Bitwise Solana ETF breaks records – Will the ‘watershed moment’ last?

ambcryptoPublished on 2025-10-29Last updated on 2025-10-30

Key Takeaways

How strong was BSOL’s trading performance?

BSOL saw $56 million in volume on day one and $72.4 million on day two, making it the highest first-day turnover among nearly 850 ETFs launched this year.

Are other crypto ETFs seeing similar activity?

Yes, the Canary Litecoin ETF (LTCC) and Canary HBAR ETF (HBR) are sustaining trading volumes – uncommon after the debut day.


The first U.S. investment product offering full direct exposure to Solana [SOL] is showing no signs of cooling off.

After a record-setting debut, the Bitwise Solana Staking ETF (BSOL) delivered an even stronger performance in its second trading session, posting $72.4 million in volume on the 29th of October.

That builds on its $56 million opening day, the highest first-day turnover among nearly 850 ETF launches so far this year.

Execs weigh in

Bloomberg Senior ETF Analyst Eric Balchunas wrote in a post on X, 

“$BSOL did more volume on Day Two.. $72m is a huge number. Good sign.”

Echoing similar sentiments, Kyle Samani, Managing Partner at investment firm Multicoin Capital, added

“Truly a watershed moment. The amount of available capital that can now buy SOL that could not previously is tremendous.”

That being said, the momentum around Solana-linked exchange-traded products is not limited to Bitwise alone. Data showed that other recently launched crypto ETFs were also seeing steady activity.

Other SOL ETF activity

Balchunas further noted that the Canary Litecoin ETF (LTCC) and Canary HBAR ETF (HBR) held volumes near $8 million and $1 million, respectively. Most ETFs usually see sharp post-launch declines, making these steady figures noteworthy.

Meanwhile, Bitwise’s BSOL ETF continued to lead the pack, recording roughly $69.5 million in first-day inflows and followed by $46.5 million on the 29th of October, according to Farside

Seeing this, Matt Hougan, CIO of crypto index fund manager Bitwise Invest, also tweeted,

“I have a feeling the Bitwise Solana Staking ETF, BSOL, is gonna be huge. Institutional investors love ETFs, and they love revenue. Solana has the most revenue of any blockchain. Therefore, institutional investors love Solana ETFs.”

Grayscale’s newly converted Solana staking ETF (GSOL) also entered the market with approximately $4 million in volume, while the REX Osprey SOL Staking ETF (SSK) added around $18 million mid-week. 

Market sentiments and more

Despite the excitement around the new ETFs, market sentiment isn’t fully aligned with the bullish narrative.

On the predictions platform Myriad, traders were assigning only a 32.7% probability that Solana will set a new all-time high before the year ends.

Meanwhile, SOL saw mild volatility, sliding 3.1% in the last 24 hours to around $194 as Bitcoin [BTC] also cooled from recent highs. However, at press time, Solana recovered slightly to $195.53, up 0.41% according to CoinMarketCap.

Still, the bigger picture looks far from quiet; the combined daily Spot Solana ETF volume, led by the REX-Osprey SOL ETF, has already reached $1.82 billion as of the 29th of October.

Solana ETF VolumeSolana ETF Volume

Source: The Block

Share

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Same $5 Rate, Bill Differs by 30%, OpenAI Exec: Token Pricing Is Never Directly Comparable

