In the first quarter of 2026, the 13F holdings reports submitted by major institutions to the U.S. SEC for the first time laid out the subtle adjustments of sovereign wealth funds and university endowments in crypto-related ETFs on the same table. Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund Mubadala significantly pressed the "plus" button this quarter: its holdings of the BlackRock Bitcoin Spot ETF IBIT increased from approximately 12,702,323 shares to about 14,721,917 shares, with a single source estimating that this increment corresponds to an additional holding value of over $90 million; in stark contrast, Harvard University no longer held any Ethereum ETF positions by the end of the same quarter, which was interpreted by the media as a complete liquidation. Deep潮 TechFlow cited The Block, stating that overall, university endowment funds maintained relatively stable crypto asset positions in Q1 2026, showing no signs of a collective significant increase or withdrawal, while the 13F itself only provides a "snapshot" at the end of the quarter, unable to restore the trading rhythm in between. In this static snapshot, one is a sovereign fund tasked with managing national long-term wealth ramping up on Bitcoin spot ETFs, while the other is a university fund balancing budgetary needs and donor expectations withdrawing exposure to Ethereum. The question of whether such opposing choices signify a repricing of different crypto assets by institutions or a completely different understanding of risk and time by two types of asset managers will become the core issue worth dissecting next.

Mubadala Increases IBIT: Middle East Sovereign Bets on Bitcoin

In this end-of-quarter "snapshot," the most striking move came from Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund Mubadala. The 13F document shows that its holdings of the BlackRock Bitcoin Spot ETF—IBIT, increased from approximately 12,702,323 shares to about 14,721,917 shares, adding about 2 million shares in a single quarter, with media estimating the additional portion’s market value to exceed $90 million. For an ETF that has Bitcoin as its sole underlying asset, such an increase is not merely a simple position adjustment; it is more like a clear decision by long-term capital in the Middle East to allocate more weight to Bitcoin as a single asset.

Choosing to enter through a spot ETF like IBIT, rather than buying coins directly or participating in other crypto products, reflects the sovereign fund's consideration of compliance structures and governance boundaries. ETFs are constrained by U.S. regulatory frameworks, and holdings can be recorded through disclosure mechanisms like 13F, which aligns with internal risk control and accountability processes of sovereign funds, while also being easier to incorporate into traditional investment portfolios in terms of accounting treatment and valuation systems. It is important to note that 13F only provides a snapshot at the end of the quarter and cannot disclose when Mubadala specifically made these purchases, at what prices; however, it can be confirmed that each IBIT share corresponds to actual Bitcoin held by the custodian, indicating that as similar sovereign funds continue to increase their holdings, more Bitcoin is being concentrated and locked in a few large custody addresses, resulting in a rise in the concentration of held coins on the chain, while the portion of Bitcoin that can freely circulate on the chain is relatively diminishing.

Harvard Liquidates Ethereum ETF: University Experiment Hits Pause

In contrast to the sovereign funds' continued increase in Bitcoin, another detail in the 13F document states that Harvard University had ceased to hold any Ethereum ETF positions by the end of Q1 2026. Related reports from The Block described this change as a "liquidation," but according to the existing disclosures, the market cannot see how much Harvard previously held, when, or at what price the exit was completed; 13F only provides the static result at the quarter's end. More crucially, no official comments have been made from Harvard, meaning the outside world can only attempt to reconstruct the decision-making logic of this traditional long-term capital under conditions of incomplete information.

Under these uncertain conditions, reasonable assumptions based on institutional characteristics can be proposed: first, from a risk management perspective, the Harvard endowment is regarded as a long-term capital with significant global influence, and diversified allocation is normal. If the Ethereum ETF significantly increased portfolio volatility in the short term, it could very well have been considered a "trial position," decisively closed during the volatility window; second, regarding asset allocation rhythm, as the weight of Bitcoin-related products and other equity assets changes, Harvard might simply be rebalance, temporarily pulling back high-volatility assets; third, with no official statements, the outside world cannot simplistically interpret Harvard's action as "long-term bearish," but more like a tightening of risk exposure during a temporary wait-and-see phase. It is worth emphasizing that according to Deep潮 TechFlow citing The Block’s organization, the overall crypto asset holdings of university endowment funds remained relatively stable in Q1 2026, with no signs of collective withdrawal, suggesting that Harvard's liquidation is more akin to a strategy adjustment of an individual university rather than a collective exit signal from the entire endowment fund system regarding Ethereum or crypto assets.

