On January 23, 2026, the latest trading day closing data for the US stock market showed that the US spot Ethereum ETF has recorded net outflows for four consecutive trading days, with a single-day capital outflow of approximately $41.7 million to $41.7358 million. Against a backdrop of approximately $17.702 billion in total net asset value, accounting for about 4.99% of Ethereum's total market capitalization, this consistent action has quickly amplified market concerns about passive selling pressure and capital redistribution. During the same period, the Bitcoin spot ETF has seen a cumulative net outflow of $104 million over five days, while the XRP spot ETF recorded a net inflow of $3.43 million on the same day. The divergence in capital flows among the three is reshaping the market's discussion on the "betting order" of funds among mainstream assets.
Over $40 million Outflow in Four Days: Funds are Hitting the Brakes
● Outflow Rhythm: As of January 23, 2026, at 8:00 AM UTC+8, the US spot Ethereum ETF has achieved four consecutive trading days of net outflows, with the latest single-day net outflow scale approximately in the range of $41.7 million to $41.7358 million. In terms of the single-day figure itself, compared to the entire asset pool, it is not an "emergency brake" type of extreme withdrawal, but the consistent bleeding rhythm has heightened market vigilance about whether this will evolve into a trend of significant reduction.
● Main Products Under Pressure: From a product breakdown perspective, BlackRock's ETHA has become the main channel for this round of capital outflow, with a single-day net outflow of approximately $44.5 million on January 23, significantly higher than the proportion of total net outflows from all Ethereum ETFs on that day. Meanwhile, the established product ETHE also recorded a net outflow of about $10.8 million, indicating that leading products have not gained a significant capital "moat" during this round of adjustment.
● Structural Hedging: In contrast to the bleeding of ETHA and ETHE, the Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF recorded a single-day net inflow of approximately $9.2 million, while Fidelity's FETH saw a net inflow of about $4.4 million to $4.3963 million. Some funds are migrating to new products with lower fees and lighter structures while the overall pool is shrinking, creating a structural difference of "overall outflow but local inflow," rather than a simple uniform sell-off.
● Outflow Intensity Assessment: In the current context of the Ethereum spot ETF having a total net asset value of approximately $17.702 billion, a historical cumulative net inflow of about $12.302 billion, and ETF holdings accounting for about 4.99% of Ethereum's total market capitalization, the single-day outflow of around $40 million more reflects "phase-based capital deleveraging and position adjustment." In terms of proportion, the current outflow intensity is not sufficient to rewrite the overall positive historical capital curve, but if the continuity extends, its marginal impact on sentiment and price expectations still needs to be monitored.
Bitcoin Bleeding While XRP Attracts Capital
● Bitcoin Under Pressure: Within the same time window, the US spot Bitcoin ETF has seen a cumulative net outflow of approximately $104 million over five consecutive days, with the scale of capital outflow in absolute terms still significantly higher than that of Ethereum. This phenomenon indicates that capital withdrawal is not unique to Ethereum, but rather resembles a broad risk reduction covering major assets, suggesting that macro or overall risk preferences may be trending towards conservatism.
● XRP Attracting Capital Against the Trend: In contrast to the collective pressure on BTC and ETH, the XRP spot ETF recorded a net inflow of approximately $3.43 million on January 23, exhibiting characteristics of attracting capital against the trend among mainstream assets. Although the scale is not comparable to that of Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, this small net inflow still holds emotional indicator significance, suggesting that some funds are seeking relatively strong targets within the sector.
● Scale and Rhythm Comparison: Comparing the time and scale dimensions, the BTC ETF has experienced longer duration and larger absolute value of net outflows, while the Ethereum ETF is undergoing a medium intensity cooling of $40 million over four days, and the XRP ETF is experiencing small net inflows in the opposite direction. Thus, Ethereum finds itself in the middle ground between Bitcoin's "dominant bleeding" and XRP's "marginal counter-trend": it has neither become the strongest safe haven nor the only focus under pressure, presenting an awkward position of "following the decline without leading the rise."
