Here’s Three Reasons Why Bitcoin Futures Set Record Highs Amid Price Surge to $71K

Bitcoin (BTC)-tracked futures set a record high open interest (OI) in U.S. dollar terms early Tuesday as the asset broke past $71,000 for the first time since June, data shows.

BTC futures recorded their biggest one-day jump since June 3 with OI jumping over 20,000 BTC, worth $2.5 billion at current prices, to reach almost 600,000 BTC, or $42.6 billion, as of Tuesday.

OI refers to the total number of outstanding derivative contracts, such as futures or options, that have not been settled. High open interest indicates that there is significant interest in a particular asset. When open interest increases along with rising prices, it suggests new money is coming into the market, indicating a strengthening trend – such as Tuesday’s.

High open interest can lead to increased volatility, especially as contracts near expiration. Traders might rush to close, roll over, or adjust positions, which can lead to significant price movements. Research firm Kaiko said in an X post that while futures showed strong interest from traders, the funding rates for such positions remain well below March highs which indicate tempered demand.

Funding rates in perpetual futures markets are periodic payments made between traders to ensure that the price of the perpetual contract remains close to the spot price of the underlying asset. Traders such as Singapore-based QCP Capital remain bullish on BTC in the near term, expecting price gains to continue in the weeks ahead.

“With rising expectations around a potential Trump victory boosting both stocks and Bitcoin, we believe BTC is well-positioned for medium-term gains,” the firm wrote in a Tuesday broadcast on Telegram.

Reasons why BTC OI has zoomed

Contracts offered on the Chicago Mercentile Exchange (CME) have seen a 9% surge in 24 hours, taking their open interest to 171,700 BTC, worth over $12.22 billion, which gives CME a 30% dominance in the futures open interest market. As they maintain their number one spot in this market.

In mid-October, bitcoin was trading around $67,000 and the OI on CME hit all-time highs in both notional open interest ($12.4 billion) which is the dollar value of the futures contracts and bitcoin denominated futures contracts (179,930 BTC), per Glassnode data.

Second, the funding rate in perpetual markets has also soared in the past 24 hours to 15%, according to Coinglass data, this is one of the highest recorded levels in the past few months, which shows an extreme bias for bullish long trades.

Finally, the third reason can be attributed to the strong inflows from the U.S. listed spot ETFs, which in recent weeks has seen a slight evolution from the institutional basis trade at the start of the year to now more bullish long directional plays.

Since Oct. 16 bitcoin denominated futures contracts peaked on the CME exchange, it has since dropped by over 6%, which has been the opposite for the ETF inflows which have seen a cumulative net inflow of $2.7 billion. The charge has been led by BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), which has seen $2.2 billion of net inflows in the same time period while achieving a new record of holding over 400,000 bitcoin in the ETF.

Earlier in the year it was apparent that the basis trade or the cash and carry arbitrage was taking place which involves taking advantage of the price difference between the bitcoin spot and futures price. The basis trade involves taking a long position on the ETF and then taking a short position on the CME futures bitcoin price. This was one of the reasons bitcoin has been trading in a long sideways range since March, as not all the inflows from the ETFs were directionally long but overall a net neutral strategy.

Checkmate, an analyst, also noted the recent divergence between the CME OI and the ETF inflows.

“We have a divergence between Bitcoin ETF Inflows and CME Open Interest. ETF Inflows are ticking meaningfully higher. CME Open Interest is up, but not as much. GBTC outflows are also minimal. We’re seeing true directional ETF inflows, and less so cash and carry trades,” Checkmate wrote.

The recent purchase of the Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust (BTC) by the Emory University endowment could support Checkmate’s point of view to be a directional long purchase, as one would not expect a University to start executing the basis trade. Emory University would be the first endowment to purchase a bitcoin ETF and while $15 million isn’t a large sum for an institutional investor the narrative and the directional play stand out in a similar fashion to the Wisconsin Pension Fund.

However, Andre Dragosch, head of research at Bitwise, takes the other side of this view: he believes due to the increase in net short-positioning and an increase in CME open interest in the past 24 hours, that the basis trade has already started to pick up, he told CoinDesk in a note.

