Spot Bitcoin ETF Inflows Hit $175.6M Before Swift $261M Reversal

A green day in a red month

On Monday, October 13, US spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds took in about $175.6 million in net inflows, and spot ether funds added $24.8 million.11 That ended a rough start to October for both products.11 Fidelity's Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) brought in $103.1 million, the most of any single fund that day.12 BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) added about $65.9 million.13 On the ether side, the Grayscale Ethereum Staking Mini Trust drew $16.7 million, roughly two-thirds of the category's total.12 Fidelity's ether fund, FETH, contributed $8.1 million.15

The session stood out because it was the first day in October when bitcoin and ether funds both took in money.16 Together they drew about $200 million.16 It also ended a long losing streak for ether products. Some trackers counted 8 straight days of outflows from October 1 to 12, while others called it roughly 10 sessions.1613 The difference in the count doesn't change the picture: ether funds had been losing money every day for most of the month.

The recovery lasted one session. On October 14, spot bitcoin ETFs lost about $261.4 million. FBTC shed $152.7 million and IBIT lost $110.9 million, so the two funds that led the rebound also led the retreat.19 Bitwise's BITB was the only bitcoin fund to take in money, adding $2.2 million.10 Ether funds lost $129.5 million, mostly through a $109.8 million withdrawal from BlackRock's iShares Ethereum Trust.19 Read as a two-day sequence, the October 13 inflows were a pause in a weak month, not a turn in the trend.

The context: October's worst stretch since June

The Monday inflows came after heavy selling. Bitcoin ETFs lost about $679 million in the week ending October 9, the largest weekly withdrawal since June.5 The worst day was October 7, with about $487 million in outflows, followed by another $244 million on October 8.12 Ether funds lost $542 million over the same week.16 Counting solana, zcash and hyperliquid funds, about $1.29 billion left US crypto ETFs that week.3

One daily tracker shows bitcoin ETFs down a net $539.8 million for October through the 14th. That follows inflows of $2.6 billion in September and $3.5 billion in August.1 The longer view looks better for bitcoin than for ether. Over the 30 days through October 13, bitcoin ETFs took in about $2.06 billion, while ether funds lost about $192 million.1214 Ether ETFs have lost close to $1.9 billion in total net assets since October 1, and the $24.8 million inflow barely changes that.16

The two categories are also very different in size. Bitcoin ETFs hold roughly $100 billion or more in assets, about 6% of bitcoin's market value. Ether ETFs hold around $14.5 billion, or about 4.7% of ether's.1214 Because ether funds are smaller, an outflow of a given size hurts them more. Coverage of the October selloff made this point about the $542 million weekly ether outflow.3

Where the numbers diverge

The main data providers broadly agree on the headline figures but differ in the details. Some aggregators put the October 13 bitcoin total at $175.7 million instead of $175.6 million.12 Another flow table shows $170.6 million and assigns different amounts to individual funds on several October dates.2 Estimates of total assets also vary. One outlet reported $100.75 billion in bitcoin ETF net assets, while SoSoValue data put the figure at $106.98 billion.1116 Cumulative inflows since launch were reported as anywhere from $57.22 billion to $57.68 billion.1612

The gaps come from different reporting deadlines, revisions after issuers file, and different ways of handling the converted Grayscale trusts. They are not a sign that the data is wrong. Still, readers should be wary of exact figures in single-day flow stories. One tracker warns that the latest day's numbers may be revised as issuers finalize them.20

Why single days mislead

The most useful analysis this month argues that daily flows are mostly noise. Bitcoin ETFs had net outflows on 93 of 190 trading days in 2026, about 48% of the time, yet still took in about $1.2 billion over the year.7 Weekly and monthly totals say much more about real demand than one session does.7 One trader-focused outlet noted that 8 of October's first 9 bitcoin ETF sessions moved more than $60 million in one direction or the other.16

Who is selling also matters. Early in the ETFs' life, much of the outflow came from investors leaving Grayscale's high-fee GBTC for cheaper funds, so the money stayed in bitcoin.20 October looks different. Redemptions were concentrated in the biggest, cheapest funds: FBTC and ARK 21Shares' ARKB together accounted for most of the week's losses.3 That looks more like investors reducing their exposure than switching between funds, and this is the weaker reading for demand.