● Risk Preference Rotation: This differentiation is difficult to explain with a single causal factor; it resembles a process of institutional risk preference restructuring within the sector: some funds are withdrawing from the large-cap, most liquid BTC and ETH, attempting to explore relatively high Beta or new narrative assets within the regulatory framework; while others are temporarily exiting merely for short-term risk aversion or liquidity management considerations. Due to the lack of more granular data on fund sources and destinations, it can currently only be viewed as a representation of a capital rotation rather than a qualitative "abandonment" of any single asset.
Similar Products Rising and Falling: Institutions Rearranging
● Major Outflows and New Products Attracting Capital: BlackRock's ETHA saw a single-day net outflow of approximately $44.5 million, while the Grayscale Mini Trust and Fidelity's FETH recorded net inflows of approximately $9.2 million and approximately $4.4 million, respectively, highlighting the "rise and fall" within the same asset class. Funds are not uniformly withdrawing from Ethereum exposure but are simultaneously showing signs of migration from some leading/established products to more segmented, fee-advantageous products.
● Product Competition Dimensions: In terms of publicly available information, different Ethereum ETFs exhibit differences in management fee rates, historical premium/discount levels, and brand preferences, which will affect institutions' cost-benefit analysis and channel selection in the long run. In this round of data, newly launched or more competitively priced products have relatively gained net inflows, while older products with historically higher fees are under heavier pressure. This aligns with the general rule in the traditional asset management industry that "funds tend to favor cost-efficient products," but the specific driving factors cannot yet be fully quantified at this stage.
● Structural Net Outflow Pathways: A comprehensive observation of the current capital flow trajectory can outline a possible structural net outflow pathway: on one hand, some funds are withdrawing from higher-cost, larger-scale, historically burdened ETFs; on the other hand, these funds have not completely exited Ethereum exposure but are partially migrating to new products or smaller-scale ETFs. This pattern of "internal migration + external balance sheet reduction" allows for the coexistence of overall net outflows and local net inflows at the same time.
● Phase-Based Rearrangement Rather Than Comprehensive Exit: Against the backdrop of historical cumulative net inflows still reaching $12.302 billion and the overall still being positive, the current observed four-day outflow appears more like a phase-based capital rearrangement rather than a systemic denial of the Ethereum ETF sector. If subsequent data does not show large-scale single-day redemptions, this round of adjustment is more likely to be classified as institutions adjusting their formations under considerations of interest rates, risk budgets, and product cost-effectiveness, rather than a "vote with their feet" type of comprehensive exit.
Short-Term Price Pressure and Misalignment of On-Chain Narratives
● Selling Pressure Transmission Path: Mechanically, continuous net outflows from ETFs often mean that issuers are selling corresponding amounts of spot Ethereum into the market or reducing related exposures through market makers to meet redemption demands. This can increase potential selling pressure in the spot market in the short term, especially during periods of tighter overall liquidity, making price fluctuations more pronounced. However, the specific degree of impact still depends on the depth of the spot market, the absorption capacity of over-the-counter trading, and other concurrent capital inflow and outflow channels.
● Long-Term On-Chain Beneficiary Logic: In contrast to short-term capital outflows, Liquid Capital founder Jack Yi emphasizes that "the biggest beneficiaries of the globalization of stablecoins and financial on-chain activities are Ethereum." This viewpoint represents a longer-cycle fundamental narrative: as more value, assets, and settlement activities are moved on-chain, the infrastructure supporting these activities and its security and composability are expected to accumulate value over a longer time horizon, with Ethereum's central position in the current ecosystem providing a practical foothold for this logic.
● Temporal Misalignment: On one end is the short-term continuous outflow of tens of millions of dollars from the Ethereum ETF over four days and potential spot selling pressure, while on the other end is the expansion expectation of on-chain finance and asset on-chain activities over many years. The two curves exhibit a clear misalignment in the time dimension: short-term funds may reduce their ETF holdings due to macro noise, asset allocation, and other factors, while the long-term narrative revolves more around technological evolution and application expansion. This misalignment suggests that single-day or weekly ETF capital fluctuations cannot directly negate long-term fundamental logic.
● Boundaries of Analysis and Caution: Currently, publicly available information lacks specific on-chain data indicators and institutional holding details, such as the proportion and behavior patterns of different types of institutions and strategies in this round of outflows. Based on limited data, the relationship between ETF capital flows and on-chain activities can only be logically inferred directionally, without providing precise quantitative mappings. Therefore, any simple inference that "ETF outflows = long-term bearish for Ethereum" should be approached with sufficient caution and reservation.
