Crypto ETF Fund Outflows: Is BlackRock and Other Issuers Still Making Money?
Original Article Title: When Wrappers Run Red
Original Article Author: Prathik Desai, Token Dispatch
Original Article Translation: Luffy, Foresight News
During the first two weeks of October 2025, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw inflows of $32 billion and $27 billion, setting records for the highest and fifth-highest weekly net inflows in 2025.
Prior to this, Bitcoin ETFs were on track to achieve a "no consecutive outflow week" milestone in the second half of 2025.
However, the most severe cryptocurrency liquidation event in history occurred unexpectedly. This event, which resulted in the evaporation of assets worth $190 billion, continues to haunt the crypto market.

Net Fund Flows and Asset Net Value of Bitcoin Spot ETFs in October and November

Net Fund Flows and Asset Net Value of Ethereum Spot ETFs in October and November
However, in the seven weeks following the liquidation event, Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs experienced outflows in five weeks, totaling over $50 billion and $20 billion, respectively.
By the week ending November 21, the Net Asset Value (NAV) managed by the Bitcoin ETF issuer had shrunk from approximately $1.645 trillion to $1.101 trillion, while the Ethereum ETF's asset net value was nearly halved, dropping from $306 billion to $169 billion. This decline was partly due to the price decline of Bitcoin and Ethereum themselves, as well as some tokens being redeemed. In less than two months, the combined net asset value of Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs evaporated by about one-third.
The retreat in fund flows reflects not only investor sentiment but also directly impacts the fee income of ETF issuers.
Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs are the "money printers" of institutions like BlackRock, Fidelity, Grayscale, Bitwise, etc. Each fund charges fees based on the assets under management, typically expressed as an annual fee rate but actually accrued based on daily net asset value.
Every day, the trust funds holding Bitcoin or Ethereum shares will sell a portion of their holdings to cover transaction fees and other operational expenses. For the issuer, this means that their annual revenue is approximately equal to the Assets Under Management (AUM) multiplied by the fee rate; for the holders, this results in a gradual dilution of the amount of tokens held over time.
The fee rate range for ETF issuers is between 0.15% and 2.50%.
Redemption or outflows of funds themselves do not directly result in profit or loss for the issuer, but outflows cause a reduction in the issuer's ultimately managed asset size, thereby decreasing the asset base on which fees can be collected.
On October 3, the total assets under management by Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF issuers reached $195 billion, considering the aforementioned fee levels, their fee pool size was considerable. However, by November 21, the remaining asset size of these products was only about $127 billion.

If we calculate the annualized fee income based on the weekend's assets under management, over the past two months, the potential revenue for Bitcoin ETFs has declined by over 25%; Ethereum ETF issuers have been more significantly affected, with a 35% decline in annualized revenue over the past nine weeks.

The Larger the Issuance Scale, the Harder the Fall
From the perspective of a single issuer, there are three slightly different trends behind the flow of funds.
For BlackRock, its business characteristics involve a combination of "economies of scale" and "cyclical fluctuations." Its IBIT and ETHA have become the default choices for mainstream investors to allocate Bitcoin and Ethereum through an ETF channel. This has allowed the world's largest asset management institution to charge a 0.25% fee based on its large asset base, especially when the asset size hit a record in early October, the gains were substantial. However, this also means that when large holders decided to reduce risk in November, IBIT and ETHA became the most direct selling targets.
The data is sufficient to support this: BlackRock's Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs saw annualized fee income declines of 28% and 38%, exceeding the industry average declines of 25% and 35%.
Vanguard's situation is similar to that of BlackRock, but on a relatively smaller scale. Its FBTC and FETH funds also followed the rhythm of "inflow first, outflow later," where the market enthusiasm in October was eventually replaced by outflows in November.
Grayscale's story is more about "historical legacy issues." Once upon a time, GBTC and ETHE were the only scaled channels for numerous U.S. investors to allocate Bitcoin and Ethereum through brokerage accounts. However, with institutions like BlackRock and Vanguard leading the market, Grayscale's monopoly position no longer exists. To make matters worse, the high fee structure of its early products has led to continued outflow pressure over the past two years.
The market performance in October and November also confirmed this investor tendency: when the market is bullish, funds will shift to lower-fee products; when the market weakens, positions will be significantly reduced.
The early Grayscale cryptocurrency products had a fee rate 6-10 times lower than low-cost ETFs. Although a high fee rate can boost revenue figures, the elevated cost will continuously drive investors away, diminishing the asset under management that generates fee income. The retained funds are often constrained by frictional costs such as taxation, investment mandates, operational processes, rather than stemming from active investor choices; and each outflow reminds the market: once a superior option arises, more holders will abandon high-fee products.
These ETF data unveil several key features of the current cryptocurrency institutionalization process.
The spot ETF market in October and November demonstrates that the cryptocurrency ETF management business is as cyclical as the underlying asset market. When asset prices rise and market sentiment is positive, inflows will drive up fee revenue; however, once the macro environment changes, funds will swiftly exit.
Although large issuance institutions have established efficient "fee channels" on Bitcoin and Ethereum assets, the volatility in October and November proves that these channels are also susceptible to market cycle impacts. For issuers, the core issue is how to retain assets in the face of a new market shock, avoiding significant fluctuations in fee revenue following macro trend changes.
While issuers cannot prevent investors from redeeming shares in a sell-off, income-generating products can to some extent mitigate downside risks.
Covered call option ETFs can provide investors with premium income (Note: A covered call option is an options trading strategy where an investor holds the underlying asset while simultaneously selling an equal number of call option contracts. Through collecting the premium, this strategy aims to enhance portfolio returns or hedge some risks.), offsetting some of the underlying asset price declines; collateralized products are also a viable direction. However, such products need to undergo regulatory review before being formally introduced to the market.
You may also like

Stolen: $290 million, Three Parties Refusing to Acknowledge, Who Should Foot the Bill for the KelpDAO Incident Resolution?

