2025 Recap | Bitcoin ETFs Mostly Show Net Outflows! GBTC Sees $3.7 Billion Net Outflows

With one week left in the books, 2025 is shaping up to be both a successful and disappointing year for U.S.-listed crypto ETFs.

On net, crypto ETFs gathered $21.3 billion of inflows during the year-to-date period ending Dec. 29. Those headline numbers, however, mask a more uneven picture beneath the surface.

Inflows slowed sharply in recent months. Over the past three months, crypto ETFs took in just $790 million, as several of the largest spot products experienced outflows amid falling prices.

The biggest story of 2025 was the dominance of iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT), which took in $24.8 billion, far and away the largest inflows of any crypto ETF this year.

Only one other spot bitcoin ETF managed to cross the $1 billion mark, the Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust ETF (BTC), which gathered $1.1 billion.

That stands in stark contrast to 2024, when multiple bitcoin ETFs attracted substantial assets, including the Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC), the ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB), and the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF (BITB).

In fact, excluding IBIT, U.S.-listed spot bitcoin ETFs collectively saw $3.5 billion of net outflows in 2025.

A major driver was Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC), which continued to hemorrhage assets, losing another $3.7 billion this year on top of the $21.5 billion it shed in 2024. But even stripping GBTC out of the picture, spot bitcoin ETFs outside of IBIT attracted just $1,839 million in inflows.

Strong Flows, Weak Performance

That brings us to the most disappointing aspect of the year: performance.

After roaring out of the gate—fueled by ETF inflows, strong momentum, and safe-haven demand amid equity volatility, inflation concerns, trade tensions, and geopolitical conflict—crypto prices peaked in October. Bitcoin briefly touched $125,000, while ether climbed above $4,800, its first new high since 2021.

At their highs, bitcoin and ether were up roughly 32% and 44%, respectively, for the year.

Today, both are in the red. Bitcoin is down about 6% year to date, while ether is off roughly 10%, disappointing performance in a year in which the S&P 500 is up 17.4% and gold has surged 67%.

Crypto markets began to crack in October, leaving many investors puzzled as to why the asset class lagged despite strong ETF demand and a notably friendlier regulatory backdrop.

Even the U.S. president leaned fully into crypto in 2025, with the launch of Trump Coin in January and the establishment of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve in March.

But those developments may have already been priced in. Bitcoin and ether jumped 120% and 47% in 2024, largely after the November election as traders anticipated a more permissive regulatory backdrop.

As often happens in markets, once a trade becomes crowded, momentum reverses. 

Pressure on the Corporate Treasury Trade

A similar dynamic may be unfolding in the corporate crypto treasury trade pioneered by MicroStrategy and later emulated by many other firms.

That trade depended on investors paying a premium for public companies holding crypto on their balance sheets. Recently, those premiums have compressed, undermining the strategy and adding to negative sentiment across the space.

Product Launches Balloon 

While performance disappointed, 2025 was a landmark year for crypto ETF launches.

In September, the SEC unveiled generic listing standards for crypto ETFs, opening the door to products holding assets beyond bitcoin and ether. Since then, ETFs targeting Solana, XRP, and even dogecoin have launched, with more expected.

That broader asset menu also made crypto index ETFs viable, allowing providers to bundle multiple digital assets into a single fund for the first time.

Separately, 2025 also saw the introduction of staking within U.S.-listed crypto ETFs, adding a yield component by allowing investors to earn rewards for helping validate blockchain transactions.

A Mixed Verdict

Taken together, 2025 was a year of contrasts for crypto ETFs.

Crypto ETFs clearly succeeded in 2025 as vehicles for access to the space. As investments, however, they largely disappointed, reminding investors that flows and performance don’t always move together.