Strategy Watch #2

insights.glassnodePublicado a 2026-03-24Actualizado a 2026-03-24

Resumen

Strategy Watch #2 provides institutional analysis of digital asset fund performance and allocation trends. The report covers six key areas: institutional capital flows, fund performance, macro strategies, on-chain vault returns, manager sentiment, and allocation updates. In February and early March, Bitcoin and Ethereum saw significant net outflows (-$9.6B and -$3.2B respectively), while stablecoins attracted inflows (+$6.2B), suggesting a defensive shift toward lower-risk assets. BTC ETF flows turned positive in March, though institutional conviction remains cautious. DeFi Total Value Locked (TVL) on Ethereum declined sharply, with peak outflows of -$23.7B in February, indicating reduced participation in on-chain yield strategies. CME basis yields continued to tighten, reflecting lower institutional leverage and softer derivatives demand. The report also highlights performance trends, with only one strategy type generating positive returns in February. Over 300 managers shared their three-month market outlook, and a new $750M fund of funds was announced.

The full report is freely available in PDF format.

Download PDF version

Welcome to Strategy Watch #2

Strategy Watch was built to address a clear demand for high-signal, impartial analysis of fund-level performance and allocation trends in digital assets.

The inaugural edition confirmed this demand, reaching a broad audience of key decision makers, from leading global asset managers, hedge funds, major investment banks, top-tier crypto-native funds and Fund of Funds.

Building on this early momentum, our objective is straightforward — to make Strategy Watch a must-read monthly publication for the digital asset investment community.

This publication is strengthened by direct input from market participants. Funds and allocators that contribute data and insights help shape a more complete and valuable view of the landscape.

If you have insights, data, or allocation updates worth sharing, we welcome your contribution.

Present your latest initiatives and updates to a curated audience of institutional allocators.

Share updates ↗

Inside the Latest Strategy Watch

The report is structured across six core sections, each focused on a distinct dimension of institutional activity in digital assets:

01 Institutional Flow Monitor |

02 Fund and SMA Performance | February was a bloodbath, check this section to see the only strategy type that returned positively last month.

03 Strategy Deep Dive: Macro Strategies | Hear firsthand from a macro portfolio manager on how they are navigating the current geopolitical challenges. 

04 On-chain Vault Performance | Are ETH curators underperforming ETH staking yield?

05 Manager Monitor | Find out how more than 300 managers are expecting the crypto market to perform over the next three months.

06 Allocation Updates | New USD 750m Fund of Funds is launching. Check this section to learn more.

in partnership with

The Premier Digital Assets Allocator Platform. Learn more


Institutional Flow Monitor

Capital flows into BTC and ETH remained deeply negative through February and into March, with stablecoins turning net positive in early March as investors rotated toward lower-risk positioning.

Bitcoin and Ethereum continued to experience sustained net outflows, with BTC and ETH capital flows registering -$9.6B and -$3.2B. However, stablecoins broke from the broader negative trend, flipping to +$6.2B in net inflows. Rather than signaling a broad return of risk appetite, this rotation likely reflects a defensive repositioning, with capital migrating into dollar-denominated on-chain instruments while conviction in spot crypto assets remains under pressure heading into mid-Q1 2026.

ETF & DAT Net Flows

After sustained February outflows, BTC ETF and DAT flows returned to positive, while ETH institutional flows showed early signs of stabilization.

After sustained February outflows, Bitcoin ETF and DAT flows returned to positive territory, recovering to +28k BTC and +46.8k BTC respectively. Ethereum flows were more measured, with ETF flows near neutral at +46.5k ETH and DAT flows stabilizing at +295.8k ETH. While the directional shift is encouraging, the recovery remains early-stage and uneven, and it would be premature to characterize this as a broad resumption of institutional conviction.

DeFi TVL & Stablecoin Cap

DeFi TVL on Ethereum saw sharp contraction through February before showing early signs of stabilization in March, though the broader declining trend since August 2025 remains intact.

Total Value Locked on Ethereum recorded peak outflows of -$23.7B per month in February, implying sustained withdrawal by larger allocators from on-chain activities such as liquidity provisioning and yield strategies. This slowdown alone is insufficient to signal a reversal, and diminished conviction in DeFi risk-adjusted returns continues to point to shallower liquidity depth across the ecosystem.

CME Basis Yield

CME Basis Yield compressed even further in February, reinforcing waning incentives for market-neutral strategies compared to January.

The monthly dollar value captured by institutions via cash-and-carry trades declined notably for both Bitcoin and Ethereum, building on the sharp compression seen since August 2025. This tightening basis reflects reduced leverage deployment, softer futures demand, and continued pullback in balance-sheet commitment amid tighter liquidity conditions persisting from January into early March 2026.


Disclaimer: This report does not provide any investment advice. All data is provided for information and educational purposes only. No investment decision shall be based on the information provided here and you are solely responsible for your own investment decisions.
Exchange balances presented are derived from Glassnode’s comprehensive database of address labels, which are amassed through both officially published exchange information and proprietary clustering algorithms. While we strive to ensure the utmost accuracy in representing exchange balances, it is important to note that these figures might not always encapsulate the entirety of an exchange’s reserves, particularly when exchanges refrain from disclosing their official addresses. We urge users to exercise caution and discretion when utilizing these metrics. Glassnode shall not be held responsible for any discrepancies or potential inaccuracies. Please read our Transparency Notice when using exchange data.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the primary purpose of the Strategy Watch publication?

