Bitcoin ETF Sees $463 Million in Outflows as ETH Defies Trend to Attract Capital: Could $2,500 Become a New Launching Pad?

Pubblicato 2026-09-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-09-15

Introduzione

Bitcoin ETFs recorded four consecutive days of net outflows last week, totaling $462.73 million. In contrast, ETH ETFs saw a single-day inflow of $216.41 million on Friday, achieving approximately $197 million in weekly net inflows and marking their fourth consecutive week of inflows. The upcoming FOMC meeting and CLARITY vote will test whether this divergence in capital flows can be sustained.

Institutional Capital Begins to Differentiate Among Crypto Assets

Last week saw a clear divergence in the flow of funds for US crypto ETFs. Bitcoin ETFs experienced redemptions every trading day from September 8th to 11th, with a weekly net outflow reaching $462.73 million, ending the previous trend of three consecutive weeks of inflows. During the same period, the price of Bitcoin retreated to around $77,000, and the macro environment became more tense due to inflation and interest rate hike expectations.

Bitcoin ETF trading volume declined by approximately 28% sequentially to $8.76 billion, while ETH ETF trading volume conversely increased by about 54% to $5.14 billion. The combined fund flow for five major categories of crypto ETFs shifted from a net inflow of about $1.24 billion the previous week to a net outflow of approximately $263 million, indicating a clear contraction in institutional risk appetite, but not a synchronized retreat from all assets.

ETH Completed a Flow Reversal on Friday

ETH ETFs came under pressure at the beginning of the week, but saw a single-day net inflow of $216.41 million on Friday, exceeding the size of the final weekly net inflow. This capital injection reversed the prior weakness, resulting in a weekly net inflow of about $197 million for ETH ETFs and extending their streak of consecutive net inflows to four weeks.

This set of data illustrates that while Bitcoin faced sustained redemptions, some institutional capital remained willing to allocate to ETH. Whether the price can stabilize around $2,500 depends not only on spot buying interest but also on whether ETF flows maintain their relative strength.

FOMC and Regulatory Vote to Determine the Next Direction of Flows

XRP and Solana ETFs also attracted net inflows of $18.98 million and $10.30 million respectively last week, with ETH, XRP, and Solana combined attracting approximately $226 million. Capital flows are shifting from broad-based momentum chasing to more selective allocation, with ETH being the most prominent beneficiary of this shift.

The Federal Reserve will hold its meeting from September 15th to 16th, with interest rate futures suggesting a relatively high probability of a 25-basis-point rate hike; the US Senate is also scheduled to hold a procedural vote on a new version of the CLARITY Act on Tuesday. These two events may determine whether ETH fund flows can continue to lead and whether the $2,500 level can transition from resistance to effective support.

Letture associate

The "Number Game" Behind Trillion-Dollar Valuations: OpenAI and Anthropic's Revenue Can't Be Compared Directly

"Valuation Game in Trillions: The 'Digital Metrics Play' Behind OpenAI and Anthropic's Incomparable Revenues" Investors face significant uncertainty as core financial metrics from the two AI giants, OpenAI and Anthropic, cannot be compared directly due to differing accounting methods. OpenAI projects its annualized revenue run rate (ARR) to reach or exceed $70 billion by year-end, while Anthropic announced in July that its ARR had hit $65 billion. However, a key discrepancy renders these figures incomparable: Anthropic records the total sales value generated through cloud partners like Amazon as revenue, whereas OpenAI only counts its net share from partners like Microsoft. This reporting difference has tangible market impact. A recent tech stock downturn was partly attributed to investor attempts to adjust OpenAI's numbers for a direct comparison, leading to lower estimates and concerns about its growth pace. Currently, OpenAI's ARR is reportedly around $50 billion, with expectations to approach $70 billion by December. The issue highlights broader concerns about ARR as a non-standardized, often manipulated metric used to showcase growth and justify high private valuations. It is calculated by extrapolating short-term performance or summing contract values, offering companies considerable discretion. A significant gap exists between ARR and actual recognized annual revenue: OpenAI expects 2026 revenue of roughly $35 billion (half its year-end ARR projection), and internal documents show Anthropic's 2025 revenue was about $4.6 billion against a published ARR exceeding $9 billion. Experts warn that the opacity surrounding these key players creates a "black box" effect, complicating investment decisions and amplifying market volatility. As their performance is a bellwether for the AI investment narrative, any signs of slowing sales growth could ripple through the broader market, affecting chipmakers and other beneficiaries of the AI boom. The reliance on ARR sidesteps a fundamental question: the scale of real sales needed to justify trillion-dollar valuations and cover massive expenditures. The situation may improve with greater transparency, particularly if Anthropic proceeds with its anticipated Wall Street debut, which would subject the company to standardized GAAP financial reporting.

marsbit1 h fa

The "Number Game" Behind Trillion-Dollar Valuations: OpenAI and Anthropic's Revenue Can't Be Compared Directly

marsbit1 h fa

The Brutal Truth of the VC Industry: Why Most Funds Haven't Returned the Principal After 9 Years?

**VC's Harsh Reality: Why Most Funds Haven't Returned Capital After 9 Years** This article uses hard data to dissect key trends in venture capital and AI spending. It reveals that large, established VC firms are heavily clustered in similar AI investments, while emerging managers are more likely to back unconventional companies. Data shows that of scored seed deals, emerging funds invested 24.7% in "outlier" startups versus only 11.5% for giant funds, largely due to specialized funds with different mandates. A critical finding from Carta data exposes that most VC funds fail to return investors' capital even after nine years. Median funds from 2017 have only returned $0.37 for every dollar invested. This creates pressure for funds nearing their lifecycle end, which can influence their advice to portfolio companies regarding exits or follow-on funding—a dynamic founders must understand. The analysis of AI spending identifies a crucial, often overlooked market: the middle layer between basic and frontier models, which accounts for ~40% of enterprise AI spend. Price wars are intense here due to lab competition, open-source models, and fine-tuning. The article advises startups to categorize AI spending into three lines—salary replacement (benchmarked against labor costs), productivity tools (evaluated by usage), and product-integrated costs (focused on margins)—to spend effectively. Finally, it highlights a decline in rigorous due diligence for deep tech (e.g., quantum computing), where large deal sizes, reliance on lead investor reputations, and herd behavior often replace independent technical validation, risking a repeat of historical investment bubbles.

marsbit1 h fa

The Brutal Truth of the VC Industry: Why Most Funds Haven't Returned the Principal After 9 Years?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片