On February 16, 2026, data was released revealing a cumulative net outflow of $3.74 billion from cryptocurrency investment products over four consecutive weeks, pulling market sentiment back into the tense narrative of "capital is fleeing." In the latest week, global cryptocurrency ETPs continued to see a net outflow of $173 million, with Bitcoin and Ethereum products remaining the primary battleground for redemptions, facing pressure of $133 million and $85.1 million respectively in a single week. On the surface, this seems to be a collective vote to exit mainstream assets, but at the same time, certain altcoin-related products have seen structural inflows, creating a rare divergence between the mainstream bleeding and the margins going against the tide. This is the real suspense the current market wants to clarify: Is the money fleeing crypto, or is it being reallocated?
A $3.74 Billion Outflow Over Four Weeks: A Collective Release of Mainstream Capital
● Outflow Pattern: CoinShares data shows that over the past four weeks, global cryptocurrency ETPs have experienced a cumulative net outflow of $3.74 billion, and this pattern did not abruptly halt in the latest week, with another $173 million decrease in capital allocation just last week. This continuous pressure indicates that the outflow is not a one-off emotional release but rather a rhythmic reduction in holdings over several weeks, systematically re-evaluating current valuations and the macro environment.
● Pressure Concentration: Structurally, the selling pressure is highly concentrated in two main asset products—Bitcoin investment products saw a single-week outflow of $133 million, while Ethereum products faced an outflow of $85.1 million. This implies that this adjustment is not an indiscriminate sell-off across the entire cryptocurrency spectrum, but rather a focused liquidation of top products that have the best liquidity, largest volumes, and are easiest to quickly realize risk premiums. The mainstream position has instead become a “priority to cut” in the short term.
● Sentiment Not Reversed: CoinShares research director James Butterfill pointed out that the selling pressure on cryptocurrency investment products "has eased but has not reversed." In other words, the intensity of the sell-off has cooled compared to previous weeks, but the capital has not shown clear signs of returning, resembling a shift from panic selling to a cautious reduction, with most capital still waiting for new directional signals rather than actively rebuilding positions.
● Redemption Reflecting Macro: Continuous redemptions can be interpreted as a reassessment of the macro environment and price volatility by funds—amid expectations of inflation, interest rate pressure, and overall underperformance in risk asset valuations, liquidity prioritizes withdrawal from the most easily cashable public products. Compared to over-the-counter holdings or non-standard allocations, ETP redemptions have lower execution and compliance costs, making them the preferred tools for rapidly reducing cryptocurrency exposure and re-pricing portfolio risks.
When the Mainstream is Abandoned: Quiet Influx into Altcoin Products
● Counterbalancing: While Bitcoin and Ethereum ETPs continue to experience outflows, the briefing mentions that some altcoin-related products have seen structural inflows, creating a countervailing picture of mainstream bleeding and peripheral compensation. This is not an overall warming of total capital but more like funds decreasing their positions in the main tracks while specifically testing certain high Beta targets, resulting in a localized rotation of "bloodletting and transfusion" within segments.
● Risk Appetite Shift: Capital shifting from BTC/ETH products to altcoin-related products often implies two conflicting betting strategies: one is believing that the upside elasticity of mainstream assets has been exhausted in the short term, thus using smaller positions to capture relatively higher volatility returns; the other is opting for more aggressive assets to hedge against the opportunity cost of “missing out on the next big surge” amidst expectations of overall risk premiums being elevated. This rotation reflects structural speculative impulses rather than a systematic re-evaluation of industry fundamentals.
● Inadequate Data Transparency: It is essential to emphasize that details regarding the specific inflows into altcoins still show significant gaps at the data level. The research brief explicitly notes that accurate inflow figures for individual products like XRP, Solana, Chainlink remain to be verified, with detailed breakdowns by region and type yet to be disclosed. Given the incomplete evidence chain, one can only confirm the directional fact of “structural inflows” without extrapolating to a comprehensive season for altcoins or a wave of funds for specific projects, necessitating a restrained conclusion.
Quantum Shadows Loom: How Technological Fears Amplify Discounts
● Introducing Perspectives: On-chain analyst Willy Woo stated, “The market has begun to price in the threat of quantum computing,” adding a layer of long-term technological risk to the interpretation of recent capital outflows. From this perspective, the selling pressure on mainstream assets is not just a response to short-term price and policy uncertainties but also mixed with a latent discount concerning the potential disruption of underlying security assumptions.
● Long-term Security Threats: Quantum computing is viewed as a potential threat to the current mainstream cryptographic systems, particularly challenging assets that rely on elliptic curve cryptography and asymmetric signing. If quantum computing achieves breakthroughs in breaking existing key and signing mechanisms, it could theoretically weaken the trust foundation of on-chain assets as “immutable,” thus classified as an extreme but impactful long-tail risk capable of altering the pricing framework for some long-term funds.
● Risk Premium Accumulation: When there are short-term macro and regulatory uncertainties, alongside emerging long-term risks like quantum threats, investors naturally raise their risk premium requirements for mainstream assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum. Funds may choose to preemptively lock in gains and reduce exposure through publicly redeemable products while waiting for greater consensus around technical safety, protocol upgrades, and anti-quantum solutions. This combination of “short-term reduction + long-term observation” amplifies the current ETP-level selling pressure representation.
