• Last week, cryptoassets outperformed traditional assets due to a reacceleration in US spot Bitcoin ETF inflows
• Our in-house “Cryptoasset Sentiment Indicator” continues to fluctuate around neutral levels of sentiment
• US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw their highest weekly net inflow since mid-March and have seen 20 consecutive trading days of positive net inflows so far
Chart of the Week
Performance
Last week, cryptoassets outperformed traditional assets once again supported by a renewed acceleration in global crypto ETP net inflows and US spot Bitcoin ETF net inflows in particular.
More specifically, US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw their highest weekly net inflow since mid-March (Chart-of-the-Week). Weekly crypto ETP net inflows across all types of cryptoassets surpassed 2 bn USD last week, of which net inflows into US spot Bitcoin ETFs accounted for ~80.5% alone. US spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen 20 consecutive trading days of positive net inflows so far.
It seems as if risk appetite is returning to the crypto markets, especially after the ECB and Bank of Canada both announced to cut their key interest rates last week. These developments mark a significant shift in major central banks’ monetary policy as these are the first interest rate cuts since 2019 (ECB) and 2020 (Bank of Canada), respectively.
The macro liquidity tide is obviously turning already, which we have also analysed in our latest monthly report here.
However, the net implications for Bitcoin and cryptoassets of this reversal in global monetary policy are still somewhat mixed as these changes also signal that economic data are worsening significantly and global growth still seems to be the most dominant macro factor for Bitcoin at the moment based on our analyses.
In this context, the latest non-farm payrolls print that came in way above expectations seems to be inconsistent with other US employment data that continue to signal worsening labour market conditions.
That being said, over the medium- to long-term, monetary policy easing will provide a significant tailwind for Bitcoin and cryptoassets, especially in light of the latest Bitcoin Halving that will probably affect performances positively from summer onwards.
Increasing spot supply scarcity is generally visible for both Bitcoin and Ethereum as on-exchange balances continue to hit multi-year lows.
So, while the growth of fiat liquidity supply is likely to accelerate over the next 12 months, the illiquidity of supply of major cryptoassets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum will also worsen.
This combination of fiat demand expansion and cryptoasseet supply tightening is bound to be very positive for cryptoassets going forward.
In general, among the top 10 crypto assets, BNB, Toncoin, and Bitcoin were the relative outperformers.
Overall, altcoin outperformance vis-à-vis Bitcoin has declined significantly compared to the prior week, with only around 15% of our tracked altcoins managing to outperform Bitcoin on a weekly basis. This is consistent with the fact that Bitcoin outperformed Ethereum by almost 500 bps last week, which is generally a sentiment gauge for the overall altcoin market.
Sentiment
Our in-house “Cryptoasset Sentiment Index” continues to fluctuate around neutral levels of sentiment.
At the moment, 5 out of 15 indicators are above their short-term trend.
Last week, there were significant reversals to the upside in BTC exchange inflows and BTC options put-call volume ratios.
The Crypto Fear & Greed Index signals ”Greed” as of this morning.
Performance dispersion among cryptoassets still remains very low. Most altcoins are still trading in line with Bitcoin.
Altcoin outperformance vis-à-vis Bitcoin has declined significantly compared to the week prior, with only around 15% of our tracked altcoins outperforming Bitcoin on a weekly basis, which is consistent with the fact that Bitcoin outperformed Ethereum last week.
In general, increasing (decreasing) altcoin outperformance tends to be a sign of increasing (decreasing) risk appetite within cryptoasset markets and the latest altcoin underperformance could signal low appetite for risk at the moment.
Meanwhile, sentiment in traditional financial markets rebounded to the upside from its recent lows, judging by our own measure of Cross Asset Risk Appetite (CARA).
Fund Flows
Last week, we saw very positive net inflows into global crypto ETPs of around +2,270.4 mn USD which was the highest amount of weekly net inflows since mid-March.
