Bitcoin ETFs experience significant losses as Gold reaches 53 record highs with $559 billion in demand.

Gold demand hit an unprecedented $555 billion in 2025, propelled by an 84% increase in investment inflows and $89 billion directed towards physically backed ETFs.

The World Gold Council indicates that ETF holdings rose by 801 tons to a record 4,025 tons, with assets under management doubling to $559 billion. US gold ETFs alone absorbed 437 tons, elevating domestic holdings to 2,019 tons, valued at $280 billion.

This reflects a shift in institutional positioning.

In contrast, Bitcoin experienced a decline in holders during the initial two months of 2026. US spot Bitcoin ETFs reported net outflows exceeding $1.9 billion in January.

As of February 9, global spot Bitcoin ETFs held 1.41 million BTC valued at $100 billion, approximately 6% of Bitcoin’s total supply. However, the data suggests that capital is exiting rather than entering.

The gold surge supports the debasement theory, raising the question of whether Bitcoin will capture any of the forthcoming flows or if investors have already categorized it as a separate risk asset.

Related Reading

First US bank collapse of 2026 adds to gold, silver, and Bitcoin chaos while $337B in unrealized contagion looms

The shutdown of Metropolitan Capital Bank coincides with a severe global sell-off that has traders concerned about a wider contagion.

Jan 31, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

What actually changed

Investment demand for gold reached 2,175 tons in 2025, marking an 84% increase year-over-year.

Utilizing the World Gold Council’s average price of approximately $3,431 per ounce, this equates to around $240 billion in notional investment demand. This figure is influenced by ETF adoption, central bank purchases, and worries about currency stability rather than cyclical growth concerns.

China’s People’s Bank has acquired gold for the 15th consecutive month, holding 74.19 million ounces valued at $369.6 billion as of January 2026.

The IMF highlights that global debt remains above 235% of world GDP, a context that enhances the appeal of hard collateral regardless of growth expectations.

Gold’s performance in 2025, which resulted in 53 all-time highs, was not merely a trade. It represented a revaluation of the role of strategic reserves amid ongoing sovereign deficits and diminishing confidence in the stability of fiat currencies.

Proponents of Bitcoin argue that it fulfills a similar role: a non-liability asset resistant to debasement. However, the ETF data presents a contrasting narrative.

While gold funds saw their assets under management double, Bitcoin ETFs faced significant capital outflows. If investors perceived the two as interchangeable, the flows would align, but they do not.

Metric	2025 / Jan–Feb 2026 value	Direction	Interpretation
Gold: Total demand (value)	$555B (2025)	↑	Record demand value indicates a repricing of “strategic collateral,” not merely cyclical buying
Gold: Investment demand	2,175t (2025)	↑	Investment-driven demand consistent with macro/sovereignty hedging
Gold: Physically backed ETF inflows	$89B (2025)	↑	Institutional channels are active; the ETF structure serves as the transmission mechanism
Gold: ETF holdings change	+801t (2025)	↑	Accumulation of holdings indicates persistent positioning, not a fleeting trade
Gold: End-year ETF holdings	4,025t (all-time high, 2025)	↑	New peak in “inventory” reinforces the notion of a structural allocation shift
Gold: Gold ETF AUM	$559B (2025)	↑	Doubling of AUM signals an increase in institutional exposure and mandate adoption
Gold: US gold ETFs absorbed	+437t (2025)	↑	Significant participation from US institutions; not solely an emerging market/central bank narrative
Gold: US gold ETF holdings	2,019t (2025)	↑	Increased domestic stockpile supports the “gold re-rating” and reserve-like framing
Gold: US gold ETF AUM	$280B (2025)	↑	Concentrated capital base: US ETF complex is a significant driver of the gold demand
Bitcoin ETFs: Net flow (US spot ETFs)	–$1.9B (Jan 2026)	↓	De-risking and liquidation pressure; the data contradicts the pure debasement narrative
Bitcoin ETFs: Global holdings (spot ETFs)	1.41M BTC (Feb 9, 2026)	—	Large existing base remains, but flows are the marginal signal (and they are negative)
Bitcoin ETFs: Value of holdings	~$100B (Feb 9, 2026)	—	Size is significant, yet capital is exiting rather than accumulating
Bitcoin ETFs: Share of BTC supply	~6% (Feb 9, 2026)	—	Concentrated “wrapper ownership” is substantial enough that flows can impact the margin

Small percentages and big numbers

This hypothetical analysis is crucial as it quantifies the implications of minor reallocations for Bitcoin’s marginal demand.

Starting with global gold ETF assets under management of $559 billion, a 0.25% rotation would equate to $1.4 billion, or approximately 19,900 BTC, at current prices around $70,212. A 0.5% shift would yield $2.8 billion and 39,800 BTC.

A full percentage point would translate to $5.6 billion, sufficient to acquire approximately 79,600 BTC, representing 6.3% of existing US spot ETF holdings or about 177 days of post-halving issuance at 450 BTC per day.

Using the 2025 gold ETF inflows of $89 billion as an alternative reference, the same analysis yields smaller yet still significant figures. A 0.25% reallocation amounts to $222 million, or around 3,170 BTC, while a 0.5% reallocation amounts to $445 million and 6,340 BTC.

At 1%, the figure increases to $890 million and approximately 12,700 BTC.

A third reference is based on the derived $240 billion in gold investment demand from 2025. Quarter-percent, half-percent, and one-percent reallocations translate to $600 million (8,550 BTC), $1.2 billion (17,100 BTC), and $2.4 billion (34,200 BTC), respectively.

These are not forecasts but sensitivity analyses. They clarify the stakes: even a 0.5% allocation of gold ETF assets would represent a significant capital amount comparable to Bitcoin’s largest monthly outflow in recent memory.

