Here’s How Solana And XRP ETFs Have Performed Compared To Bitcoin And Ethereum

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-04-15Last updated on 2026-04-15

Abstract

The article compares the performance of Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP ETFs over the past week. Data shows Bitcoin ETFs had significant volatility, with a large $471.3M inflow on April 6, followed by sharp outflows, and then a brief rebound before turning negative again. Ethereum ETFs followed a similar pattern, with a notable $120.24M inflow but also periods of outflows. In stark contrast, Solana and XRP ETFs saw much more muted activity. XRP attracted only $13.8M in total inflows, while Solana saw just $11.69M. This indicates a cautious investor stance towards these altcoins compared to the more established Bitcoin and Ethereum.

With macroeconomic factors and geopolitical tensions guiding the market’s direction over the past few weeks, major inflows and outflows have been observed across Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, as well as Solana and XRP ETFs. A direct comparison between Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs reveals a modest correlation in capital flows, suggesting similar investor behavior between the two assets. In contrast, XRP and Solana ETFs have experienced relatively subdued activity, likely impacted by persistent market volatility and a prevailing risk-off sentiment among investors.

Bitcoin And Ethereum ETF Performance This Past Week

Data from SoSoValue shows that Spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen stronger inflows than outflows since the start of last week. On April 6, Bitcoin ETFs posted their largest single-day inflow since the beginning of March, with more than $471.3 million flowing into these investment products. BlackRock’s IBIT had led this massive inflow with approximately $181.9 million. This was followed by Fidelity’s FBTC, which recorded inflows of about $147.3 million.

Following this, Bitcoin ETFs saw sharp outflows for two consecutive days, with $159.05 million withdrawn on April 7 and another $125.55 million leaving the fund on April 8. The decline in flows coincided with the US-Iran ceasefire announcement, which ironically should have bolstered market sentiment and yielded more positive results. However, the outflows continued, with Fidelity’s FBTC recording the highest outflows, followed by Grayscale’s GBTC and BlackRock’s IBIT.

Source: Chart from SoSoValue

On April 9 and 10, investors appeared to shift significantly, likely due to easing geopolitical pressures. This change was reflected in strong demand, with Bitcoin ETFs recording total inflows of more than $598.5 million on both days. However, the rebound proved short-lived. As of today, April 13, the funds have turned negative again, recording more than $291.1 million in outflows.

Similar to Bitcoin ETFs, Ethereum Spot ETFs have also recorded more inflows than outflows since last week. On April 6, the ETF posted its largest inflow since March 17, with more than $120.24 million entering the fund. However, this momentum was quickly reversed. The next two days saw notable outflows totaling $83.3 million, with most of these withdrawals coming from Fidelity’s FETH and BlackRock’s ETHA.

Since this decline, Ethereum ETFs have returned to positive territory, recording three consecutive days of inflows totaling more than $159.5 million. The flow patterns observed across both Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs indicate a similar trend, with investors adjusting their exposure in response to market conditions.

How Solana And XRP ETFs Have Fared

Compared with Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, XRP and Solana ETFs have experienced relatively muted investor demand. XRP ETFs, in particular, have attracted only about $13.8 million in total inflows since last week, underscoring their reduced demand.

On April 6, XRP ETF recorded zero flows, followed by modest inflows of $3.32 million on April 7. Activity stalled again on April 8, with zero flows, before a slight reversal on April 9, when the funds posted an outflow of $671,160. Momentum improved briefly on April 10, as XRP ETFs recorded their largest inflow since early February, with more than $9.09 million entering the funds, followed by an additional $1.46 million the next day.

In contrast, Solana ETFs have recorded total inflows of just $11.69 million since last week, reflecting relatively low participation. April 6 and 7 saw modest positive flows totaling over $1.17 million. This was followed by a sharp reversal, with outflows exceeding $17 million, before activity declined again on April 9 with zero flows.

Demand briefly returned on April 10, when the fund attracted another $11.45 million, marking its highest inflow since early March. Overall, recent activity in both altcoin ETFs stands in stark contrast to investor behavior in Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, suggesting a more cautious stance toward altcoins and comparatively weaker demand.

SOL trading at $86 on the 1D chart | Source: SOLUSDT on Tradingview.com

Related Questions

QHow did Bitcoin ETFs perform in terms of inflows and outflows during the week discussed in the article?

ABitcoin ETFs saw strong inflows than outflows overall, with the largest single-day inflow of $471.3 million on April 6, followed by two consecutive days of outflows totaling $284.6 million, then a rebound with over $598.5 million in inflows on April 9 and 10, but ending with outflows of $291.1 million on April 13.

QWhat was the correlation in capital flows between Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs according to the article?

AThe article states that there is a modest correlation in capital flows between Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, suggesting similar investor behavior in adjusting exposure in response to market conditions.

QHow did the performance of XRP and Solana ETFs compare to that of Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs?

AXRP and Solana ETFs experienced relatively subdued activity and muted investor demand compared to Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, with XRP attracting only $13.8 million and Solana $11.69 million in total inflows, indicating weaker demand and a more cautious investor stance.

QWhat event was cited as coinciding with the sharp outflows from Bitcoin ETFs on April 7 and 8?

AThe sharp outflows from Bitcoin ETFs on April 7 and 8 coincided with the US-Iran ceasefire announcement, which ironically did not bolster market sentiment as might have been expected.

QWhich specific Bitcoin ETFs were mentioned as leading the massive inflows on April 6?

AOn April 6, BlackRock’s IBIT led the massive inflows with approximately $181.9 million, followed by Fidelity’s FBTC with inflows of about $147.3 million.