Macro pressure is doing the heavy lifting

The flows make more sense alongside the economic data. US headline inflation rose to 3.7% in September, above the 3.6% forecast, and traders' odds of a Federal Reserve rate hike in October rose to 54%.17 Bitcoin slipped below $81,000 as Treasury yields rose. Coverage credited ETF inflows with providing some support, but noted that higher yields and profit-taking capped any gains.17 Nearly $944 million in leveraged crypto positions were liquidated in 24 hours.18 One market report described a roughly 3% drop in bitcoin and a fall of more than 6% in ether as uncertainty grew over the Fed.19

Bitcoin was trading around $83,000 earlier in the month, roughly 31% below its level a year ago.7 It briefly rose above $84,000 on October 14. Analysts said the price recovery had not been matched by a lasting return of money into ETFs, which left the rebound unconfirmed.5 Our reading is that ETFs now act as a channel for macro positioning. When the rate outlook gets more hawkish, institutional holders sell through FBTC and IBIT, just as they cut exposure to other risky assets.

The regulatory backdrop: agencies fill the gap Congress left

The flow swings are happening while US crypto regulation shifts from Congress to the agencies. On September 15, the Senate failed by 49–50 to advance the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY Act), short of the 60 votes needed.21 The bill had passed the House in July 2025.21 It stalled over ethics rules on officials' crypto holdings, law-enforcement concerns about developers who don't hold customer funds, and banks' objections to stablecoins that pay yield.21 Senator Tillis voted no so that he could later move to reconsider, which keeps the bill technically alive. Even so, passage before this Congress ends is widely seen as unlikely.25

The regulators have moved ahead without it:

• SEC custody rules. On October 1, the SEC proposed rules that would make it easier for investment advisers and regulated funds to hold crypto. They would allow self-custody in some cases and let state trust companies act as custodians.23 One analyst said the SEC is using its existing powers to clear obstacles one at a time: issuance, tokenization, trading exemptions and now custody.23
• Regulation Crypto Assets. The SEC's August proposal would create a startup exemption for raising up to $5 million over four years and a fundraising exemption of up to $75 million a year. It would also set a safe harbor for deciding when a token is no longer an investment contract. Public comments close October 20.21
• CFTC rulemaking. On October 5, the CFTC asked for public comment on a framework for retail crypto trading. Unlike the CLARITY Act, it would not require all crypto trading to take place on CFTC-registered platforms.21
• Shared definitions. A joint interpretation issued by the SEC and CFTC in March 2026 sorts crypto assets into five categories. That gives both agencies a common set of definitions while legislation is stalled.25

The custody proposal matters most for ETF flows. Its stated aim is to give advisers and funds a compliant way to hold crypto, and it could increase competition among custodians, a business that has been concentrated in a few firms.23 Over time, that could widen the range of firms able to recommend or package crypto exposure. The October flow data suggests that easier access does not keep money in the funds when interest-rate expectations turn hawkish.

There is also a structural risk. Rules written by agencies can be undone by future commissioners more easily than a law passed by Congress.21 Any new market-structure bill would have to start over after the next Congress convenes in January 2027.21

The takeaway

The October 13 inflows were real, broad-based and short-lived. Two signals matter more than any one day. The first is whether FBTC and IBIT can post inflows for several weeks in a row. The second is whether ether funds can stop losing money, which they have done for most of the month.13 The rules governing crypto custody and issuance are improving steadily. Investor demand, for now, depends more on inflation data and Fed expectations than on regulatory progress.