The challenge is that there is no mechanism compelling that rotation, and current behavior indicates that allocators perceive the two assets as complements in different portfolios rather than substitutes within the same mandate.

Table illustrates hypothetical Bitcoin demand if gold capital rotates: a 1% shift from gold ETF assets would equal $5.6 billion or 79,616 BTC, representing 6.27% of U.S. spot ETF holdings and 177 days of mining issuance.

Jan. 30 tells you what Bitcoin is

On January 30, gold plummeted nearly 10%, its sharpest single-day drop since 1983, following Kevin Warsh’s nomination as Treasury Secretary, which raised concerns about balance sheet tightening, and the CME increased margin requirements.

Silver fell 27% on the same day. Bitcoin dropped 2.5% to around $82,300, explicitly linked by Reuters to liquidity concerns arising from the potential for a reduced Federal Reserve balance sheet.

Gold and silver did not act as stable insurance. They declined sharply amid a hawkish liquidity shock and a wave of leverage unwinds. Bitcoin followed suit.

By February 9, gold had rebounded to around $5,064 as the dollar weakened and markets adjusted for anticipated rate cuts. However, the January 30 data revealed something significant: in 2026, Bitcoin continues to function as a liquidity indicator during policy-tightening shocks, rather than as a safeguard against fiat debasement.

Related Reading

Gold just erased $5.5 trillion in value and Bitcoin bulls see one huge opening ahead

The extraordinary market fluctuations in gold could open a new chapter for Bitcoin within the hard money narrative.

Jan 30, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

This distinction is crucial for the rotation theory. If the main driver of capital into gold is concerns about sovereignty and debt sustainability, Bitcoin could theoretically benefit.

However, if the transmission mechanism involves tighter policies or margin calls, Bitcoin behaves more like risk-on leverage than as collateral.

Market forecasts remain optimistic about gold. UBS targets prices above $6,200 per ounce later in 2026, JPMorgan at $6,300, and Deutsche Bank at $6,000. However, these projections assume that gold will benefit from both debasement fears and safe-haven demand during times of stress.

Bitcoin has shown the former but not the latter.

When the debasement trade could favor Bitcoin

The environment that supports Bitcoin is one where markets anticipate easier policies, balance sheet expansion, and a weaker dollar. These conditions enhance assets that thrive on abundant liquidity.

Reuters commentary explicitly connects Bitcoin and gold to balance sheet expansion hedging, and the World Gold Council notes that declining yields, a weakening dollar, safe-haven demand, and momentum supported the 2025 ETF inflows.

For Bitcoin to succeed rather than merely follow, two conditions must be met: sustained spot ETF inflows rather than reflexive rebounds, and reduced leverage reflexivity that can exacerbate sell-offs during liquidity shocks.

Recent months have demonstrated the opposite. Outflows have been consistent, and Bitcoin’s correlation with risk assets remains elevated during periods of stress.

A straightforward hypothetical illustrates the stakes: if Bitcoin captured 1% of global gold ETF assets under management in a debasement-driven environment, that would represent approximately $5.6 billion in additional buying, about 80,000 BTC at $70,000, equivalent to 6% of current US spot ETF holdings.

This is not an insignificant amount. However, it necessitates a catalyst strong enough to alter allocator behavior, not just to align narratives.

What to watch

The dollar and real-rate expectations will influence the next phase. The direction of the DXY, explicit signals regarding balance sheet policy, and the pace of any Federal Reserve rate cuts will determine whether the environment favors hard assets broadly or just those with established safe-haven credibility.

The January 30 shock highlighted sensitivity to liquidity conditions. A shift towards easier policies could change the narrative.

ETF flows provide the clearest indication of allocator intent. Comparing weekly inflows into gold ETFs with daily flows into US spot Bitcoin ETFs will reveal whether capital views Bitcoin as an alternative store of value or as a high-beta macro trade.

China’s ongoing gold accumulation, spanning 15 consecutive months of central bank purchases, supports its sovereignty bid for hard collateral and establishes a baseline for how nation-states are positioning themselves.

Gold forecasts clustering around $6,000 to $6,300 per ounce create a testable scenario: if gold consolidates and then accelerates towards those targets, will Bitcoin follow or diverge?

The outcome will indicate whether the debasement theory translates into Bitcoin demand or if institutional flows remain tied to traditional hard assets with greater liquidity and regulatory clarity.

Chart illustrates that gold, silver, and Bitcoin all experienced sell-offs on January 30 during a liquidity shock, with gold recovering to above $5,000 by February 9 while Bitcoin remained lower, indicating different recovery patterns.

The underlying question

Gold’s $555 billion demand year was not driven by traders anticipating inflation prints. It involved central banks, sovereign wealth funds, and institutional allocators repositioning for a landscape where debt levels, currency stability, and geopolitical fragmentation are more significant than short-term growth cycles.

Bitcoin’s case relies on the same macro logic, but its behavior during the January 30 shock and the preceding months of ETF outflows suggest that allocators still perceive it as a liquidity-sensitive asset rather than a liability-free reserve.

The rotation analysis demonstrates what is feasible if that perception changes.

A 1% reallocation from gold ETF assets could impact markets. However, possibility does not equate to probability, and current flows are moving in the opposite direction.

Bitcoin does not require gold to fail. It needs a catalyst that persuades the same institutions responsible for gold’s record year that Bitcoin belongs in the strategic collateral category, not the speculative beta sleeve. Thus far, that catalyst has yet to materialize.

The post Why Bitcoin ETFs bleed billions while Gold makes 53 new all-time highs with $559B in demand appeared first on CryptoSlate.