Ethereum ETFs flip to $117mln inflows – Will ETH reclaim $3K next?

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-01-28Last updated on 2026-01-28

Abstract

Ethereum ETFs recorded $117 million in net inflows on January 26th, led by Fidelity with $137 million, while BlackRock saw outflows, indicating selective institutional interest rather than broad accumulation. Despite this, Ethereum's price action remained constrained, trading around $2,908 with key support near $2,900 and $2,850. Breaking the $3,000 resistance is crucial for a potential move toward $3,200–$3,400, though weak momentum indicators like the MACD and RSI suggest limited buying pressure. Additionally, Ethereum’s network fees dropped to multi-year lows, improving scalability but raising questions about sustained long-term growth.

Ethereum rebounded on the 26th of January, posting $117 million in net inflows into U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs. Fidelity dominated the session, recording $137 million in inflows and snapping a four-day outflow streak.

By contrast, BlackRock registered net outflows on the day. That divergence highlighted selective institutional positioning rather than broad-based accumulation.

The reversal in ETF flows followed multiple sessions of sustained outflows. That shift left traders focused on whether institutions were rebuilding exposure or executing short-term reallocations.

Even so, inflows alone did not guarantee immediate price expansion.

Ethereum network fees hit multi-year lows

Glassnode data showed Ethereum’s Total Transaction Fees fell to their lowest level since May 2017 on the 27th of January.

This sharp decline boosted scalability and security, driving the ecosystem forward. Lower fees solidified a healthier ecosystem, but the real challenge remains sustaining explosive long-term growth. This mirrors the powerful expansions of 2017 and 2021 when fees also dropped to these levels.

Liquidity thickens below $2,900

Ethereum’s liquidity clusters around $2,900 and $2,850 offered crucial downside support. Large buy orders in these zones triggered accumulation from whales, creating solid backing.

But what happens if the price drops below these levels? Will market makers hunt that liquidity, causing a cascading effect and leading to a deeper pullback?

At the time of writing, Ethereum [ETH] was trading at $2,908. Reclaiming and breaking the $3,000 level became the new benchmark. A successful reclaim and clearing of the downtrend could have pushed Ethereum toward the $3,200-$3,400 resistance zone.

However, momentum indicators like the MACD showed signs of weakness, and the RSI was in the 40s, indicating a lack of strong buying momentum. Ethereum’s ability to break the $3,000 resistance would have defined its next move.


Final Thoughts

  • Ethereum saw $117 million in net inflows into U.S. spot ETFs. While Fidelity absorbed most inflows, BlackRock posted net outflows, signaling selective positioning rather than uniform institutional accumulation.
  • Liquidity clustered near $2,900 and $2,850 offered support.

Related Questions

QWhat was the net inflow amount for U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs on January 26th, and which firm dominated the session?

AThe net inflow was $117 million, and Fidelity dominated the session with $137 million in inflows.

QAccording to Glassnode, when was the last time Ethereum's Total Transaction Fees were as low as they were on January 27th?

AThe last time fees were this low was in May 2017.

QWhat are the two key liquidity support levels mentioned for Ethereum's price?

AThe key liquidity support levels are $2,900 and $2,850.

QWhat does the article suggest the RSI indicator being in the 40s signifies for Ethereum?

AIt indicates a lack of strong buying momentum.

QWhat resistance zone could Ethereum have moved toward if it successfully reclaimed the $3,000 level?

AIt could have moved toward the $3,200-$3,400 resistance zone.

Related Reads

AI Giants Enter the Dark Forest

In the AI industry's "dark forest," major players like Anthropic, OpenAI, and DeepSeek are strategically withholding their most advanced models to avoid becoming targets in a high-stakes competitive landscape. Anthropic released Claude Opus 4.7 but admitted it underperforms compared to their unreleased model Mythos, citing safety concerns. They delayed addressing user complaints about performance regression until OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 launch, highlighting a tactic of controlled disclosure aligned with competitors’ moves. OpenAI’s GPT-5.5, though a full retrain since GPT-4.5, was seen as incremental rather than revolutionary. Leaks revealed internal models like Glacier and Heisenberg, indicating significant unreleased capabilities. OpenAI acknowledges a "capability overhang," where real model power exceeds what users experience, often due to infrastructure-driven throttling. DeepSeek launched V4 Preview, a cost-efficient model, but its full potential (V4 Pro Max) awaits Huawei’s Ascend 950 super-nodes量产 in late 2026. Their strategy focuses on affordability and scalability, aiming to democratize AI access globally, a move noted even by NVIDIA’s CEO as a disruptive threat. Together, these actions reflect a broader trend: leading AI labs are deliberately pacing releases, hiding strengths, and aligning disclosures with competitive dynamics—each avoiding the risk of exposure in a forest where first movers become targets.

marsbit1h ago

AI Giants Enter the Dark Forest

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

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 ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片