Here is a summary of the article in English: **Title: Priced at $5, Bills Vary by 30%. OpenAI Executive: Token Prices Are Not Directly Comparable** A key takeaway from OpenAI's Codex lead, Tibo, is that a "token" is not a standardized unit for comparing AI model costs, akin to grams or kilowatt-hours. He uses an analogy: two identical pizzas priced per slice can yield different total costs depending on how they're cut. Similarly, different models use different "tokenizers" to segment text, meaning the same input text can produce vastly different token counts. For instance, the same text was tokenized as 766 tokens by GPT-5.6 Sol and 1170 tokens by Claude Opus 5—a 34.5% difference—despite both models advertising the same input price of $5 per million tokens. This discrepancy arises because each company trains its own tokenizer based on its training data, affecting how common or rare word combinations are split. The problem isn't cross-vendor only. Even Anthropic warns that its newer models (Claude 4.7+) use a different tokenizer, producing roughly 30% more tokens for the same text than earlier versions, so cost estimates shouldn't be reused across model generations. Bill differences stem from four main factors: 1) Tokenizer efficiency (input token count), 2) Caching (e.g., GPT-5.6 Sol offers a much lower cache input rate), 3) Output pricing (which can outweigh input savings in agent workflows), and 4) Context length pricing tiers (e.g., GPT-5.6 Sol charges double the input rate for entire requests exceeding 272K tokens). Tibo also addressed user reports of GPT-5.6 Sol's context window being limited in practice, sharing configuration code to manually expand it to 1 million tokens. However, he cautioned that larger windows increase the risk of hitting higher pricing tiers as longer session histories are processed repeatedly. The article concludes that the true metric should shift from "price per million tokens" to "price per successful outcome." The most accurate way to compare costs is to run identical real-world tasks (with the same prompts, tools, and data) through different models, accounting for all variables like tokenization, caching, output length, and context pricing. Ultimately, what matters is the total cost to complete a specific job, not the nominal token price.

marsbit4m ago

Same $5 Rate, Bill Differs by 30%, OpenAI Exec: Token Pricing Is Never Directly Comparable

marsbit4m ago

Are Big VC Funds Monopolizing the Seed Round, Leaving Small VCs with No Choice but to Give Up?

**Title: Are Big VCs Monopolizing Seed Rounds? Is Giving Up the Only Path for Small VCs?** In a frank and critical commentary, the author argues that the venture capital landscape has shifted dramatically: large, multi-stage funds are aggressively moving into seed-stage investing, leveraging their brand recognition, massive capital, and resources to dominate deals. They outcompete smaller, specialized funds for stakes in even the earliest startups, as founders increasingly prefer established names. The piece asserts that success in VC now hinges almost entirely on securing a position in the handful of globally transformative companies each year (e.g., OpenAI, Anthropic). For funds that miss these "winner-takes-most" opportunities, relevance fades. The author sarcastically suggests small fund managers should advise their portfolio companies to seek acquisition by such giants and then invest via SPVs, or abandon early-stage investing altogether to chase less ambiguous growth rounds. Further, the author claims the "best" founders—those from elite backgrounds—command premium valuations and align with top-tier funds, leaving little room for others. The relentless focus on AI is presented as another pressure point; not dedicating a fund entirely to AI is deemed a path to irrelevance, akin to missing prior cycles like SaaS or crypto. Ultimately, the letter delivers a cynical conclusion: with capital and power concentrating, true differentiation is nearly impossible. It suggests that for many small VCs, surrendering to this new reality—rather than evolving, competing, or trying something different—might be the most rational, if grim, course of action. The piece serves as a stark warning about capital concentration and the existential challenges facing smaller investment firms.

marsbit5m ago

Are Big VC Funds Monopolizing the Seed Round, Leaving Small VCs with No Choice but to Give Up?

marsbit5m ago

Bank of Russia: 12 Largest Banks to Connect Digital Ruble from September 1, 2026

The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) announced that all 12 of the country's systemically important banks will be ready to offer clients digital ruble accounts and transactions starting September 1, 2026. According to Alla Bakina, director of the CBR's national payment system department, these banks cover over 80% of the domestic payment market. The digital ruble is described as a new form of the existing currency, functioning as a cashless payment method but held directly in a user's wallet on the CBR platform. Nine other banks designated as significant payment market participants are also expected to provide access, with most aiming to complete integration by autumn 2026. Starting from the September launch date, major retail chains with annual revenue exceeding 120 million rubles will be required to accept digital ruble payments, though adoption for citizens remains voluntary. The rollout follows a delayed pilot phase, with mass implementation postponed from 2025. The CBR's model currently offers basic account functionality without interest accrual, unlike China's digital yuan, which began paying interest in early 2026. The announcement positions Russia among dozens of countries testing Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), though the digital ruble's potential role in cross-border settlements, particularly within BRICS, remains an open question for its future international relevance.

cryptonews.ru10m ago

Bank of Russia: 12 Largest Banks to Connect Digital Ruble from September 1, 2026

cryptonews.ru10m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of SOL (SOL) are presented below.

活动图片