Macro and Liquidity Environment: Bitcoin Sentiment Spillover
● Macro Expectations and Crypto: BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes previously suggested that if the Federal Reserve assists Japan in intervening in the yen market, he would hold a bullish view on Bitcoin. The logic behind this statement is to view central bank policies and global liquidity changes as important upper-level variables for the valuation of crypto assets: any signals interpreted as dovish or indicating instability in the monetary system could potentially strengthen the narrative of "Bitcoin and other crypto assets as hedging tools" on an emotional level.
● Sentiment Spillover Path: Throughout historical cycles, Bitcoin has often been the primary recipient of macro liquidity expectations, with funds first expressing changes in risk preferences through BTC, followed by emotions and capital gradually spilling over to Ethereum and other assets. When the macro environment tightens, BTC's pullback and capital withdrawal will also transmit outward, causing assets like ETH and XRP, which lack strong independent narratives, to passively follow Bitcoin's risk reduction rhythm.
● Resonance Signals of ETF Outflows: Currently, the Bitcoin spot ETF has seen a cumulative net outflow of $104 million over five consecutive days, while the Ethereum spot ETF has experienced a total outflow of around $40 million over four days. The high synchronization in the rhythm of both makes it difficult for the market to ignore the potential existence of macro resonance factors—whether it is a repricing of interest rate paths or a phase-based compression of overall risk asset valuations, both could serve as background music for unified capital deleveraging. However, in the absence of more detailed cross-asset capital flow data, this resonance remains at the phenomenological level.
● Situational Simulation Rather Than Causal Conclusion: Currently, there is no direct data to accurately quantify the causal relationship between specific macro events and Ethereum ETF outflows, nor can it be confirmed that a particular policy signal is the dominant driver of this round of capital adjustments. Therefore, discussions on the relationship between macro factors and ETF outflows are better viewed as situational simulations: how institutions adjust their exposures to crypto assets, especially BTC and ETH, under different interest rate, exchange rate, and liquidity scenarios, rather than simplifying complex realities into a linear narrative of "one event leads to one outflow."
Funds are Observing Rather Than Fleeing: Ethereum's Intermission
● Dual State Summary: In summary of the current data, the US spot Ethereum ETF is in a "historically significant net inflow, with short-term capital experiencing phase-based outflows" dual state: on one hand, the $12.302 billion historical cumulative net inflow and approximately $17.702 billion in existing assets constitute a solid "stock consensus" for Ethereum in the compliant capital world; on the other hand, the continuous outflow of tens of millions over four days indicates that, in the current uncertain environment, some funds are choosing to hit the "wait and see" button and moderately reduce risk.
● Internal Positioning within the Sector: Compared to the continuous bleeding of the Bitcoin spot ETF and the small net inflow of the XRP ETF against the trend, it resembles a strategic positioning within the sector: funds are withdrawing some liquidity from mainstream core assets like BTC and ETH while slightly testing the waters on targets like XRP. This behavior pattern aligns more with the logic of "reallocation and exploration" rather than providing a definitive long-term judgment on the outcomes for Ethereum or Bitcoin themselves.
● Caution Against Overinterpretation: In the absence of richer data support, equating short-term ETF capital outflows simply with a "long-term bearish view on Ethereum's fundamentals" carries significant interpretative risks. ETF capital flows reflect more of a composite result of phase-based risk preferences, interest rate expectations, and product competition dynamics, rather than an immediate judgment on the underlying blockchain technology routes and ecological vitality, with significant differences in both time dimensions and impact chains.
● Three Subsequent Main Lines: To validate the current judgment that "funds are observing rather than fleeing," it is essential to closely track three main lines moving forward: first, the trend of ETF capital flows, to see whether the current four-day outflow is a brief interlude or evolves into medium- to long-term net redemptions; second, Ethereum's on-chain activities and the progress of financial on-chain initiatives, to assess whether the long-term fundamental narrative continues to materialize; third, regulatory and macro liquidity dynamics, including adjustments to ETF products, policies in the crypto industry, and the global monetary environment. Only by integrating these three clues can we gain a more comprehensive understanding of Ethereum's true position in this round of capital repricing.
Join our community to discuss and grow 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。
