Strategy Watch #2

insights.glassnodePublished on 2026-03-24Last updated on 2026-03-24

Abstract

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.

Related Questions

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.

Related Reads

Who Will Take Over After SpaceX's IPO?

SpaceX is set to go public on June 12 with a $1.8 trillion valuation, but only about 5.56 billion shares (4.2% of the total) will be initially available for trading. Buy-side pressure is expected in three distinct waves. First, the IPO subscription at a fixed $135 per share, which is oversubscribed by nearly 4 times. Second, immediate secondary market trading post-listing. Third, and most significant, the forced buying by passive index funds. The Nasdaq 100 index has modified its rules to include SpaceX just 15 trading days after its IPO, despite its small float, which will compel hundreds of tracking funds to buy large quantities of stock. However, this initial supply shortage will not last. A staged lock-up release is designed for the approximately 54% of shares held by VCs, early employees, and other insiders (excluding Elon Musk's 42%, which is locked for 366 days). Releases begin after the Q2 earnings report, with subsequent unlocks at multiple intervals up to 180 days post-IPO. This means selling pressure from insiders will gradually increase throughout the latter half of the year. A key counterbalance is scheduled for mid-December during the Nasdaq 100's annual rebalancing. By then, the public float will have expanded significantly, forcing index funds to buy more shares, potentially providing institutional support after months of insider selling.

marsbit31m ago

Who Will Take Over After SpaceX's IPO?

marsbit31m ago

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

On June 11, Anthropic apologized not for a model failure, but for a lack of transparency. Its new Claude Fable 5 model was found to be secretly rerouting requests from users engaged in advanced AI model development to a weaker version, Opus 4.8, without any notification. The company's response—promising future notifications for such "downgrades"—was met with user skepticism. The article argues the core issue isn't technical but commercial: Anthropic's "safety" measures are primarily a business strategy. A key feature, the "intelligent safety classifier," marketed as user protection, is described as a tool for "competitive defense" to protect Anthropic's market lead by limiting rivals' research capabilities. This covert mechanism was designed for low "false positives," precisely targeting AI researchers. Anthropic's model involves a calculated three-step process: publishing alarming security research to amplify public anxiety, offering its Fable 5 model with a "safety classifier" as a premium-priced solution, and cashing in through a planned high-value IPO. This contrasts with OpenAI's more direct "tool-and-traffic" approach. The apology, merely changing a secret downgrade to a visible one, is seen as a business "patch" rather than a principled shift. The incident risks damaging Anthropic's "safest AI" reputation among the developer community, which underpins its valuation and appeal to government and corporate clients. Ultimately, the article concludes that for Anthropic, safety is a business, and the apology is merely customer service for that business.

marsbit51m ago

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

marsbit51m ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

**Summary:** A growing "anti-college" movement is gaining traction among elite circles in Silicon Valley, challenging the traditional value of a four-year university degree. Proponents argue that college has become an expensive, slow, and increasingly irrelevant waste of time, especially in the fast-paced tech world where opportunities pass by quickly. The movement is led by figures like billionaire Peter Thiel, who criticizes universities for high costs, ideological indoctrination, and stifling true innovation. His "Thiel Fellowship" pays young people to drop out and pursue ventures. Companies like Palantir Technologies (co-founded by Thiel) fuel this trend with programs like the "Meritocracy Fellowship," which offers high school graduates paid internships as an alternative to immediate college enrollment, promising a practical "Palantir Degree." Key drivers include: 1. **Economics:** Skyrocketing student debt versus the allure of immediate, high-paying tech jobs or startup funding. 2. **Technology:** AI and online tools lowering barriers to self-education and product development, making formal instruction seem inefficient. 3. **Culture:** A backlash against perceived "woke" ideology and DEI policies in universities, coupled with a belief that these institutions suppress meritocracy and masculine drive. The movement is notably male-dominated. Critics, like economist David Deming, warn against overgeneralizing from dropout success stories (survivorship bias). He emphasizes that genuine autodidacts are rare, corporate training is narrowly focused, and the "college wage premium" remains high for most people. University liberal arts education, he argues, builds adaptable problem-solving skills and broad perspectives. The debate highlights a deeper crisis in education. The core model of the modern university appears increasingly mismatched with the speed of the information age. The movement signals a shift in the locus of learning from institutional "education" to personal, active "learning" powered by the internet and AI. Ultimately, this may not mean the end of university, but rather a painful evolution. The future likely holds more hybrid, personalized, and lifelong learning pathways. The central question becomes: in a world changing faster than any curriculum, how do we best learn?

marsbit1h ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

The commercialization of generative AI is facing a critical inflection point as a potential price war looms. According to The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is considering a significant cut to its token fees to compete with rival Anthropic, signaling a shift from a growth-at-all-costs model focused on token consumption. This move comes as both companies, reportedly losing billions on compute, prepare for IPOs, and as enterprise customers face "bill shock" from switching to usage-based token billing. Reports indicate poor ROI, with one analysis finding only 18 cents of every dollar spent on AI tokens generates user-facing value. The industry's initial phases—from flat-rate subscriptions to aggressive subsidies—have given way to a reckoning with real costs. Analysts debate the future: some predict a bifurcation between premium, high-cost models for complex tasks and cheaper alternatives for routine work, while others believe overall spending will still rise as agentic AI increases tokens per task. Notably, Chinese model DeepSeek's low-cost API is gaining traction with U.S. enterprises, adding competitive pressure. The core challenge is redefining value beyond token volume ("tokenmaxxing") toward measurable productivity ("valuemaxxing"), as the entire AI value chain, from cloud providers to chipmakers, feels the ripple effects of unsustainable pricing.

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

marsbit1h ago

The Bitcoin 400-Day Cycle: Historical Performance Shows How Low The Bottom Goes

A crypto analyst forecasts a continued Bitcoin bear market, predicting a potential price bottom around October 2026 based on a historical 400-day cycle pattern. The analysis suggests Bitcoin is currently 252 days into a bear phase that typically lasts 364-400 days, indicating another 112-148 days of downward pressure. The projected cycle low could be around $30,000, representing a more than 75% decline from recent all-time highs near $126,000. The analyst dismisses arguments that current market factors like ETFs make this cycle different, noting the pattern has held for over a decade. Another expert aligns, forecasting a bottom between $30,000-$40,000 by late Q3 or early Q4 2026 and rejecting the possibility of Bitcoin reaching $100,000 this year.

bitcoinist1h ago

The Bitcoin 400-Day Cycle: Historical Performance Shows How Low The Bottom Goes

bitcoinist1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片

Hot Categoriesright-arrow

Hot Tagsright-arrow