Overall Stability of Endowment Funds: No Signs of Collective Withdrawal

From the disclosed 13F, Harvard's liquidation of the Ethereum ETF appears more like an enlarged "anomalous sample." Deep潮 TechFlow cited The Block's organization pointing out that the overall crypto asset holdings of university endowment funds did not experience significant increases or decreases in Q1 2026; instead, there were mostly slight adjustments and rebalancing of existing positions, and the disclosed allocation scale is not large, still remaining in the realm of "proportional testing." In other words, while Harvard chose to withdraw exposure to Ethereum, other university endowment funds did not collectively follow suit to reduce a certain type of crypto ETF in the same quarter, nor did they provide a unified signal for increasing positions.

This "overall stability with individual adjustments" structure reflects the consistent rhythm of university endowment funds: typically conducting portfolio reviews quarterly or annually, the 13F presents only a static snapshot at the end of the quarter, making it difficult to discern the specific motivations behind each adjustment; however, it can be confirmed that at least in Q1 2026, no large-scale collective withdrawal actions appeared within the disclosed samples. Compared to the more aggressive layouts of sovereign funds in Bitcoin ETFs, university endowment funds are still in a phase of testing and observing in crypto-related ETFs, more often using limited proportions and diversified targets to assess this asset category, rather than making synchronized decisions to advance or retreat on the same battlefield.

Divergent Paths in the Same Quarter: Preferences of Sovereign Funds and Universities

In the same quarter's 13F snapshot, the responses from Mubadala and Harvard are nearly in opposite directions. The former increased its holdings of the BlackRock Bitcoin Spot ETF IBIT from about 12.7 million shares to about 14.7 million shares in Q1 2026, with media estimating the additional exposure's value to exceed $90 million, further betting on Bitcoin within the regulatory framework of the ETF; meanwhile, the latter ceased to disclose any Ethereum ETF positions in the same quarter, summed up as "liquidating Ethereum ETF." According to the organization, the overall position of university endowment funds in crypto assets did not undergo any large-scale increase or decrease, making the increase in IBIT by Mubadala and the exit of Harvard from the Ethereum ETF strikingly contrasted.

Zooming out from a single asset, it is evident that institutional characteristics play a decisive role. Sovereign wealth funds bear the long-term wealth management goals of the state, with relatively mild pressure on the liability side; their decision-making chain places more emphasis on cross-cycle returns. Under these conditions, the structure of "single asset + spot custody" like Bitcoin is more likely to be considered a long-term allocation direction capable of withstanding high volatility. In contrast, university endowment funds must be accountable to intramural budgets, donor expectations, and public opinion; their tolerance for emerging assets is inherently lower. When the risk-return characteristics of the Ethereum ETF become difficult to explain to the board and donors, adjusting this position to zero becomes not only a risk management choice but also a means of expressing attitudes. Thus, in the same Q1 2026, while Bitcoin was positively reinforced by sovereign funds through IBIT, Ethereum ETFs were put on hold in the portfolios of a few universities, clearly illustrating the starkly different perceptions of the roles of these two assets by different institutions.

What to Watch Next Quarter: 13F and On-chain Clues

Returning to the starting point, Q1 2026 provided a clearly contrasting opening: Mubadala, a sovereign fund tasked with national long-term wealth management, significantly increased its stake in IBIT in the 13F quarter-end snapshot, while Harvard University adjusted its Ethereum ETF to zero holdings in the same document; media整理 shows that overall endowment funds from other universities maintained stability in their crypto holdings, while more specific details from other sovereign funds have yet to be disclosed. In the next quarter, two clues will need to be tracked simultaneously: first, in future 13F disclosures, whether Mubadala continues to consider IBIT as a core allocation, whether other sovereign funds will begin to catch up with Bitcoin spot ETFs, or attempt to expand into more crypto-related ETFs; second, whether more endowments from the university side will follow Harvard in reevaluating or even reducing their Ethereum ETF weights. Meanwhile, behind the shares of spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, whether the concentration of Bitcoin and Ethereum held by custodians on-chain will change can also become one of the observation directions. It needs to be emphasized that the quantitative information we currently possess mainly comes from Q1 2026’s 13F filings and media organization, which only provides a snapshot of holdings at quarter-end and cannot reconstruct the entire trading path within the quarter; any conclusions are merely based on limited disclosed phase judgments, and must wait for subsequent quarters’ regulatory documents and custody structure clues to verify the divergent allocation paths of sovereign funds and university endowment funds between Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
AiCoin On-chain: https://aicoin.com/hyperliquid
AiCoin Exclusive Hyperliquid Benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin Exclusive Aster Benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2

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。