Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
BTC 
ETH This week, spot bitcoin ETFs still led the inflow of U.S. crypto funds, but their advantage narrowed significantly.
This week, U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) still led the inflow of crypto funds, reportedly attracting US$884 million. However, its advantage over Ethereum products has narrowed significantly-the Ethereum ETF has attracted $713 million, and the competitive landscape dominated by Bitcoin has been tightening since the launch of the first spot ETFs.
Weekly data makes this number particularly eye-catching. In terms of a full trading week, the capital inflow of the Ethereum ETF is close to the total amount of Bitcoin, with a difference of only about $171 million between the two.
Key Data Overview
Weekly Ethereum ETF inflow: US$713 million
Gap with Bitcoin: Bitcoin ETF leads with US$884 million, with a lead of approximately US$171 million.
Bitcoin maintains the lead, but the gap narrows.
Bitcoin funds remain the main flow of institutional capital, which is consistent with the market pattern that has accelerated demand for Bitcoin exposure since the launch of spot products. The weekly total keeps Bitcoin leading among all single-asset crypto fund categories. But the change lies in the size of the lead: the $171 million gap is quite narrow relative to the overall funding size, which means that Ethereum products account for nearly 45% of the combined weekly capital inflows for the two assets. Historically, demand for bitcoin has been more concentrated. For example, BlackRock's IBIT alone absorbed most of the inflows from a single-day bitcoin ETF.
Why it is important to narrow the gap between Ethereum and Bitcoin capital inflows
The narrowing of the weekly gap should be interpreted more as a signal of relative preferences of institutions than a change in leadership positions. Two assets compete for the same ETF-driven capital pool, so the smaller gap suggests that allocators this week directed a larger share of their funds to Ethereum products, above the long-term average. The prudent conclusion is that this trend requires multiple weeks of data confirmation before it can be judged as a sustainable rotation rather than a single strong period for Ethereum. At the regulatory level, the product portfolios of both parties are still expanding. For example, Thailand is advancing draft rules for spot bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, which may broaden their respective accessible markets. In terms of price context, Ethereum's spot market data and the broader Fear and Greed Index provide a real-time reference for the allocation of these capital flows.
From Bitcoin's perspective, money flow data does not touch on the fundamentals of the network: Bitcoin's monetary base, block issuance and settlement guarantees are independent of the ETF packaging that attracts capital in any week. ETF demand marginally affects spot pressure, but the computing power to ensure chain security and its fixed supply schedule are the attributes that distinguish Bitcoin from all products competing for the same institutional dollar.
