Chainlink eyes DeFi dominance? Assessing $70B TVS, ETF inflows & more…

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-01-29Last updated on 2026-01-29

Abstract

Despite the 2025 market cycle's hype, institutional investors appear hesitant towards "fundamentals-led" narratives, as seen with Ethereum's price decline despite strong on-chain activity. A clear divergence emerged in ETF flows, with Chainlink's Grayscale ETF (GLNK) attracting $4.05 million in inflows while Ethereum's saw significant outflows. Chainlink's ETF inflows even outpaced Dogecoin's, despite its smaller market cap, suggesting institutional interest may be driven by fundamentals rather than short-term speculation. This is supported by Chainlink's growing role in DeFi, including its integration into Korea's stablecoin expansion via the Global Alliance for KRW Stablecoins (GAKS) and a record $70 billion in Total Value Secured (TVS). These factors position Chainlink as a key infrastructure player, attracting institutional capital based on adoption, trust, and real-world utility.

Despite all the hype in the 2025 cycle, it doesn’t look like institutions are fully buying the “fundamentals-led” story.

Take Ethereum, for example: Down 11% in 2025, and still it saw strong on-chain activity.

For context, the Fuska and Pecta upgrades cut fees and eased congestion, with daily transactions even hitting a record 2.3 million, showing that the upgrades have started delivering results in the 2026 cycle so far.

Still, big money isn’t really showing up.

On-chain strength, institutional hesitation

ETF flows saw nearly $664 million in outflows this week alone. In contrast, Chainlink’s [LINK] Grayscale ETF (GLNK) pulled in $4.05 million in inflows, marking a clear divergence.

To put that in perspective, Ethereum’s [ETH] Grayscale Spot ETF (ETHE) saw $52 million in outflows over the same period. For Layer-1s, that kind of divergence in institutional flows doesn’t look like a short-term rotation.

Building on that, SoSoValue data showed an even clearer contrast.

Chainlink’s ETF flows continue to outpace Dogecoin’s [DOGE], whose net inflows still trail LINK, even though DOGE’s market cap is nearly 3× larger.

Technically, this suggests ETF capital rotating into Chainlink isn’t chasing short-term moves. Instead, it raises the question: Is LINK one of the few high-cap assets still seeing a fundamentals-driven institutional rally?

Chainlink pushes to hold DeFi dominance as rivalry intensifies

The 2025 cycle set the stage for bringing DeFi back to the mainstream.

Data from DeFiLlama as of press time showed total value locked (TVL) across all Layer-1s climbing to $170 billion, reclaiming the level for the first time since it was lost after the 2022 bear market, pointing to a return of on-chain liquidity.

Naturally, that growth spilled into key sectors like stablecoins, RWA, and AI.

Enter Chainlink, now part of the Global Alliance for KRW Stablecoins (GAKS), putting it right at the center of Korea’s stablecoin expansion.

Put simply, Chainlink isn’t sitting out the DeFi race.

By integrating into global stablecoins (the backbone of DeFi rails), it clearly strengthens LINK’s core fundamentals in privacy, compliance, and interoperability, positioning the network as a key infrastructure player.

Meanwhile, the network’s total value secured (TVS) hit a record $70 billion in Q4 2025, reflecting the total assets powered by Chainlink’s oracles and marking a clear sign of its adoption, trust, and real-world usage.

Given this, it’s no surprise that institutional interest is picking up. In this context, Chainlink’s ETF flows appear less speculative and more fundamentally driven, making LINK a clear standout among its rivals.


Final Thoughts

  • While Ethereum’s and Dogecoin’s spot ETFs saw major outflows, Chainlink continues to attract inflows, signaling institutional capital is favoring LINK over other high-cap assets.
  • With TVS hitting $70 billion, global stablecoin integration, and key infrastructure strengths, Chainlink is cementing its role as a core DeFi player.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main divergence observed between Chainlink's and Ethereum's ETF flows in the article?

AWhile Ethereum's Grayscale Spot ETF (ETHE) saw $52 million in outflows, Chainlink's Grayscale ETF (GLNK) pulled in $4.05 million in inflows, indicating a clear preference for LINK.