AStrategy Watch was built to address a clear demand for high-signal, impartial analysis of fund-level performance and allocation trends in digital assets, aiming to be a must-read monthly publication for the digital asset investment community.

QWhich was the only strategy type that returned positively in February according to the report?

AThe report indicates that readers should check the 'Fund and SMA Performance' section to see the only strategy type that returned positively in February, though the specific strategy name is not stated in the provided text.

QWhat was the trend in capital flows for Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) through February and into March?

ACapital flows into BTC and ETH remained deeply negative, with BTC and ETH capital flows registering -$9.6B and -$3.2B, respectively.

QHow did stablecoin capital flows behave in contrast to BTC and ETH in early March?

AStablecoins broke from the broader negative trend, flipping to +$6.2B in net inflows, which likely reflects a defensive repositioning into lower-risk, dollar-denominated on-chain instruments.

QWhat does the sharp compression in CME Basis Yield indicate about market conditions?

AThe compression in CME Basis Yield reflects reduced leverage deployment, softer futures demand, and a continued pullback in balance-sheet commitment amid tighter liquidity conditions, indicating waning incentives for market-neutral strategies.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

**Summary: Rising Interest Rates Are Not the Killer of Tech; EPS Is: The "Keep the Strong, Ditch the Weak" Strategy After the AI Theme Plunge** The author argues that the sharp sell-off in tech and AI-related stocks, triggered by a strong US jobs report that heightened Fed rate hike fears, represents a "pullback to pick up passengers" rather than a "car crash." The true end of a tech bull market is not determined by an extra 25 basis point hike, but by industry overcapacity and the disproval of earnings per share (EPS) expectations. Historical analysis shows that during past rate hike cycles, the Nasdaq-100 often outperformed, provided EPS growth remained strong. The current phase is seen as a shift from a "broad narrative-driven rally" to a "focused verification stage" for AI. The investment strategy should be to "keep the strong, ditch the weak." * **Retain exposure** to high-conviction AI infrastructure leaders with clear order visibility, stable margins, strong cash flow, and upward EPS revisions (e.g., AI servers, advanced packaging, optical modules, key cloud suppliers). * **Reduce exposure** to high-beta, narrative-driven stocks with unclear profit paths (e.g., some quantum computing, space, or speculative chip stocks), especially on rebounds. Valuation concerns should focus on whether earnings can catch up to high multiples, not on high P/E alone. Crowded positioning signals a concentration into quality assets, not necessarily a market top. The upcoming Q2 earnings season will be a key validation point. The core principle is to hold stocks with proven EPS, while using macro events (CPI data, central bank meetings) to manage timing and risk.

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

SpaceX's potential IPO is priced at $135 per share, aiming to raise $75 billion and valuing the company at approximately $1.77 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO in history. This valuation has sparked intense debate among investors. Bullish analysts, including major underwriters Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, argue the valuation is justified by SpaceX's long-term potential. They see it not just as a rocket company but as a future leader in space infrastructure, with key growth drivers being Starlink satellite internet, low-cost rocket launches, and future AI-related ventures. They project revenues reaching hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars by 2030-2040. ARK Invest's model suggests a 2030 enterprise value could reach $2.5 trillion. Bearish analysts from independent research firms like Morningstar, PitchBook, and New Constructs contend the IPO price is excessively high, already pricing in unrealistic future growth. Using DCF and sum-of-the-parts models, they estimate fair value between $780 billion and $1.7 trillion, significantly below the IPO target. They highlight risks such as the speculative nature of AI projections, over-dependence on Elon Musk, high growth expectations, and corporate governance concerns. Trefis set a target price of just $79 per share. While both sides acknowledge SpaceX's unique position in commercial space, the core disagreement centers on whether the $135 share price offers a reasonable margin of safety or is overly optimistic. Despite the valuation controversy, reported strong demand for the IPO indicates significant market interest.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

The article discusses the evolution of on-chain credit, distinguishing three markets: overcollateralized crypto lending, unsecured lending (largely unsuccessful), and asset-backed credit (ABC). ABC, backed by identifiable real-world collateral with legal recourse, is identified as the fastest-growing category and the only one credibly addressing adverse selection—the core problem in credit where the riskiest borrowers self-select. Current growth in on-chain Real World Assets (RWAs), particularly tokenized private credit funds (e.g., Maple Finance, Centrifuge), is substantial but often merely "wraps" existing fund structures, inheriting their risks rather than solving adverse selection at the protocol level. The regulatory landscape is a key driver, with the US GENIUS Act (prohibiting stablecoin issuers from paying yield) and the proposed CLARITY Act (closing loopholes on indirect yield) set to redefine permissible yield-bearing products. This makes vaults (like ERC-4626) the critical architecture—they become the primary compliant vehicle for delivering yield, functioning as issuance, disclosure, distribution, and recovery mechanisms. The author's thesis is that the correct post-GENIUS/CLARITY architecture involves building ABC solutions where credit assessment, structure, and recovery are encoded directly into the smart contract vault layer, moving beyond mere tokenized fund wrappers to solve adverse selection fundamentally and ensure regulatory compliance.

Foresight NewsHace 3 hora(s)

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

Foresight NewsHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片