Global Bitcoin ETPs saw net inflows of +2,189.0 mn USD last week, of which +1,828.9 mn USD (net) were related to US spot Bitcoin ETFs alone. US spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen 20 consecutive trading days of positive net inflows so far.
Flows into Hong Kong spot Bitcoin ETFs were also decent, with net inflows of around +260.6 mn USD, according to data provided by Bloomberg.
The Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) continued to see minor net outflows with approximately -31.1 mn USD last week, while other major US spot Bitcoin ETFs continued to attract more capital.
Global Ethereum ETPs saw accelerating net inflows last week, with net inflows of around +80.0 mn USD.
Besides, Altcoin ETPs ex Ethereum also experienced some minor net inflows of around +17.8 mn USD last week.
Besides, Thematic & basket crypto ETPs continue to see minor net outflows of -7.5 mn USD, based on our calculations. The ETC Group MSCI Digital Assets Select 20 ETP (DA20) saw neither in- nor outflows last week (+/- 0 mn USD).
Meanwhile, global crypto hedge funds continue to decrease their market exposure to Bitcoin. The beta of global crypto hedge funds’ performance has declined to 0.73 over the past 20 trading days.
On-Chain Data
Looking at core on-chain data for Bitcoin, we can make the following observations. Active addresses still hover near year-to-lows as transaction fees remain relatively high. There was also a spike in mean transaction fees last week on Friday to the highest level since the Halving event on the 20th of April. The mean transaction fee reached 83.7 USD that day.
One of the reasons is that the overall number of transactions and also the transaction rate (transactions/second) have gradually increased over the past weeks which has resulted in an increase in the mempool of unconfirmed transactions.
This does not seem to be inscription-related, as this share has remained below 10% of overall transaction count.
The Bitcoin hash rate also continued to be relatively high and we even saw a slight increase in network hash rate compared to the prior week. In this context, there are still no signs of “miner capitulation” in light of the recent reduction of mining revenues due to the Halving. For instance, aggregate BTC miner balances have moved sideways and we haven’t seen significant miner transfers to exchanges either.
Looking at exchange activity, one can observe say that exchange balances continue to decline to fresh multi-year lows. For instance, aggregate BTC exchange balances have touched the lowest level since March 2018 and aggregate ETH exchange balances touched the lowest level since July 2016 last week.
Bitcoin exchanges saw around -21.7k BTC in net withdrawals over the past 7 days and whales have continued to send bitcoins of exchange as well. Whales are defined as network entities that control at least 1,000 BTC.
However, net buying minus selling volumes on exchanges have been negative over the past week, despite significant net inflows into spot US Bitcoin ETFs. This implies that there is significant selling pressure on spot exchanges that is countering current buying demand.
This is probably one of the main reasons why bitcoin has not reclaimed new all-time highs despite reaccelerating US spot Bitcoin ETF inflows.
Futures, Options & Perpetuals
Last week, BTC futures open interest increased significantly and reached the highest level since January 2023 in BTC-terms. Perpetual open interest also reached the highest level since December 2023 in BTC-terms. The significant increase futures open interest was only partially attributed to an increase in CME futures open interest that accounted for less than half of this increase. However, the CME data point to a significant increase in net shortopen interest by non-commercials.
This is probably due to the fact that the Bitcoin futures basis continued to creep upwards and has reached a 2-months high of around 14.2% p.a. This has probably attracted more basis trades, which has resulted in the abovementioned increase in shortopen interest. The basis trade consists of a delta-neutral long and short position in Bitcoin.
Meanwhile, perpetual funding rates continued to be relatively elevated, signalling decent demand for long perpetual contracts.
Bitcoin options’ open interest also increased significantly last week. The decline in relative put-call open interest ratio implies that this increase was mostly driven by an increase in call open interest on a net basis. A call option gives the holder the right to buy the underlying at a specific price in the future. Relative put-call volume ratios declined throughout the week.
