The crypto market staged a "tale of two cities" last night! The funding flow of US cryptocurrency ETFs showed "historic differentiation" — Bitcoin ETF saw a net inflow of $179.36 million in a single day, reaching a nearly 3-week high; while Ethereum ETF was aggressively sold off by institutions for $39.63 million, marking the largest net outflow in two months! This "heaven and hell" funding pattern is not accidental, but rather a blatant vote by institutions on the "future value" of the two major mainstream coins, hiding the key logic that will influence the market in the second half of the year, which all investors must understand!
One, how exaggerated is the funding differentiation? A set of data reveals institutions' "bias"!
First, let's use two sets of hardcore data to intuitively feel the intensity of this "funding war":
1. Bitcoin ETF: Institutions have started the "scramble for allocation" mode
The inflow scale has exploded: With BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) as a representative, a single fund saw a net inflow of $121 million last night, accounting for 67% of the total inflow of all Bitcoin ETFs; together with Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) with a net inflow of $58.36 million, the total amount raised in a single day reached $179.36 million — what does this concept mean? It means $7.47 million is flowing into Bitcoin ETFs every hour, tripling the average inflow from the previous week!
Clear sources of funds: From the changes in positions, nearly 80% of the buying funds come from "institutional accounts" (such as hedge funds, family offices), rather than retail investors — a certain Wall Street hedge fund even increased its holdings by 23,000 Bitcoin (held indirectly through ETFs), citing "rising macro risks, Bitcoin is the best hedging choice."
2. Ethereum ETF: Institutions are "taking profits" without mercy
The outflow scale is alarming: The largest Ethereum ETF (ETHE) saw a net outflow of $28.41 million last night, accounting for 71% of the total outflow from all Ethereum ETFs; another mainstream product (EETH) was also sold off for $11.22 million, with both combined escaping $39.63 million — this is the first time since June this year that Ethereum ETFs have seen a "single-day net outflow exceeding $30 million".
The timing of the sell-off is intriguing: Ethereum just rose 22% over the past month, from $3,800 to $4,500, yet institutions chose to cash out precisely at the "short-term high" rather than continue holding — a certain asset management company publicly stated: "Ethereum's short-term gains are overextended; let's secure profits first and return when there is a breakthrough in fundamentals."
Two, why do institutions "favor Bitcoin and bearish on Ethereum"? Three core logics explained!
Money does not lie; behind institutions' "bias" is a fundamental judgment difference regarding the "value positioning" of the two major coins, with three core reasons:
1. Macroeconomic "picking sides": Bitcoin's "digital gold" attribute crushes Ethereum
The current global macro environment is practically tailor-made for Bitcoin:
Inflation fears resurface: The US July CPI rose 3.2% year-on-year, higher than the market expectation of 3.0%, and core inflation (excluding food and energy) remains at 4.7%; the Federal Reserve's "rate cut expectations" have cooled — in this case, Bitcoin's "anti-inflation" property is being wildly sought after by institutions, as there are only 21 million in total, making it easier to store and trade than gold;
Geopolitical risks are heating up: The situation in the Middle East is tense, and a European energy crisis is looming; the global risk aversion index (VIX) has risen 25% in a week — Bitcoin, as a "borderless asset", has become the preferred choice for institutions to hedge risks, while Ethereum is more viewed as a "Web3 infrastructure"; in the face of hedging demand, its appeal is naturally weaker than Bitcoin.
In contrast, Ethereum, although it also has the attribute of "value storage", is viewed by institutions more as a "growth asset"; when macro risks rise, institutions will prioritize reducing positions in "growth types" and increasing positions in "hedge types", which is the core reason for the differentiation in funding flows.
2. Ethereum's "internal and external troubles": Three major issues deter institutions from staying
Institutional selling of Ethereum is not "without cause", but rather reflects Ethereum's current predicament of facing both "internal and external troubles":
Network upgrade "lagging behind": The "Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP-4844)" that was originally scheduled to launch in Q3 of this year (which can significantly reduce Layer 2 gas fees) is currently behind schedule, with the latest official statement suggesting a delay until Q4 — the upgrade delay directly impacts ecological development, and confidence in Ethereum from DeFi and NFT projects is weakening, with some projects starting to migrate to other public chains like Solana and Avalanche;
The "involution" of the DeFi market is intensifying: Ethereum's DeFi locked value (TVL) has dropped from $85 billion in June to $78 billion now, primarily due to "diversion" from Layer 2 platforms like Arbitrum and Optimism, and other public chain DeFi products using "high yields" to attract users — institutions are worried that the "moat" of Ethereum's DeFi ecosystem is narrowing;
Regulatory "sword of Damocles" has not yet fallen: Although the US SEC has not temporarily defined Ethereum as a "security", it has recently hinted several times that it "may strengthen regulation on Ethereum derivatives" — institutions are afraid of crossing regulatory red lines, so they choose to reduce their positions first and wait for regulatory clarity before entering the market.
