Park explained on X that growing data now indicates the decline coincided with one of the most volatile days across global capital markets, during which Blackrock’s Ishares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) posted record trading volume exceeding $10 billion—more than double its prior high—alongside the largest options contract activity since the ETF’s launch.

According to Park, the options flow was unusually skewed toward puts rather than calls, suggesting defensive positioning rather than speculative upside. At the same time, Park noted that IBIT’s price action showed an unusually tight correlation with software equities and other risk assets, reinforcing the view that bitcoin was caught in a broader risk unwind rather than a crypto-specific shock.

Park pointed to data from Goldman Sachs’ prime brokerage desk showing Feb. 4 ranked among the worst daily performance events on record for multi-strategy hedge funds, registering a 3.5 z-score event. “It was catastrophic,” Park wrote, adding that such episodes typically prompt risk managers to demand rapid, indiscriminate de-grossing across portfolios, which likely spilled into Feb. 5 trading.

Despite bitcoin falling more than 13% that day, Park stressed that ETF flows defied historical patterns. Instead of heavy redemptions, IBIT recorded roughly 6 million new shares created, translating to more than $230 million in added assets under management (AUM), while the broader spot ETF complex saw over $300 million in inflows.

Park said this counterintuitive outcome suggests the selling pressure came largely from hedged, market-neutral strategies rather than outright exits. “The sell-off did not result in end outflows of bitcoin assets,” he wrote, concluding that activity was dominated by dealers and market makers operating within the “paper money complex.”

A key driver, Park argued, was the forced unwinding of the CME bitcoin basis trade. He highlighted that near-dated CME basis spreads jumped from roughly 3.3% on Feb. 5 to about 9% on Feb. 6, one of the largest single-day moves since spot ETFs launched, consistent with large funds being directed to reduce leverage.

Also read: Prediction Markets Price Patriots Loss Ahead of Super Bowl LX

Park also cited structured products and options dynamics as accelerants. As downside barriers were breached, dealers hedging knock-in risk were forced to sell underlying exposure into weakness, amplifying downside momentum as implied volatility briefly approached extreme levels.

By Feb. 6, bitcoin rebounded more than 10%, a move Park linked to the re-expansion of CME open interest as market-neutral strategies re-entered positions. He concluded that the episode points to bitcoin’s growing integration into TradFi markets, writing that “the catalyst came from non- crypto TradFi derisking,” not a fundamental breakdown within the crypto sector itself.

• What caused bitcoin’s Feb. 5 sell-off?
  Jeff Park believes it stemmed from TradFi deleveraging and ETF-related hedging, not crypto-native selling.
• Did investors exit Bitcoin ETFs on Feb. 5?
  No, Park reported net creations across spot bitcoin ETFs despite the price drop.
• Why did options activity matter?
  Park said put-heavy positioning and short-gamma dynamics forced dealers to sell into weakness.
• What explains bitcoin’s rebound on Feb. 6?
  Park pointed to the return of CME basis trades and market-neutral positioning after leverage was reduced.

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。