For most of 2025, Bitcoin enjoyed an seemingly unshakable floor, buoyed by a powerful, albeit unlikely, alliance of corporate treasuries and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Companies issued stock and convertible debt to acquire the digital asset, while robust ETF inflows consistently absorbed new supply. Together, these forces forged a durable demand base, enabling Bitcoin to defy tightening financial conditions. However, this sturdy foundation is now showing signs of shifting.
Charles Edwards, founder of Capriole Investments, recently voiced a weakening in his bullish outlook. In a November 3rd post on X, he observed a critical turning point:
"For the first time in 7 months, net institutional buying has DROPPED below daily mined supply. Not Good."
Edwards noted that consistent institutional accumulation had been his primary reason for optimism, even when other assets outperformed Bitcoin. This new development signals a significant change in market dynamics.
Corporate Treasury Accumulation Takes a Pause
Currently, approximately 188 corporate treasuries hold substantial Bitcoin positions, many with business models heavily reliant on their token exposure. Among them, MicroStrategy Inc. (now simply Strategy) stands as the undisputed leader. Led by Michael Saylor, this software company transformed into a Bitcoin treasury powerhouse, holding over 674,000 BTC. Yet, even Strategy’s aggressive buying rhythm has slowed dramatically.
In the third quarter, Strategy added only about 43,000 BTC, marking its lowest quarterly purchase this year. CryptoQuant analyst J.A. Maarturn links this slowdown to Strategy's declining Net Asset Value (NAV) premium. Historically, investors paid a hefty premium for Strategy's shares, effectively granting leveraged exposure to Bitcoin's upside. This premium, which once soared to 208%, has now compressed to just 4%.
With fewer valuation tailwinds, issuing new shares to acquire Bitcoin is no longer as financially accretive, dulling the incentive to raise capital. Maarturn summarized the situation:
"Capital is harder to raise. Equity issuance premiums have dropped from 208% [to] 4%."
The cooling trend extends beyond Strategy. Metaplanet, a Tokyo-listed firm emulating the US pioneer, recently traded below the market value of its own Bitcoin holdings after a steep drawdown. In response, it authorized a share buyback and introduced new capital-raising guidelines, signaling confidence but also highlighting waning investor enthusiasm for "digital-asset treasury" business models. This shift even led to consolidation within the sector, with asset management firm Strive acquiring Semler Scientific, a smaller BTC treasury company, last month. This deal allows them to hold nearly 11,000 BTC, securing a premium that is becoming increasingly scarce.
These examples suggest a structural constraint—when equity or convertible issuance no longer commands a market premium, capital inflows dry up, naturally slowing corporate accumulation.
Spot Bitcoin ETFs: A Shift to Two-Way Markets
Spot Bitcoin ETFs, once considered automatic absorbers of new supply, are also showing signs of fatigue. For much of 2025, these financial vehicles dominated net demand, with creations consistently exceeding redemptions, particularly during Bitcoin’s surge to record highs. However, by late October, their flows turned choppy.
Some weeks saw a shift into negative territory as portfolio managers rebalanced positions and risk desks trimmed exposure in response to evolving interest-rate expectations. This newfound volatility marks a new phase in ETF behavior. The macro backdrop has tightened, hopes for rapid rate cuts have faded, real yields have risen, and liquidity conditions have cooled. While demand for Bitcoin exposure remains firm, it now arrives in bursts rather than steady waves.
Data from SoSoValue illustrates this shift: the first two weeks of October attracted nearly $6 billion in inflows, but by month-end, over $2 billion in redemptions reversed a portion of those gains. This pattern suggests that Bitcoin ETFs have matured into genuine two-way markets. They provide deep liquidity and institutional access, but they no longer act as one-directional accumulation vehicles. When macro signals wobble, ETF investors can exit as quickly as they enter.
Market Implications: Increased Volatility and Macro Sensitivity
This evolving scenario doesn't automatically spell a downturn, but it certainly implies greater volatility for Bitcoin. With corporate and ETF absorption softening, Bitcoin’s price action will be increasingly driven by shorter-term traders and macro sentiment. Edwards argues that fresh catalysts—such as monetary easing, regulatory clarity, or a return of equity-market risk appetite—will be crucial to reignite institutional interest.
The effects are twofold:
- Weakening Structural Bid: The consistent structural demand that once acted as a price floor is now weakening. During periods of under-absorption, intraday swings can amplify because fewer steady buyers exist to dampen volatility. While the April 2024 halving mechanically reduced new supply, scarcity alone doesn’t guarantee higher prices without consistent demand.
- Shifting Correlation Profile: As balance-sheet accumulation cools, Bitcoin's asset correlation may shift back to tracking the broader liquidity cycle. Rising real yields and strong dollar phases could pressure prices, while easing conditions might restore its leadership in risk-on rallies. Bitcoin is re-entering a macro-reflexive phase, behaving less like "digital gold" and more like a high-beta risk asset.
None of these shifts negate Bitcoin’s long-term narrative as a scarce, programmable asset. Rather, they reflect the growing influence of institutional dynamics that once insulated it from retail-driven swings. The very mechanisms that lifted Bitcoin into mainstream portfolios are now binding it more tightly to the gravity of traditional capital markets. The coming months will test whether the asset can sustain its store-of-value appeal without automatic corporate or ETF inflows. Historically, Bitcoin has shown a remarkable ability to adapt, with new demand channels often emerging as old ones slow, whether from sovereign reserves, fintech integrations, or renewed retail participation during favorable macro cycles.
Source: CryptoSlate
Post a Comment