QWhat key metric did Chainlink achieve in Q4 2025 that demonstrates its adoption and trust?

AChainlink's Total Value Secured (TVS) hit a record $70 billion, reflecting the total assets powered by its oracles.

QHow does the article explain the significance of Chainlink joining the Global Alliance for KRW Stablecoins (GAKS)?

AIt puts Chainlink at the center of Korea's stablecoin expansion, strengthening its core fundamentals in privacy, compliance, and interoperability, and positioning it as key DeFi infrastructure.

QAccording to the article, why do Chainlink's ETF inflows appear to be fundamentally driven rather than speculative?

AThe inflows are occurring alongside major fundamental developments like record TVS and global stablecoin integration, rather than just chasing short-term price moves.

QWhat overall trend in the DeFi market does the article highlight with the $170 billion Total Value Locked (TVL) figure?

AIt shows that on-chain liquidity is returning, with TVL reclaiming a $170 billion level for the first time since it was lost after the 2022 bear market.

Related Reads

Why Hasn't the U.S. Seen the Rise of 'Huabei' or 'Jiebei'?

The article explores why the U.S. lacks large-scale consumer credit products like China's "Huabei" and "Jiebei," despite having a developed financial sector. Key reasons include: 1. **Structural Barriers**: A fragmented federal and state regulatory system, reinforced by post-2008 reforms like the Dodd-Frank Act, raises compliance costs and protects traditional banks, stifling fintech innovation. 2. **Credit Card Dominance**: Credit cards, used by 70-80% of adults, form a $1.28 trillion debt market with high APRs (avg. 22.3%). This system cross-subsidizes users who pay in full with those carrying balances, creating a predatory yet entrenched ecosystem. 3. **Data Privacy Laws**: Strict regulations (e.g., FCRA, CCPA) prevent tech giants from leveraging behavioral data for credit scoring, unlike in China where such data fuels fintech models. 4. **Capital Market Disincentives**: Wall Street penalizes tech firms entering finance due to lower valuations associated with heavy regulation and risk, as seen in Apple’s failure with Apple Card. 5. **Banking Oligopoly**: Major banks control consumer lending, leveraging lobbying power and consumer habits to maintain high-cost credit, while alternatives like payday loans (400% APR) or "unbanked" services remain niche or exploitative. Ultimately, regulatory, structural, and corporate interests collectively block the emergence of accessible, low-cost digital lending in the U.S.

Odaily星球日报41m ago

Why Hasn't the U.S. Seen the Rise of 'Huabei' or 'Jiebei'?

Odaily星球日报41m ago

More and More 'Model Supermarkets' Are Opening: ByteDance, Alibaba, and Tencent Compete to Integrate

Chinese tech giants like ByteDance, Alibaba, and Tencent are accelerating the rollout of integrated AI model subscription services—dubbed “model supermarkets”—to provide developers with bundled access to multiple leading domestic large language models (LLMs). ByteDance’s Volcengine recently upgraded its "Coding Plan" by adding newer models like GLM-5.1, Minimax M2.7, and Kimi k2.6, allowing subscribers to use various top models under a single monthly fee starting at ¥40. However, user feedback reveals significant issues, including rapid consumption of usage limits (e.g., hitting caps within hours), frequent server errors (like HTTP 429), and slow response times during peak hours. Complaints about misleading deduction rates—where calls to advanced models consume more quota—are also common. The trend is industry-wide: Alibaba, Tencent, and Baidu have all launched similar multi-model coding plans. While these platforms reduce trial costs for developers, they also expose challenges in balancing affordability with service quality and computational stability. Amid this shift, independent AI companies like Zhipu, MiniMax, and Moonlight Face (Kimi) are developing strategies to avoid becoming mere “pipes” in this ecosystem—focusing on vertical applications, autonomous agents, and long-context models to retain competitiveness. Analysts suggest that, while platform aggregation may pressure model firms in the short term, specialized and vertical AI capabilities will remain differentiated in the long run.

marsbit44m ago

More and More 'Model Supermarkets' Are Opening: ByteDance, Alibaba, and Tencent Compete to Integrate

marsbit44m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片