- BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) experienced fluctuating inflows; Ethereum ETF (ETHA) outperformed.
- BlackRock’s whitepaper highlighted Bitcoin’s exceptional performance over the past decade, but acknowledged its high risks.
BlackRocks Bitcoin [BTC] ETF (IBIT) has seen fluctuating inflows in recent days, with the most recent update on September 18 revealing zero new inflows.
BlackRock’s Ethereum, on the other hand [ETH] ETF (ETHA) recorded healthy inflows of $4.9 million during the same period Farside Investors.
Blackrock’s ETF performance analyzed
Despite these short-term variations, the IBIT ETF has accumulated total inflows of $20.92 billion since its inception, surpassing the cumulative inflows of $17.45 billion for all BTC ETFs combined.
Similarly, ETHA has seen total inflows of $1.03 billion since launch, while the cumulative Ethereum ETF sector has experienced negative net outflows of $9.8 million.
These figures suggest that the lack of inflow for IBIT may be a temporary fluctuation, with potential for improvement soon.
Blackrock on the role of Bitcoin
After a history of successful launches, BlackRock has unveiled an expanded version nine-page whitepaper which addresses Bitcoin’s distinctive role among the major asset classes.
The article highlights BTC’s unique position as a ‘diversifier’, contrasting it with traditional assets by highlighting its volatile correlations with US stocks and USD interest rates.
According to BlackRock, Bitcoin’s unconventional features present both opportunities and challenges for investors accustomed to analyzing traditional asset classes.
Source: www.blackrock.com
Bitcoin’s journey so far
The whitepaper provides an in-depth analysis of Bitcoin’s journey to a $1 trillion market cap, showcasing Bitcoin’s exceptional performance over the past decade.
This shows that in seven of the last ten years, BTC has outperformed all major asset classes, delivering impressive annualized returns of over 100%.
This remarkable growth occurred despite Bitcoin being the worst performer in three of those years, marked by four significant declines of more than 50%.
“These movements in bitcoin’s price continue to partly reflect its evolving outlook as it becomes widely adopted as a global monetary alternative.”
Source: www.blackrock.com
A hedge against the weakness of the US dollar
The article also highlights BTC’s perceived isolation from global macroeconomic factors, suggesting that it has become a “flight to safety” for some investors during times of geopolitical uncertainty.
Additionally, BlackRock argued that Bitcoin provides a hedge against potential US dollar weakness that could come from the growing federal deficit.
The whitepaper further contrasts Bitcoin with US stocks by highlighting Bitcoin’s continuous trading and near-instant cash settlement, which improves its liquidity during market stress.
Unlike traditional stocks that are limited to standard trading hours, Bitcoin operates 24/7, making it particularly valuable during periods of liquidity pressure, such as on weekends when traditional markets are closed.
This unique feature positions Bitcoin as a highly marketable asset during times of financial uncertainty, providing an advantage over traditional assets that are less accessible during such periods.
Source: www. blackrock.com
Bitcoin, a risky asset – why?
That said, the whitepaper concluded that Bitcoin remains a high-risk asset, noting:
“None of the previous analysis denies the fact that bitcoin, on a standalone basis, is still a very risky asset. Bitcoin has also been volatile and subject to numerous risks, including regulatory challenges, uncertainty about its adoption path, and an immature ecosystem.”
This means that the risks of BTC differ from those of traditional investment assets.
Unlike other assets, Bitcoin’s behavior and risk factors cannot be easily categorized within a simple framework of ‘risk on’ (investing in assets perceived as higher risk for higher returns) versus ‘risk off’ (riskier assets avoid in favor of safer ones).
Overall, BTC’s unique features make it a special case, showing that these traditional risk assessment models may not fully capture its complexity.