“There was an increase in net short positioning judging by the change in net non-commercial positioning on CME since early September. This coincided with an overall increase in CME open interest which implies that net there has really been an increase in cash-and-carry trades,” he wrote in a note to CoinDesk. “However, we only have weekly data up to 22/10 from the CFTC, so we don’t have insights into the latest OI change yet”.

Nearly 50% of U.S. Investors Plan to Invest in Crypto ETFs: Charles Schwab Survey

U.S. investors are very much keen on investing in exchange-traded funds (ETF) that hold cryptocurrencies, a new survey commissioned by financial services giant Charles Schwab showed on Thursday.

Some 45% of respondents said they plan to invest in crypto via ETFs over the next year, up from 38% a year earlier, surpassing demand for bonds and alternative assets. Only U.S. equities fared better, with 55% of participants planning to invest.

Among millennial ETF investors, though, crypto was the leading asset class, with 62% saying they plan to allocate to that sector versus only 48% for U.S. stocks, 47% for bonds and 46% for real assets such as commodities.

Boomer ETF investors were much less keen on digital assets, with only 15% of the respondents having plans to invest.

“Pretty stunning,” Eric Balchunas, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, said about crypto’s high ranking in investment plans in the survey.

The implications of the survey, which asked 2,200 individual investors between the age of 25 and 75 with at least $25,000 to be invested, could be a boost for the nascent and growing class of crypto-focused ETFs, which are being marketed as a diversification tool for traditional investment portfolios of stocks and bonds.

While U.S.-listed spot bitcoin ETFs hardly need the help, having attracted nearly $19 billion of net inflows since their debut in January, spot ether ETFs have languished on a relative and absolute basis since their launch a few months later. Exits from the incumbent Grayscale Ethereum Trust have overwhelmed inflows into the newer entrants, with net outflows for the group as a whole topping more than $500 million, according to Farside Investors.

Four Reasons Ether ETFs Have Underperformed

For many investors, the performance of spot ether (ETH) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) has been disappointing.

Whereas spot bitcoin (BTC) ETFs processed almost $19 billion in inflows in the course of 10 months, ether ETFs, which began trading in July, have failed to produce the same kind of interest.

Even worse, Grayscale’s ETHE, which existed as an ether Trust prior to its conversion into an ETF, has suffered massive redemptions, and demand for other ether funds has failed to offset them.

That means ether ETFs have, so far, experienced $556 million in net outflows since they launched. Just this week, the products have bled out a net $8 million, according to Farside data.

So why are ether ETFs performing so differently? There are a few possible reasons.

Putting inflows into context

First of all, it’s important to note that ether ETFs only look bad in contrast to bitcoin ETFs. The bitcoin products have broken so many records that they’re arguably the most successful ETFs of all time.

For example, the ETFs issued by BlackRock and Fidelity, IBIT and FBTC, collected $4.2 billion and $3.5 billion each in their first 30 days, smashing the previous record, held by BlackRock’s Climate Conscious fund, which had garnered $2.2 billion in its first month, August 2023.

While ether ETFs failed to replicate these kinds of earth-shattering results, three of the funds are still among the top 25 best performing ETFs of the year, according to ETF Store president Nate Geraci.

BlackRock’s ETHE, Fidelity’s FBTC, and Bitwise’s ETHW have vacuumed up almost $1 billion, $367 million, and $239 million in assets respectively – not bad at all for two-and-a-half months old funds.

“Spot ether ETFs were never going to challenge spot bitcoin ETFs in terms of inflows,” Geraci told CoinDesk.

“If you look at the underlying spot markets, ether is about one-fourth the market cap of bitcoin. That should be a reasonable proxy of where spot ether ETF demand ends up longer-term relative to spot bitcoin ETFs.”

The problem is that Grayscale’s ETHE has drowned out these funds’ performances with its large outflows.

Spun up in 2017 as a trust, ETHE was originally designed, for regulatory reasons, in a way that didn’t permit investors to redeem their ETF shares – the money was stuck in the product. That changed on July 23, when Grayscale won approval to convert its trust into a proper ETF.