The decline in the 25-delta BTC 1-month option skew also corroborates the view that there was increased demand for calls relative to puts.
BTC option implied volatilities also continued to decrease last week. Implied volatilities of 1-month ATM Bitcoin options are currently at around 49.8% p.a.
Bottom Line
• Last week, cryptoassets outperformed traditional assets due to a reacceleration in US spot Bitcoin ETF inflows
• Our in-house “Cryptoasset Sentiment Indicator” continues to fluctuate around neutral levels of sentiment
• US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw their highest weekly net inflow since mid-March and have seen 20 consecutive trading days of positive net inflows so far
To read our Crypto Market Compass in full, please click the button below:
This is not investment advice. Capital at risk. Read the full disclaimer
Den börshandlade fonden följer S&P 500:s utveckling och använder optioner i ett försök att skydda investerare mot de första 10 % av förlusterna varje år. Buffertstrategin har nackdelen att eventuella värdevinster är begränsade.
ETFens totala kostnadskvot (TER) uppgår till 0,50 % per år. Utdelningarna i ETFen ackumuleras och återinvesteras.
iShares US Large Cap Moderate Buffer Mar UCITSETF USD (Acc) är en mycket liten ETF med 14 miljoner euro i förvaltningstillgångar. Denna ETF lanserades den 31 mars 2026 och har sitt säte i Irland.
Det betyder att det går att handla andelar i denna ETF genom de flesta svenska banker och Internetmäklare, till exempel Nordnet, SAVR, DEGIRO och Avanza.
Som alltid med ETFer är det viktigt att veta om de index som spåras av sektor ETFer för att förstå vad du köper in dig i. Investerare kan vända sig till sektor ETF-investeringar för att konstruera sina portföljer på ett annat sätt än den mer traditionella geografiska metoden, eller för att försöka dra nytta av konjunkturcykeln genom att satsa på de sektorer som de tror kommer att överträffa, och undervikta eftersläpande.
Oavsett dina skäl till att välja sektor ETFer, är det viktigt att veta hur de investerar – vilket som alltid med ETFer innebär att förstå indexen som spåras av en sektor ETFs underliggande innehav, och hur dessa index klassificerar de tiotusentals investerarbara aktier som finns tillgängliga i olika sektorer.
Två sektorsklassificeringssystem
De främsta leverantörerna av sektorindex – MSCI och STOXX Limited – baserar sina index på ett av två olika internationellt erkända sektorsklassificeringssystem:
Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS), som delar upp 51 000 värdepapper i 11 sektorer, 24 branschgrupper, 68 branscher och 157 underbranscher.
Industry Classification Benchmark (ICB), som klassificerar 75 000 värdepapper i 10 branscher, 19 supersektorer, 41 sektorer och 114 undersektorer.
GICS vs. ICB klassificering i en överblick
GICS
ICB
Nivå 1
11 sektorer
10 industrier
Nivå 2
24 industrigrupper
10 supersektorer
Nivå 3
68 Industrier
41 sektorer
Nivå 4
157 Subindustrier
115 subsektorer
51 000 aktier
>75 000 aktier
MSCI; ICB Benchmark; Mars 2018 STOXX Limited och FTSE använder ICB-systemet som bas för sina index, medan MSCI och S&P använder GICS.
Hur sektorsklassificeringssystemen fungerar
Båda systemen är baserade på en hierarki av grupperingar – från breda sektorsklassificeringar ner till mer specialiserade nischer. Du kan tänka på det som liknar hur vi klassificerar växtriket i familj, släkt, art och så vidare.
Till exempel placeras aktier i företag som får majoriteten av sina intäkter från flygverksamheten av ICB-systemet…
… till undersektorn flyg- och rymdfart
… som är en del av flyg- och försvarssektorn
… som ingår i supersektorn industriella varor och tjänster
… som sitter inom Industribranschen
Även om GICS-systemet är liknande – men absolut inte identiskt – är dess kategorinamn olika. Därför finns risken för investerare förvirring.
