Strategy Watch #3

insights.glassnodeОпубликовано 2026-04-23Обновлено 2026-04-23

Введение

Strategy Watch #3 provides institutional analysis of digital asset fund performance and allocation trends. Key findings show gradual stabilization in capital flows, with Bitcoin and ETH outflows improving from February lows but remaining negative. BTC ETF and DAT flows turned positive mid-March before moderating, while Ethereum flows followed more cautiously. DeFi TVL on Ethereum recovered significantly, nearing neutral by month-end. However, BTC CME basis yield turned negative, eliminating carry trade opportunities. The report also covers performance dispersion among strategies, a deep dive into quant trend following, on-chain vault yields, manager sentiment, and new institutional entries, including a $6B pension fund increasing crypto exposure.

The full report is freely available in PDF format.

Download PDF version

Welcome to Strategy Watch #3

Strategy Watch was built to address a clear demand for high-signal, impartial analysis of fund-level performance and allocation trends in digital assets.

Our objective is straightforward — to make Strategy Watch a must-read monthly publication for the digital asset investment community.

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 | Early stabilization as BTC/ETH outflows improve and ETF demand recovers, but conviction in spot markets remains under pressure.

02 Fund and SMA Performance | Market-neutral strategies delivered consistent gains; directional performance remains highly dispersed.

03 Strategy Deep Dive: Quant Trend Following | What’s driving quant trend performance in a difficult environment for directional strategies? Hear directly from a fund manager.

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 | A $6B pension fund increases crypto exposure as new funds and institutional strategies continue to launch.

in partnership with

The Premier Digital Assets Allocator Platform. Learn more


Institutional Flow Monitor

  • BTC and ETH capital flows remained negative through March but continued to recover from February lows, while stablecoin inflows moderated alongside the broader stabilization.

Bitcoin and Ethereum continued to register net outflows through March, with capital flows closing the month at -$7.0B and -$1.6B respectively, a notable improvement from the -$9.6B and -$3.2B readings seen in mid-February. Stablecoin inflows also moderated to +$2.6B by month-end, easing from the +$6.2B peak earlier in March. The overall picture is one of gradual stabilization rather than recovery, with the acute phase of institutional de-risking losing momentum but conviction in spot assets remaining under pressure.

ETF & DAT Net Flows

  • BTC ETF and DAT flows swung decisively positive through March, with ETH channels following at a more measured pace before both eased into month-end.

Bitcoin ETF and DAT flows finally turned positive through March, reaching intra-month highs of +30.6k BTC and +46.8k BTC respectively mid-month before settling back to +17.6k BTC and +30.9k BTC by month-end. Ethereum flows mirrored the directional shift with less intensity, as ETF flows reached +46.6k ETH and DAT flows peaked at +295.9k ETH before easing to +261.9k ETH at close. The mid-month surge followed by minor pullback, suggests demand remains sensitive to wider market conditions, rather than a true sustained structural shift in institutional positioning.

DeFi TVL & Stablecoin Cap

  • DeFi TVL flows on Ethereum staged a significant recovery through March, reversing from peak February outflows to near-neutral territory by month-end.

After registering peak monthly outflows of $17.8B at end of February, Ethereum DeFi TVL flows recovered sharply through March, turning positive in mid-month and closing the period near neutral at -$0.75B. The pace of recovery was notable, with flows moving from double-digit outflows in early March to briefly positive readings around $4.9B by mid-month before settling back. While the trend shift is meaningful, a single month of stabilization is insufficient to declare a reversal of the broader contraction that has persisted since August 2025, and sustained inflows would be required to confirm a genuine return of allocator conviction in on-chain yield strategies.

CME Basis Yield

  • BTC CME basis yield turned negative through March, erasing the carry trade entirely, while ETH basis yield remained subdued but showed tentative signs of recovery by month-end.

Here we measure return available to institutions running cash-and-carry trades. After compressing through February to $17.3M/month, BTC basis yield crossed into negative territory mid-March and closed the month at -$3.9M, reflecting a full inversion of the carry premium. This signals futures are trading at a discount to spot, removing the economic rationale for market-neutral strategies entirely. ETH basis yield, already negative at end of February, oscillated in a narrow range before recovering modestly to +0.9M by month-end. Taken together, the carry environment for both assets remains structurally challenged, with meaningful recovery contingent on a sustained rebuilding of futures premium above spot.