At the time of conversion, ETHE had roughly $1 billion in assets, and while some of those assets were moved by Grayscale itself to another of its funds – the ether mini ETF – ETHE has suffered from almost $3 billion in outflows.

It’s worth noting that Grayscale experienced the same thing with its bitcoin ETF, GBTC, which has processed more than $20 billion in outflows since its conversion in January. However, the stellar performances of BlackRock and Fidelity’s spot Bitcoin ETFs have more than offset GBTC’s bleedout.

Lack of staking yield

One of the big differences between bitcoin and ether is that investors can stake ether – essentially locking it into the Ethereum network to earn a yield paid out in ether.

However, in their current form, ether ETFs don’t allow investors to gain exposure to staking. So holding ether through an ETF means missing out on that yield (currently about 3.5%) – and paying a management fee to issuers that can range from 0.15% to 2.5%.

While some traditional investors won’t mind giving up that yield in exchange for the convenience and safety of an ETF, it makes sense for crypto-natives to find alternative ways of holding ether.

“If you’re a competent fund manager with even a basic understanding of the crypto market and you’re managing someone’s money, why would you buy an ether ETF right now?” Adam Morgan McCarthy, an analyst at crypto data firm Kaiko Research, told CoinDesk.

“You pay to get exposure to ETH (and the underlying is custodied at Coinbase) or you buy the underlying yourself and stake it with the exact same provider in return for some yield,” McCarthy said.

Marketing Ethereum to clients

Another obstacle for ether ETFs is that it can be hard for some investors to understand the core use-case for Ethereum because it seeks to lead in several, diverse areas of crypto.

Bitcoin was created with a hard cap on supply: There will never be more than 21 million bitcoin in existence. That makes it relatively easy for investors to see it as “digital gold” and a potential hedge against inflation.

Explaining why a decentralized, open-source smart contract platform matters – and more importantly, why ether stands to accrue in value – is another task altogether.

“One of the challenges for ether ETFs in penetrating the 60/40 Boomer world is distilling its purpose/value into an easy-to-understand soundbite,” Bloomberg Intelligence ETF analyst Eric Balchunas wrote in May.

McCarthy agreed. “Ether is just that bit more complex to get across to people – it’s not built for an elevator pitch,” he told CoinDesk.

It’s no wonder, then, that crypto index fund Bitwise recently launched an educational ad campaign highlighting the technological benefits of Ethereum.

“As investors learn more about stablecoins, decentralized finance, tokenization, prediction markets, and the many other applications powered by Ethereum, they will enthusiastically embrace both technology and the US-listed Ethereum ETPs,” Zach Pandl, head of research at Grayscale, told CoinDesk.

Poor price performance

There’s also the fact that ETH itself hasn’t performed all that well compared to BTC this year.

The second largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization is only up 4% since Jan. 1, whereas BTC has risen 42% and keeps hovering around its 2021 all-time highs.

“One factor contributing to the success of the bitcoin ETFs, which remain mostly retail-driven, has been investor animal spirits and fear of missing out, which itself was fueled by BTC’s 65% rise into the ETF launch and subsequent 33% gain since,” Brian Rudick, director of research at crypto trading firm GSR, told CoinDesk.

“ETH’s 30% price decline since its ETFs launched has put a large damper on retail enthusiasm to buy the funds,” Rudick added. “Sentiment around Ethereum is low, with some seeing it as stuck between Bitcoin as the best monetary asset and Solana as the best high-performance smart contract blockchain.”

Unattractive valuation

Finally, there’s a possibility that traditional investors simply don’t find ether’s valuation attractive at these levels.

At a market capitalization of roughly $290 billion, ether already has a higher valuation than any bank in the world except for JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, which stand at $608 billion and $311 billion respectively.

And while that might seem like an apples-to-oranges comparison, Quinn Thompson, founder of crypto hedge fund Lekker Capital, told CoinDesk that ether’s valuation also looks high compared to tech stocks.

Ether’s valuation “next to other assets
is now uglier because there is no justification for its price on any sort of valuation framework,” Thompson wrote in September. “Either price has to come down, or a new generally accepted valuation framework for the asset needs to be widely accepted.”