On November 5, Eastern Time, according to publicly disclosed and organized data, approximately $430 million net outflow occurred in Bitcoin spot ETFs in a single day, with about $200 million flowing out from Fidelity-managed FBTC and around $105 million from BlackRock’s IBIT. Both leading products had previously accumulated over $10 billion in historical net inflows, yet on the same day, they experienced a significant capital withdrawal. The day after this "negative" ETF curve marked an unsettling note, on November 6, Injective officially announced that the first US ETF tracking INJ—INJC—was listed on NASDAQ, positioned as the first ETF product providing US investors with exposure to INJ. The held spot INJ is custodied by BitGo, and it plans to allocate up to about 90% of its position to participate in on-chain staking, with the net staking income automatically reinvested into the fund’s position. One is a mature product around Bitcoin that experienced a large net outflow in the short term, while the other is a new ETF that directly integrates on-chain staking logic into the traditional securities framework, appearing in quick succession and reflecting the complex attitude of traditional institutions towards crypto assets—contracting yet experimenting, cautious yet aggressive.
$430 Million Withdrawn in One Day: Leading Bitcoin ETFs Under Pressure Simultaneously
On November 5, Eastern Time, Bitcoin spot ETFs recorded about $430 million in total net outflow in a single day. This cold and hard number was magnified by two leading products into visible pressure. On that day, Fidelity’s FBTC had a net outflow of about $200 million, becoming the single product with the largest net outflow; BlackRock’s IBIT similarly saw a net outflow of about $105 million, aligned in direction with FBTC. The publicly disclosed data for that day did not provide specific values for other products, but the simultaneous withdrawal of these two products was sufficient to define the market sentiment outline for the day.
Even more strikingly, these two products had previously been representative of "only inflows" over a longer period: IBIT's historical total net inflow was approximately $65.504 billion, and FBTC's historical total net inflow was about $10.223 billion, establishing a solid leading position in the Bitcoin ETF landscape. It is precisely because of such a large stock that the $430 million net outflow on November 5 stood out as particularly noticeable; it did not shake the foundation of existing funds but clearly sent a signal: even the most steadfast "heavy zones" of Bitcoin ETFs will choose to collectively reduce exposure at some point.
Ripples in a Trillion-dollar Market: The Gap Between Daily Outflow and Historical Net Inflow
If we regard the $430 million total net outflow on November 5 as a ring of ripples, it is actually impacting a stockpile that had already accumulated a thick “water level.” As of now, BlackRock’s IBIT has a historical total net inflow of about $65.504 billion, and Fidelity’s FBTC about $10.223 billion, significantly surpassing the fluctuations of that day. Compared to the single-day net outflow of about $105 million, IBIT's cumulative net inflow is almost two orders of magnitude greater; the $200 million net outflow from FBTC that day, relative to its historical net inflow of over $10 billion, can likewise only be seen as a marginal adjustment rather than a removal of “bottom water.”
What’s even more noteworthy is that these two leading products recorded outflows on the same day against the backdrop of high cumulative net inflow, reflecting a phase adjustment on the massive existing stock: part of the capital chose to lock in profits or recall leveraged exposure, but it did not shake the overall pattern that had been long accumulated as "only inflows." Public materials have not yet indicated whether such single-day net outflows will be amplified or continued in subsequent trading days, so a more reasonable interpretation currently is to view it as a posture change on the massive stock rather than a fundamental reversal of the long-term funding routes in Bitcoin spot ETFs.
From Bitcoin to INJ: Expanding the Crypto ETF Landscape
The day after Bitcoin spot ETFs recorded an approximate $430 million net outflow on November 5, the ETF landscape quietly expanded outward on another side. On November 6, Injective announced that the first US ETF tracking INJ—INJC—was listed on NASDAQ. The product was explicitly described by officials as the first ETF providing investment exposure to INJ, with its tracking target being the performance of spot INJ prices. Unlike the Bitcoin and Ethereum-related products that the market has already become accustomed to, this means that the coverage of crypto ETFs linked to the US capital market begins to extend from mainstream assets to more segmented assets represented by INJ.
For many investors who only hold traditional brokerage accounts, INJC provides another path: it allows indirect exposure to the price of INJ by purchasing securitized shares on NASDAQ without the need to establish an on-chain wallet or directly interact with token contracts. More critically, INJC is designed to have BitGo custody the held spot INJ and plans to allocate up to about 90% of its INJ position for participating in on-chain staking, with the net staking income automatically rolling back into the ETF assets themselves, rather than being distributed to holders in cash. In the time window just after Bitcoin spot ETFs witnessed single-day net outflows, the issuance is delivering a more diverse and segmented crypto asset ETF to the market. This combination of collecting and expanding indicates that product supply is still extending towards more complex on-chain exposure and narrower asset tracks.
Writing Staking into ETF Terms: The Ambition of High Staking Positions in INJC
From a terms design perspective, INJC is not simply “buy and hold” spot INJ, but embeds on-chain earnings into the product structure itself. Official information shows that the spot INJ held by INJC is safeguarded by the custodian BitGo, and the product plans to participate in on-chain staking activities with up to about 90% of its INJ position. More critically, the net staking income generated from this portion will not be paid to holders in cash but will be automatically reinvested into INJC, aimed at increasing the nominal INJ holdings of the ETF, allowing investors to hold a continuously compounding on-chain staking income INJ position in their securities accounts.
For ordinary investors, this design retains the familiar ETF shell in form while outsourcing all the cumbersome operations of “opening a wallet, selecting nodes, monitoring on-chain income” to the custody and management party, significantly lowering the technical threshold for direct participation in INJ staking. However, the cost is also stated in the same line of terms: such a high staking ratio means that a considerable part of the ETF’s underlying assets will exist on-chain in a locked state. The staking decisions and asset control are highly concentrated in BitGo and its partners, and currently, publicly available materials do not disclose specific staking nodes or service provider lists, nor do they provide detailed risk control and compliance arrangements. This innovative structure embedding high staking ratios into the ETF amplifies INJ's ambition to grow through traditional markets while increasing a layer of custody and compliance risk exposure that holders must continuously monitor.
Bitcoin Out, INJ In: The Next Step for Traditional Capital’s Crypto Exposure
Putting the approximately $430 million net outflow from Bitcoin spot ETFs on November 5 in the context of IBIT's approximately $65.504 billion and FBTC's approximately $10.223 billion historical net inflows makes it look more like a phase adjustment of high-position stock chips rather than a confirmed trend reversal; concurrently, on November 6, INJC was listed on NASDAQ, dedicating up to about 90% spot INJ to on-chain staking while writing the automatic reinvestment of net staking income into the product terms, indicating that the traditional ETF framework is beginning to attempt to package the on-chain earnings mechanism as a whole for investors. Moving forward, whether the redemption rhythm of Bitcoin spot ETFs continues to favor outflows or returns to net inflows, and whether the subscription scale, position growth rate, and staking execution disclosure of INJC and other similar altcoin asset ETFs can meet expectations will jointly delineate the true allocation preference of institutions between “pure price exposure” and “price + on-chain earnings exposure.”
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Exclusive Hyperliquid benefits for AiCoin: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
Exclusive Aster benefits for AiCoin: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
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。
