Author: Claude, Shenchao TechFlow
Deep潮 Summary: The U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have just experienced their most severe withdrawal period since listing: from May 15 to June 3, they recorded 13 consecutive trading days of net outflows, totaling $4.4 billion—more than double the previous record set in February 2025. Coupled with a decline in cryptocurrency prices, the total assets under management of these ETFs dropped from $104.3 billion to $82.8 billion over three weeks.
On June 12, twelve funds collectively recorded zero outflows, with a net inflow of $85.84 million in a single day; Standard Chartered listed this signal as one of three indicators that Bitcoin had reached its bottom.
13 days, $4.4 billion: Bitcoin ETFs experience their longest outflow since launch
The flow of funds is the most direct measure of institutions' true attitudes toward Bitcoin.
These ETFs buy and sell spot Bitcoin in real time based on investor subscriptions and redemptions; the inflow and outflow of funds directly correspond to increases and decreases in institutional positions, with no speculative noise.
Over the past month, this metric has recorded the worst figures since launch. According to Galaxy Research, from May 15 to June 3, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs experienced 13 consecutive trading days of net outflows, totaling approximately $4.37 billion, equivalent to about 59,000 Bitcoin. This marks the longest continuous outflow period since these products launched in January 2024, surpassing the previous record of 8 days and $3.2 billion in February 2025—more than doubling it.
Galaxy Research also noted that outflows across multiple time windows—7 days, 10 days, and 20 days—reached record highs during this period, indicating that selling pressure was not concentrated on a single day but persisted over an extended duration. This wave of withdrawals pushed the cumulative net inflow for 2026 into negative territory for the first time. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas confirmed that year-to-date fund flows turned negative for the first time this year.
The largest outflow came from BlackRock’s IBIT. According to Farside Investors data, IBIT alone accounted for approximately $3.3 billion in outflows during the period, representing three-quarters of the total outflow. Fidelity’s FBTC followed with approximately $456.6 million in outflows, while Grayscale’s GBTC saw approximately $303.6 million in outflows. IBIT, which had been the strongest fund in terms of capital inflows since its launch, became the epicenter of redemptions this time.
Funds fleeing and falling prices trigger a vicious cycle, wiping out $21.5 billion in three weeks.
The outflow of funds was amplified by the concurrent decline in coin prices.
According to The Defiant, citing SoSoValue data, the total assets under management of all U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs declined from approximately $104.29 billion on May 15 to about $82.83 billion on June 3, a reduction of roughly $21.5 billion over three weeks. This decline resulted from two reinforcing factors: redemptions withdrawing capital, combined with Bitcoin’s price drop from above $80,000 to around $63,000—a decline of approximately 21%—which further reduced the market value of holdings. The two forces amplified each other.
Based on holdings, ETF Bitcoin holdings have decreased to approximately 1.277 million BTC, about 7.2% lower than the peak in October 2025. The Bitcoin held by these ETFs currently accounts for around 6.36% of Bitcoin’s circulating market cap, below the high of over 7% in mid-May.
A redemption on May 28 was particularly notable. On that day, BlackRock’s IBIT experienced a net outflow of $527.8 million, the second-largest single-day redemption in the fund’s history. Throughout May, U.S. Bitcoin ETFs recorded a monthly net outflow of $2.43 billion, setting a record for the largest monthly outflow, with $1.42 billion of that occurring in the final week alone.
After the outflow ends, the "clean rebound" is considered one of the bottom signals by Standard Chartered.
The turning point occurred in early June.
On June 5, Bitcoin ETFs ended 13 consecutive days of outflows with a modest net inflow of $3.05 million. While $3.05 million is negligible in this market size, the trend has reversed. On the same day, Ethereum ETFs also ended 17 consecutive days of outflows, posting a net inflow of $19.3 million, all of which came from BlackRock’s ETHA fund alone.
The true signal recognized by institutions was the transaction on June 12 (Friday). According to SoSoValue data, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a net inflow of $85.84 million that day, with five funds experiencing inflows, seven showing zero net flow, and none recording net outflows. The collective absence of outflows across all 12 products—the state of "zero net outflows"—is a key indicator that bulls monitor to assess whether selling pressure is easing.
Geoff Kendrick, Global Head of Digital Assets Research at Standard Chartered, included it on his list of Bitcoin bottom indicators. In a brief report to clients on Friday, Kendrick said that crypto asset prices have reached the low point of this cycle, corresponding to Bitcoin at approximately $59,000—a 53% decline from its peak of $126,000. He noted three indicators to confirm this: Strategy’s report purchased Bitcoin last week, ETFs recorded positive inflows on Friday, and oil prices continued to decline. He concluded the report with: “Winter is over; welcome back to spring in crypto.”
However, a single-day inflow of $858.4 million cannot reverse the $4.4 billion withdrawal over three weeks. But a clean trading day is a starting point to observe whether selling pressure has peaked.
ETF fund flows are increasingly driving cryptocurrency prices. According to calculations cited by Cryptopolitan, ETF fund flows currently account for approximately 45% of Bitcoin’s weekly price movements. Since their launch in January 2024, the cumulative net inflows into these Bitcoin ETFs have exceeded $55 billion, remaining less than $10 billion below their historical peak. Balchunas therefore views the $4.4 billion outflow as a significant momentum reversal, rather than a structural collapse.