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.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat is the main objective of the Strategy Watch publication?

AThe objective is to make Strategy Watch a must-read monthly publication for the digital asset investment community by providing high-signal, impartial analysis of fund-level performance and allocation trends.

QWhat was the trend in Bitcoin and Ethereum capital flows through March as reported?

ABitcoin and Ethereum continued to register net outflows through March, closing at -$7.0B and -$1.6B respectively, which was an improvement from the -$9.6B and -$3.2B readings seen in mid-February.

QHow did the performance of market-neutral strategies compare to directional strategies?

AMarket-neutral strategies delivered consistent gains, while directional performance remained highly dispersed.

QWhat happened to the BTC CME basis yield in March?

AThe BTC CME basis yield turned negative through March, erasing the carry trade entirely and closing the month at -$3.9M, indicating futures were trading at a discount to spot.

QWhich section of the report discusses the performance of on-chain ETH vaults compared to staking yield?

ASection 04, titled 'On-chain Vault Performance', addresses whether ETH curators are underperforming ETH staking yield.

Похожее

Can Alibaba Cloud Rewrite Itself?

Over the past five months, Alibaba Cloud's MaaS (Model as a Service) revenue has surged 15x, marking a strategic overhaul where the company is shifting its 17-year-old system designed for "humans using cloud" to a new paradigm centered on "Agents consuming Tokens." At its recent summit, Alibaba Cloud announced a full-stack upgrade encompassing "chip-cloud-model-inference," all optimized for AI Agents. Key launches include the new AI product portal "QianWen Cloud," hyper-node servers powered by the in-house AI chip Zhenwu M890, and the latest flagship model, Qwen3.7-Max. Senior VP Liu Weiguang described this as building "China's largest AI factory," where chips are raw materials, the cloud is the workshop, models are machines, and the inference platform is the assembly line, with Tokens as the final product. The company is now emphasizing its chip strategy, unveiling the Zhenwu M890 and a two-year roadmap for future chips. With over 560,000 chips deployed across 400+ clients, Alibaba Cloud aims to control the marginal cost per Token, mirroring Google's integration of TPU and Gemini for optimal cost-performance. The cloud infrastructure itself is being rewritten. Traditional cloud interfaces are being transformed into standardized, Agent-callable Skills. A new scheduling logic focuses on "task scheduling" over "resource scheduling" to handle the unpredictable, elastic workloads of Agents. Liu noted that AI applications now automatically provision cloud resources, with one customer's daily automated provisioning equaling two weeks of manual work. For models, the focus has shifted from conversational prowess to execution capability. Qwen3.7-Max demonstrated this by autonomously writing and optimizing a production-grade AI compute kernel for the new Zhenwu M890 chip over 35 hours, achieving a 10x performance improvement. The underlying Bailian platform was upgraded for efficiency, and it maintains an open ecosystem, hosting third-party models. This restructuring extends beyond technology to sales, organization, and metrics. Alibaba Cloud has established dedicated MaaS sales teams, separated from traditional IaaS, with new KPIs focusing on high-quality Tokens that solve real problems, the number of core business systems integrated with models, and the efficiency of Agent task completion. The underlying bet is clear: AI represents an opportunity orders of magnitude larger than before. Despite the uncertainty, Alibaba Cloud is aggressively rebuilding its entire system, betting on an AI-driven future where Tokens could become its largest product line.

marsbit3 мин. назад

Can Alibaba Cloud Rewrite Itself?

marsbit3 мин. назад

Those Who Rushed into SpaceX's Private Secondary Market Are Bewildered in the Greatest Wealth Creation Wave Ever