● Timelines Remain Murky: Although the narrative of quantum threats is heating up, there is currently no reliable consensus on crucial issues such as the maturity timeline for the technology, actual attack paths on existing cryptographic protocols, and when the industry will complete its anti-quantum upgrades. Both the most optimistic and the most pessimistic predictions are heavily assumption-based. Without specific engineering routes and landing timeframes, using it as the primary cause for short-term capital behavior is clearly excessive; investors need to exercise cautious tracking rather than emotional amplification.
Wall Street and the East: Traditional Institutions Strategizing Amid Headwinds
● Signals from Charles Schwab: In contrast to the continuous redemptions at the ETP end, traditional financial giants are still building their crypto business stack. Taking Charles Schwab as an example, it is hiring digital asset product managers to continue expanding crypto-related products and infrastructure. For a traditional brokerage focused on retail and high-net-worth clients, recruiting during a phase of pressure on spot products and capital outflows is in itself a vote of confidence for mid- to long-term demand expectations.
● Considerations for Expansion Amid Headwinds: Traditional brokerages expanding their teams during a price decline and emotional retreat often base this on dual considerations: first, utilizing the industry cycle's low point to build technological and compliance frameworks at lower costs, preparing capacity for the next rising cycle; second, enabling quick listing of new products once regulations are clarified by early integration of crypto assets into traditional account systems, achieving “time arbitrage.” From a temporal perspective, this represents a typical counter-cyclical layout rather than a chase-the-upward-expansion approach.
● Metaplanet's Lockup Attitude: On the corporate side, Japanese company Metaplanet disclosed in its FY2025 financial report that it holds 35,102 Bitcoins, suggesting it views BTC as a long-term strategic asset at the balance sheet level. This scale far exceeds typical "testing the waters" allocations, more closely embedding Bitcoin into corporate long-term reserve logic, reflecting a recognition of its cross-cycle value, contrasting sharply with the short-term ETP redemptions.
● Game Theory Amid Cycle Mismatches: On one side is the continuous redemption of public market products, while on the other is the long-term lock-up and construction on corporate balance sheets and traditional brokerage infrastructure, forming a typical cycle mismatch. Some funds rapidly reduce positions in the secondary market to dodge volatility, while others place bets on the increased penetration of crypto assets and infrastructure over a more extended time frame. This misalignment suggests that the current ETP data reflects more of the "emotional climate of the liquid layer," rather than the value judgments of the entire institutional world.
Is Capital Fleeing or Shifting: A Multi-layered Structural Rotation
● Distinguishing Exit from Migration: Observing the continuous outflow from ETPs over four weeks, it is essential to distinguish two things—whether funds are genuinely leaving the cryptocurrency industry or merely migrating from public trading products to other vehicles or assets. Redemption from ETPs only indicates that investors no longer hold exposure through these passive tools, but it does not automatically mean they have simultaneously sold off all on-chain or OTC positions; this structural difference means that the $3.74 billion cannot simply be viewed as "total industry loss."
● Vehicle and Asset Rotation: Some funds might transition from passive BTC/ETH ETPs to spot holdings, OTC custody, or high Beta altcoins with greater elasticity. On one hand, directly holding spot can avoid management fees and product discount risks, enhancing asset sovereignty; on the other hand, amid increasing volatility, using small positions to bet on relative returns of altcoins becomes an active strategy for some capital. This migration statistically manifests as ETP outflows but presents as structural rotation across broader asset layers.
● Multi-layered Temporal Mismatches: The long-term layout of traditional financial institutions and Japanese enterprises runs on a distinctly different temporal scale and decision-making framework compared to the short-term capital withdrawal observed at the ETP level. The former plans around asset allocation and business maps spanning years or even decades, while the latter more often reacts tactically to expected volatility over the coming weeks to months. When these two rhythms overlap in the same set of capital inflow and outflow data, it is easily misinterpreted as “the entire market is bearish,” overlooking the underlying temporal and spatial layers.
● Data Boundaries and Cognitive Boundaries: Currently, public data lacks detailed breakdowns by region, type of investor, and specific varieties, while the inflow details for altcoin products have also been marked as pending verification. This signifies that any strong conclusion about “capital entirely fleeing” or “a full commencement of altcoin season” exceeds the supporting evidence available. A more prudent approach would be to treat these judgments as working hypotheses and continuously revise them with subsequent data updates, rather than freezing them into a one-sided narrative.
Short-term Panic and Long-term Greed: This Game is Far from Over
In summary, the cumulative outflow of $3.74 billion from Bitcoin and Ethereum ETPs over four consecutive weeks, accompanied by structural inflows into certain altcoin products, the holding of 35,102 BTC by Japan's Metaplanet, and continuous expansion of crypto business stacks by institutions like Charles Schwab create an intricate funding puzzle. On one end lies the short-term panic and position contraction at the liquid level, while on the other end reflects long-term greed and silent accumulation at the balance sheet and infrastructure layer, coexisting without contradiction.
On top of this puzzle, long-term technological threats like quantum computing, the oscillation of the macro environment, and the repeated expectations of regulation are being gradually and carefully priced in phase-wise, by asset, and by vehicle. Some funds choose to redeem ETPs to simultaneously discount recent volatility and distant risks, while traditional finance and corporate players hedge these uncertainties over a more extended timeframe by trading time for space.
Moving forward, what truly deserves attention is not just whether ETPs transition from net outflow to net inflow, but also whether capital more prominently reflects a rotation from mainstream to high Beta assets, whether the rhythm for launching and approving traditional financial products accelerates, and whether listed companies in markets like Japan continue to increase their Bitcoin holdings on their balance sheets. The game between short-term and long-term, panic and greed, has only just entered a new round.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX welfare group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance welfare group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