Related Reads

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

In the race to dominate the AI era's entry point, China's tech giants—Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba—are aggressively deploying AI Agents to control the future of traffic distribution. Alibaba is pursuing a dual-track "closed loop + openness" strategy. Its Qianwen app is evolving into a super-Agent integrated across its ecosystem (Taobao, Alipay, etc.) to handle complex tasks like travel planning. Concurrently, it is opening its platform to external brands (Luckin Coffee, KFC) and has launched a B2B Agent platform, "Wukong," targeting enterprise automation. Its other flagship, Quark, aims to be an "AI super search box" for information and tasks. ByteDance is executing an omnipresent "sprawl strategy." Its Doubao app boasts over 300 million monthly active users and is evolving into a default AI entry point for daily life, with plans for paid versions and e-commerce integration. Its core weapon is the Kouzi platform, a visual "AI assembly factory" for developers to build custom Agents. ByteDance is also pushing hardware integration, collaborating on AI phones and developing smart glasses to embed Doubao everywhere. Tencent is playing its long-held "ultimate card" by quietly embedding an AI Agent directly into WeChat. This Agent, accessible via a swipe, can understand user commands and automatically execute tasks by calling upon WeChat's millions of mini-programs (e.g., finding and ordering coffee). This leverages WeChat's unparalleled 1.4-billion-user ecosystem to position the app as an AI-powered "service operating system," a move that could dramatically reshape the competitive landscape. The core battleground is shifting from competing for "user screen time" to competing to be the "default execution layer" for user intent. The business model is evolving from an "attention economy" to an "intent economy," where the Agent that can most efficiently fulfill a user's need gains control over service access and token flow. This represents a fundamental change in how users connect with digital services, making the fight for the Agent入口 (entry point) a pivotal moment for redefining industry leadership in the AI age.

marsbit13m ago

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

marsbit13m ago

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

The article explores the sudden shift in WeChat's strategy towards AI assistants from mobile phone manufacturers, transitioning from strict opposition to active collaboration. For over a year, WeChat fiercely resisted attempts by phone AI assistants (like ByteDance's Doubao in late 2025) to control its features via GUI automation ("simulated clicking"), citing security and data control concerns. This stance created a significant barrier for system-level AI integration. Now, Tencent has initiated A2A (Agent-to-Agent) partnerships with major phone brands like Honor, Xiaomi, OPPO, and vivo. This model allows a phone's system AI (e.g., Honor's YOYO) to parse a user's voice command and send a structured request directly to WeChat's own internal AI agent via secure APIs. WeChat then executes the action (e.g., sending a message) and returns the result. The article attributes Tencent's "change of face" to strategic pressure. While leading in social app usage, Tencent trails rivals like ByteDance and Alibaba in standalone AI app popularity. WeChat, with its vast mini-program ecosystem, is Tencent's key asset for an AI comeback. The upcoming WeChat AI agent aims to handle tasks like booking and payments within the app. However, phone system assistants remain the primary AI entry point for most users. The A2A collaboration allows Tencent to extend WeChat's AI reach to this crucial system layer while maintaining control over its core functions and data. For phone manufacturers, embracing A2A is a pragmatic move. The GUI route proved unviable due to WeChat's blocks. A2A offers a compliant path to integrate a vital service, enhancing their AI assistants' usefulness. It allows them to focus on developing their own AI ecosystems for other services while cooperating on WeChat access. The collaboration is framed as a mutual, strategic necessity: Tencent gains a distribution channel, and manufacturers gain a key functionality. The partnership relies on a "dual authorization" mechanism for security, requiring both user and app consent for each action. While questions about long-term data privacy practices remain, experts note A2A is more secure and compliant than GUI automation. Ultimately, this cooperation is seen as a tentative, calculated truce. Tencent's long-term goal is to make WeChat an AI-powered "service OS." Phone manufacturers aim to make their system AI the central user interface. Their paths may converge or clash in the future, but for now, the A2A deal represents the opening chapter in the battle for the AI-era user入口, driven by necessity and strategic calculus on both sides.

marsbit1h ago

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

marsbit1h ago

On-Chain Figures on the Eve of Kickoff: 1.6 Billion Traded Before the World Cup Even Begins

"On-Chain Numbers on the Eve of the World Cup: $1.6 Billion Traded Before Kick-off" Analysis of on-chain markets before the 2026 FIFA World Cup reveals significant crypto integration into football. The most striking figure is the approximately **$1.6 billion** in total trading volume on the single "World Cup Winner" contract on the Polymarket prediction market platform, accumulated before a single match was played. This represents explosive growth for a sector whose annual volume surged from ~$16B in 2024 to ~$64B in 2025. The ecosystem is maturing beyond speculation. Key developments include: 1) **Infrastructure upgrades** like Polymarket's migration to native, regulated USDC stablecoin for settlements; 2) **Reliable data oracles**, such as Chainlink, being used to resolve real-world match outcomes on-chain; and 3) **Official recognition**, with FIFA appointing its first-ever "Prediction Markets" partner. Over 100 contracts now cover everything from the outright winner to individual match results and even non-sporting risks like venue relocation. This evolution marks a fundamental shift. While crypto firms are absent from FIFA's top-tier sponsor list, the technology has deeply penetrated the tournament's financial and predictive infrastructure through regulated stablecoin settlements, decentralized oracles, and new official partnership categories. The regulatory landscape remains complex and varies by jurisdiction, but on-chain markets for the World Cup are already a multi-billion-dollar reality.

marsbit2h ago

On-Chain Figures on the Eve of Kickoff: 1.6 Billion Traded Before the World Cup Even Begins

marsbit2h 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 S (S) are presented below.

活动图片