Du kan se att den översta nivån under GICS-systemet är ’Sektor’, vilket är den tredje nivån i hierarkin under ICB-systemet. Ändå är dessa bara etiketter – ICB:s ”Industri”-nivå är funktionellt densamma som GICS ”Sector”-nivå.
Och naturligtvis använder kommentatorer – inklusive vi – ordet ”sektor” för att hänvisa till alla möjliga olika branschgrupperingar, inte bara till den specifika betydelsen under GICS- eller ICB-metoderna.
Sektorer/industrier på toppnivå inom GICS och ICB i jämförelse
GICS
ICB
Energy
Oil and Gas
Materials
Basic Materials
Health Care
Health Care
Industrials
Industrials
Financials
Financials
Information Technology
Technology
Telecommunication Services
Telecommunication
Utilities
Utilities
Consumer Staples
Consumer Goods
Consumer Discretionary
Consumer Services
Real Estate
–
Uppe i det blå
Även om de två klassificeringssystemen ytligt sett är ganska lika, finns det några verkliga skillnader när du gräver ner i hur de kategoriserar vissa branscher – och därav var dessa branscher sitter i sina respektive grupperingar.
Till exempel placerar ICB flygbolag i sin rese- och fritidssektor.
Däremot har GICS-systemet flygbolag i sin Airlines Industry-kategori, som är en del av dess Transportation Industry Group.
Det betyder inte att den ena kategoriseringen är bättre än den andra – och vi kan helt klart inte gå igenom alla skillnader mellan dessa system här.
Snarare vill vi belysa varför du behöver undersöka en ETF grundligt innan du köper den för att säkerställa att den kommer att exponera dig korrekt för resultatet av den typ av aktier du letar efter.
Sektorer, regioner och optimerade ETFer
Rent praktiskt, även om de djupare nivåerna i sektorklassificeringshierarkierna är viktiga att känna till, är det bara de högre nivåerna av GICS och ICB som faktiskt kan investeras genom ETFer
Se tabellen nedan för en översikt över vad som är tillgängligt just nu.
En ytterligare rynka är att sektor ETFer finns i regionala och globala varianter.
Till exempel har Xtrackers sektor ETFer fokuserade på MSCI Emerging Markets basindex, såväl som MSCI World.
Återigen, se tabellen nedan.
Det finns också sektor ETFer som spårar ”optimerade” och ”begränsade” versioner av vissa index.
Till exempel erbjuder Invescos sektor ETFer baserade på STOXX Europe 600 optimerade index.
ETFer som spårar dessa optimerade index kan erbjuda riskhanteringsfördelar jämfört med ETFer som spårar standardindex, eftersom de begränsar den totala exponeringen som fonden kommer att ha mot ett företag.
Investerare kan också föredra dem för den potentiellt överlägsna likviditeten i deras underliggande innehav.
Den börshandlade fonden investerar i ett urval av företag världen över som är optimerade enligt låg volatilitet och ESG-kriterier (miljömässiga, sociala och bolagsstyrningsaspekter).
ETFens totala kostnadsratio (TER) uppgår till 0,25 % per år. Utdelningen i ETFen delas ut till investerarna (halvårsvis).
Invesco Global Active Defensive ESG Equity UCITSETFDist är en mycket liten ETF med 1 miljon euro i förvaltningstillgångar. Denna ETF lanserades den 23 september 2025 och har sitt säte i Irland.
Handla LVLD ETF
Invesco Global Active DefensiveESG Equity UCITSETFDist (LVLD ETF) är en europeisk börshandlad fond. Denna fond handlas på flera olika börser, till exempel Deutsche Boerse Xetra.
Det betyder att det går att handla andelar i denna ETF genom de flesta svenska banker och Internetmäklare, till exempel Nordnet, SAVR, DEGIRO och Avanza.