Strategy Watch #2

insights.glassnode2026-03-24 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-03-24 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

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.

İlgili Sorular

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.

İlgili Okumalar

The Gold Buy-on-the-Dip Guide: Watch Interest Rates, Not Just War

"Gold Buying Guide: Focus on Interest Rates, Not Just War" Four months ago, gold buyers likely didn't anticipate buying at a peak that even a war couldn't sustain. After hitting a record high of $5,596 on January 29, gold entered a bear market just 91 days later, its fastest decline since 2008. A key trigger was the Fed's hawkish shift, highlighting that monetary policy, not geopolitics, is the primary driver. The article argues that the traditional "buy gold in turmoil" script has changed. While the US-Iran conflict initially boosted prices, the sustained rally in oil prices heightened inflation fears, forcing central banks to maintain or consider tighter policy. Since gold yields no interest, higher rates increase its opportunity cost, eroding its appeal. This dynamic was evident when gold fell sharply on May 18 despite positive peace talks, as lower oil prices eased inflation and thus rate hike pressures. The recent sell-off is also part of a broader market deleveraging. Correlations between gold, Nasdaq, and Bitcoin spiked as leveraged investors sold liquid assets to cover losses, creating a synchronized downturn. Historically, gold bottoms align with policy shifts, not conflict resolutions. The 2008 and 2022 bear markets ended with shifts to extreme easing and peak inflation expectations, respectively. For potential buyers, the author suggests monitoring three signals: 1) Peak interest rate hike expectations, 2) Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz (to ease oil/inflation pressure), and 3) A return to net inflows for Gold ETFs, indicating the end of forced selling. While predicting the exact bottom is impossible, the author's personal strategy involves scaling into a position across price levels like $4000, $3700, and $3500, committing no more than 30% of the intended total allocation initially, and adding the remainder only if key signals emerge. The core conclusion: In turbulent times, watching interest rates is more crucial than watching wars.

marsbit7 dk önce

The Gold Buy-on-the-Dip Guide: Watch Interest Rates, Not Just War

marsbit7 dk önce

Recent On-Chain Review: No Clear Narrative Under U.S. Stock Market Pressure, Just Hype

This article analyzes the current state of the Solana meme coin and community token ecosystem, highlighting a market caught between two dominant forces: attention-based PvP and a gradual return to community-centric projects. The first part explores the "Attention PvP" dynamic, where success is driven by celebrity endorsements, viral events, and speed. Examples include $JOTCHUA, which surged after its meme creator's social media activity, and $WORLDCUP, which outperformed a similar Base chain project ($PITCH) largely due to influencer support. The recent "pump.fun GO" feature, allowing bounty tasks for token promotion, is critiqued for fostering sensationalist and often negative stunts—like people getting token tickers tattooed on their bodies for rewards—reminiscent of old internet shock content. In contrast, the article points to a resurgence of organic, community-driven tokens that survive market volatility through strong holder bases and shared ideology, not just hype. Influencer Ansem is cited, arguing that durable meme coins rely on communities willing to endure losses and promote their core message daily. Examples given are older tokens like $neet (anti-work ethos), $troll, $buttcoin, and $triplet, which have maintained relative price stability. A prime example of this community-build model is the new project $KINS, the token for the browser-based MMORPG Kintara. Its success stems not from advanced graphics but from consistently delivering updates, fostering player trust, and creating genuine engagement (e.g., in-game economies, events, property auctions). It has attracted a growing player base and even notable KOLs as participants, demonstrating that sustainable growth can come from building trust rather than orchestrating pumps. The article concludes by questioning whether the market is ultimately a game of mutual trust or mutual deception, expressing hope that such reflection might lead to a healthier ecosystem.

marsbit7 dk önce

Recent On-Chain Review: No Clear Narrative Under U.S. Stock Market Pressure, Just Hype

marsbit7 dk önce

On-Chain Scene on Opening Day: $20 Billion Already Staked, How Do On-Chain Contracts Know Who Wins?

On the opening day of the 2026 World Cup, over $2 billion had already been wagered on just the "tournament winner" contracts on platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi. This article explores how these blockchain-based prediction markets actually function once the games begin. It breaks down the massive volume and explains how single-game and tournament-long contracts are priced, with values moving between 1-99 cents to reflect implied probabilities. A key mechanism highlighted is "elimination zeroing," where a team's "champion yes" contract immediately settles to zero once they are mathematically eliminated. The core technical question answered is: how does a smart contract "know" who won a real-world match? The answer lies in oracles. The article details two primary paradigms: UMA's "optimistic oracle" (used by most of Polymarket), which allows a challenge period after a proposed result, and Chainlink's multi-source data aggregation (used by FIFA partners like ADI Predictstreet), which automates settlement with minimal dispute windows. Finally, the article injects a note of caution, citing research estimating that a significant portion of historical trading volume on these platforms might be "wash trading" to inflate numbers. It concludes by contrasting the legal status of these "event contracts" under CFTC rules in the U.S. versus traditional, state-regulated sports betting. As the tournament progresses, the real-time operation of this multi-billion dollar machine—its settlements, eliminations, and underlying mechanisms—becomes a story as compelling as the football itself.

marsbit22 dk önce

On-Chain Scene on Opening Day: $20 Billion Already Staked, How Do On-Chain Contracts Know Who Wins?

marsbit22 dk önce

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang, in a conversation with Sequoia Capital's Konstantine Buhler, argues that we are witnessing the most significant computing shift in 60 years—from retrieval-based to generative computing. Instead of just storing and retrieving data, future systems will generate highly personalized content (text, images, video) on demand, powered by massive "AI factories." Huang envisions a global "intelligence network" that will envelop the planet, following the historical patterns of energy and communication grids. He outlines a five-layer investment framework: 1) Energy, 2) Chips/Computers, 3) Infrastructure (data centers), 4) AI Models, and 5) Applications. He predicts this ecosystem will reach a scale of $20 trillion annually. Crucially, Huang pushes back against fears of AI-driven job loss. He distinguishes between specific "tasks" (e.g., typing, analyzing images) and overall "jobs" (e.g., CEO, radiologist). While AI automates tasks, it increases efficiency and demand for the higher-value problem-solving aspects of professions, thus creating more jobs and "up-leveling" careers. The real risk, he asserts, is not being replaced by AI, but being outperformed by someone who effectively leverages it. He urges everyone to embrace AI as a tool for augmented capability and innovation.

marsbit1 saat önce

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片