provides total net assets, market-cap penetration ratios, and cumulative net inflow figures. The source notes that the two services may use slightly different methodologies, so comparisons should stay within the same data source where possible, especially for relative indicators such as outflows as a share of assets.
What matters most next week?
The source says the first item is whether ETHA can stop bleeding, because it represents more than one-third of Ethereum ETF net assets and largely determines the category’s direction. The second is whether inflows can appear for two or three days in a row, since a single positive day has limited value. The third is whether weekly outflows as a share of net assets can fall from about 2.1% to below 1%. The fourth is the relative direction versus Bitcoin: if BTC turns positive while ETH remains negative, that would point to asset-level divergence rather than a macro move. The article names the Federal Reserve’s Oct. 27-28 meeting as a key date.