ASTEROID Pumped 10,000x in Three Days, Is Meme Season Back on Ethereum?

ChainCatcher Hong Kong Themed Forum Highlights: Decoding the Growth Engine Under the Integration of Crypto Assets and Smart Economy

Why can this institution still grow by 150% when the scale of leading crypto VCs has shrunk significantly?

Anthropic's $1 trillion, compared to DeepSeek's $100 billion

Geopolitical Risk Persists, Is Bitcoin Becoming a Key Barometer?

Annualized 11.5%, Wall Street Buzzing: Is MicroStrategy's STRC Bitcoin's Savior or Destroyer?

An Obscure Open Source AI Tool Alerted on Kelp DAO's $292 million Bug 12 Days Ago

Mixin has launched USTD-margined perpetual contracts, bringing derivative trading into the chat scene.
The privacy-focused crypto wallet Mixin announced today the launch of its U-based perpetual contract (a derivative priced in USDT). Unlike traditional exchanges, Mixin has taken a new approach by "liberating" derivative trading from isolated matching engines and embedding it into the instant messaging environment.
Users can directly open positions within the app with leverage of up to 200x, while sharing positions, discussing strategies, and copy trading within private communities. Trading, social interaction, and asset management are integrated into the same interface.
Based on its non-custodial architecture, Mixin has eliminated friction from the traditional onboarding process, allowing users to participate in perpetual contract trading without identity verification.
The trading process has been streamlined into five steps:
· Choose the trading asset
· Select long or short
· Input position size and leverage
· Confirm order details
· Confirm and open the position
The interface provides real-time visualization of price, position, and profit and loss (PnL), allowing users to complete trades without switching between multiple modules.
Mixin has directly integrated social features into the derivative trading environment. Users can create private trading communities and interact around real-time positions:
· End-to-end encrypted private groups supporting up to 1024 members
· End-to-end encrypted voice communication
· One-click position sharing
· One-click trade copying
On the execution side, Mixin aggregates liquidity from multiple sources and accesses decentralized protocol and external market liquidity through a unified trading interface.
By combining social interaction with trade execution, Mixin enables users to collaborate, share, and execute trading strategies instantly within the same environment.
Mixin has also introduced a referral incentive system based on trading behavior:
· Users can join with an invite code
· Up to 60% of trading fees as referral rewards
· Incentive mechanism designed for long-term, sustainable earnings
This model aims to drive user-driven network expansion and organic growth.
Mixin's derivative transactions are built on top of its existing self-custody wallet infrastructure, with core features including:
· Separation of transaction account and asset storage
· User full control over assets
· Platform does not custody user funds
· Built-in privacy mechanisms to reduce data exposure
The system aims to strike a balance between transaction efficiency, asset security, and privacy protection.
Against the background of perpetual contracts becoming a mainstream trading tool, Mixin is exploring a different development direction by lowering barriers, enhancing social and privacy attributes.
The platform does not only view transactions as execution actions but positions them as a networked activity: transactions have social attributes, strategies can be shared, and relationships between individuals also become part of the financial system.
Mixin's design is based on a user-initiated, user-controlled model. The platform neither custodies assets nor executes transactions on behalf of users.
This model aligns with a statement issued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on April 13, 2026, titled "Staff Statement on Whether Partial User Interface Used in Preparing Cryptocurrency Securities Transactions May Require Broker-Dealer Registration."
The statement indicates that, under the premise where transactions are entirely initiated and controlled by users, non-custodial service providers that offer neutral interfaces may not need to register as broker-dealers or exchanges.
Mixin is a decentralized, self-custodial privacy wallet designed to provide secure and efficient digital asset management services.
Its core capabilities include:
· Aggregation: integrating multi-chain assets and routing between different transaction paths to simplify user operations
· High liquidity access: connecting to various liquidity sources, including decentralized protocols and external markets
· Decentralization: achieving full user control over assets without relying on custodial intermediaries
· Privacy protection: safeguarding assets and data through MPC, CryptoNote, and end-to-end encrypted communication
Mixin has been in operation for over 8 years, supporting over 40 blockchains and more than 10,000 assets, with a global user base exceeding 10 million and an on-chain self-custodied asset scale of over $1 billion.

$600 million stolen in 20 days, ushering in the era of AI hackers in the crypto world

Vitalik's 2026 Hong Kong Web3 Summit Speech: Ethereum's Ultimate Vision as the "World Computer" and Future Roadmap

On the same day Aave introduced rsETH, why did Spark decide to exit?

Full Post-Mortem of the KelpDAO Incident: Why Did Aave, Which Was Not Compromised, End Up in Crisis Situation?

After a $290 million DeFi liquidation, is the security promise still there?

ZachXBT's post ignites RAVE nearing zero, what is the truth behind the insider control?

Vitalik 2026 Hong Kong Web3 Carnival Speech Transcript: We do not compete on speed; security and decentralization are the core

In-depth Analysis of RAVE Events: Short Squeeze, Crash, and Quantitative Financial Models of Liquidity Manipulation