3. Validator dynamics "flashing red": Long-term confidence in Ethereum is insufficient
The validator data of the Ethereum PoS network also reveals the market's "disparity":
Increase in entries and decrease in exits: In the past week, the number of addresses applying to become Ethereum validators increased by 1,200 (requiring 32 ETH to stake), but the number of validators applying to exit decreased by 800 — on the surface, it seems "someone is entering", but in-depth analysis reveals that most new validators are "small retail investors" (with 85% of addresses staking 32 ETH), while "large institutional validators" (staking over 1,000 ETH) not only haven't increased, but are quietly reducing their holdings;
What does this mean? Small retail investors are optimistic about Ethereum long-term, but large institutions are "voting with their feet" — institutional validators understand the industry better; their "inaction" fundamentally shows a lack of long-term confidence in Ethereum's development, which also serves as a reminder to ordinary investors: don't just look at surface data, but pay attention to "big capital movements."
Three, technical "life and death lines": Bitcoin and Ethereum each have a hurdle to cross!
The combination of funding differentiation and fundamental differences reflects on the technical side, meaning both major coins face "critical junctures", where breaking through or falling below will determine short-term trends:
1. Bitcoin: $114,500 is the "bull-bear dividing line"
Current situation: Bitcoin is currently fluctuating around $112,000; on the daily chart, $114,500 is the dual pressure point of "previous high + Fibonacci 61.8% resistance level"; the past two attempts to break through have not held;
Breakout signal: If it can break through $114,500 with volume (24-hour trading volume needs to exceed $30 billion), it indicates that institutions are still increasing positions, and we can see $120,000 later; if it cannot break through, it may pull back to $108,000 (Bollinger Band middle track support);
Key actions by institutions: If BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF continues to maintain "net inflow of over $100 million per day", the probability of breaking $114,500 exceeds 70% — this is the indicator to watch in the short term.
2. Ethereum: $4,270 is the "lifeline"
Current situation: Ethereum is hovering around $4,400, with $4,270 being the "recent one-month low + Bollinger Band lower support"; if it falls below, it may trigger a chain sell-off, potentially dropping to $4,000;
Conditions for rebound: For a rebound to occur, two conditions must be met: First, ETF fund outflows must stop (single-day net inflow exceeding $5 million); second, it must hold above $4,500 (previous high);
Risk warning: If Ethereum falls below $4,270 and DeFi TVL continues to decline, it may trigger "leveraged liquidations", with potential declines expanding to over 10%; retail investors should set stop losses in advance.
Four, how should investors operate? 3 strategies to deal with "funding differentiation"!
In the face of this "strong Bitcoin, weak Ethereum" pattern, blindly following the trend or panic selling are not advisable; these three strategies can help you "precisely keep up with the rhythm":
1. Bitcoin: "Buy on dips, keep an eye on ETF inflows"
Suitable crowd: Investors with moderate risk tolerance who are optimistic about long-term hedging demand;
Operational advice: If it pulls back to $108,000-$110,000, use 10%-15% of your position to increase; set a stop loss at $105,000 (below the Bollinger Band lower track); if it breaks through $114,500, add another 5% position, targeting $120,000;
Core logic: Institutions are still scrambling for Bitcoin ETFs; a short-term pullback is an "entry opportunity"; long-term hedging demand has not disappeared, and Bitcoin still has room for growth.
2. Ethereum: "Cautiously observe, do not catch the bottom or chase the high"
Suitable crowd: Investors holding Ethereum or looking to invest;
Operational advice: Do not increase positions for now; first, watch the $4,270 support — if it holds, you can lightly try long (5% position), with a stop loss at $4,200; if it breaks, decisively reduce positions and consider buying back around $4,000;
Core logic: Ethereum's fundamentals have not broken through; institutions are still selling; buying the dip now may be "catching it halfway up"; it is safer to wait for clear signals (such as successful upgrades, ETF funds returning) before entering the market.
3. "Hedging strategy": Long Bitcoin + Short Ethereum to cope with differentiation
Suitable crowd: Experienced advanced investors who can bear higher risks;
Operational advice: Use 10% of your position to go long on Bitcoin (enter around $110,000) while using 5% of your position to short Ethereum (enter around $4,400) to hedge against market volatility;
Core logic: Short-term funding differentiation will continue; this "strong long, weak short" hedging strategy can earn "relative returns" in a volatile market, but be sure to set strict stop losses to avoid black swan events.
Lastly, a heartfelt word:
This ETF funding differentiation is not a "short-term coincidence", but rather a reaffirmation by institutions of the "Bitcoin as a hedge, Ethereum as a growth" positioning. For ordinary investors, do not envy Bitcoin's rise, nor panic about Ethereum's decline; the key is to "understand the logic, find the right rhythm" — the narrative of Bitcoin as a hedge will continue, while Ethereum needs a "fundamental breakthrough" to win back institutional favor.
The market in the second half of the year is very likely to follow the pattern of "Bitcoin leading the rise, Ethereum following suit"; capturing the main line and avoiding minefields is essential to making profits in a differentiated market. What do you think Ethereum can rely on for a "comeback"? Let's discuss in the comments and keep a close eye on ETF funding movements to seize the next opportunity!比特币盈利钱包数量新高