Investors are rushing into SpaceX’s private secondary market ahead of its historic IPO, but many are finding confusion instead of clarity. While early backers like Darsana Capital are poised for astronomical returns—turning a $600M bet into roughly $150B—other buyers face uncertainty about whether they actually own SpaceX shares at all. The frenzy stems from AI-driven FOMO, as soaring valuations for private companies like OpenAI and SpaceX create intense demand for pre-IPO exposure. This has fueled a booming but opaque secondary market, where special purpose vehicles (SPVs) layer investments, adding fees and obscuring ownership. Some investors are three or four layers removed from the actual stock, unable to verify their holdings. With companies staying private longer—SpaceX for 24 years—secondary trading has grown complex and risky. Platforms have faced fraud, bankruptcy, and regulatory scrutiny. Now, firms like Anthropic and OpenAI are publicly rejecting unauthorized transfers, warning that shares sold through certain platforms may be invalid. SpaceX’s IPO filing in June will finally reveal the official shareholder list, resolving these uncertainties. Until then, buying into SpaceX through secondary channels remains a high-stakes gamble—a blind box in a market overflowing with capital and complexity.

marsbit15 мин. назад

Those Who Rushed into SpaceX's Private Secondary Market Are Bewildered in the Greatest Wealth Creation Wave Ever

marsbit15 мин. назад

Warsh's First Conundrum: Rate Cuts, Inflation, and a Fractured Fed

Walsh's First Dilemma: Rate Cuts, Inflation, and a Divided Fed Kevin Warsh officially assumed the Fed Chairmanship on May 15th, inheriting a central bank deeply divided over inflation. Contrary to market expectations of a dovish stance due to his appointment by President Trump, Warsh's historical record shows early and consistent hawkish concerns about inflation. The Fed he leads is fractured, with three FOMC members recently dissenting against even hinting at future rate cuts. The immediate challenge is surging inflation. While the Iran-related oil shock is a temporary factor, core CPI and services inflation are accelerating, showing signs of becoming entrenched—echoing the Fed's 2022 "transitory" misstep. Warsh faces the task of building consensus within a committee where several members believe policy may not be restrictive enough, especially if the neutral interest rate (r-star) is higher than currently estimated. Politically, Warsh is caught between Trump's desire for rate cuts and the economic reality of persistent price pressures. Any move perceived as bowing to political pressure could undermine Fed independence. Market implications are significant. Long-term Treasury yields (e.g., 30-year at 5.19%) could rise further, especially if the June FOMC statement hints at possible tightening. Tech stocks face continued valuation pressure from higher rates. The key variable is progress in Iran negotiations; a breakthrough before the June meeting could temporarily ease oil-driven inflation, but stubborn services inflation would remain. All eyes are on Warsh's first post-FOMC press conference on June 17th. His wording on inflation and policy will reveal how much the market has mispriced his stance and the Fed's likely path forward.

marsbit25 мин. назад

Warsh's First Conundrum: Rate Cuts, Inflation, and a Fractured Fed

marsbit25 мин. назад

Harvard and Others Exit, Six Core Talents Depart in a Month: What's Happening to Ethereum?

Ethereum faces significant internal and external pressures, marked by a wave of high-profile departures from its core development team and a loss of confidence from major institutional investors. Within four months, at least seven key figures—including researchers, protocol leads, and a former executive director—have left the Ethereum Foundation. This exodus, partly triggered by controversy over a new "mission statement" requiring employee sign-off, risks derailing critical roadmap upgrades like PeerDAS and Verkle trees, and has already contributed to delays in the planned Glamsterdam upgrade. Compounding the internal instability, major institutions are reducing their exposure. Goldman Sachs slashed its iShares Ethereum Trust holdings by approximately 70%, and Harvard's endowment fund completely exited its $87 million Ethereum ETF position. Concurrently, the Ethereum Foundation itself has been unstaking and selling ETH for "treasury rebalancing," further unsettling the market. These challenges emerge as Ethereum's competitive dominance erodes. Its share of the total DeFi market has fallen to around 54%, with rivals like Solana and Base gaining ground. In fee revenue, it was recently outpaced by newer chains like Hyperliquid. Furthermore, a trend of institutions exploring proprietary or hybrid blockchains (exemplified by Circle's Arc) threatens Ethereum's position as the premier settlement layer for institutional assets. While founder Vitalik Buterin's vision for Ethereum as a secure, decentralized "technical sanctuary" and "world computer" remains clear, its realization is threatened by the concurrent loss of execution capability, institutional patience, and market share during a critical competitive phase.

链捕手1 ч. назад

Harvard and Others Exit, Six Core Talents Depart in a Month: What's Happening to Ethereum?

链捕手1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片