US Bitcoin ETFs Lose $201M as BlackRock Withdrawals Extend the Slump

US-listed spot Bitcoin funds recorded another difficult session on Monday, November 9. The updated Farside Investors flow table shows $201.0 million in net outflows across the group, extending a three-session losing streak. The important detail is that the negative total was not evenly spread across issuers: BlackRock’s IBIT recorded $213.2 million leaving, while Morgan Stanley’s MSBT attracted $22.1 million.
TL;DR: Spot Bitcoin ETFs lost a net $201.0 million on November 9, following $430.2 million on November 5 and $411.9 million on November 6. BlackRock drove Monday’s withdrawals, while one smaller fund reported inflows. The figures measure fund creations and redemptions, not the intentions of every Bitcoin investor.
Three sessions that add up to more than $1 billion
The latest fully reported Farside figures put the consecutive negative sessions at roughly $1.04 billion in aggregate. Thursday’s $430.2 million loss was followed by Friday’s $411.9 million and then Monday’s $201.0 million. That progression shows persistent selling pressure, although Monday’s net outflow was smaller than either of the previous two sessions.
Our previous report on Friday’s fund activity documented a similar pattern of issuer concentration. Going back further, the November 2 breakdown shows why it is worth examining individual ETF lines rather than reading the aggregate as a single institutional vote.
On November 9, ARK Invest and 21Shares’ ARKB showed a $9.9 million outflow. The positive contribution from MSBT offset part of the selling elsewhere. Several other funds showed no daily net creation or redemption. That does not mean no shares changed hands on exchanges; secondary-market trading and flows into or out of a fund’s underlying Bitcoin exposure are different measures.
Why IBIT carries so much of the story
BlackRock’s fund is a large and closely watched route into Bitcoin for investors using traditional brokerage and portfolio systems. Its persistent redemptions can therefore affect the tone of market commentary disproportionately. But the identity of an ETF’s end investors is not published in a daily flow table, and a withdrawal cannot automatically be attributed to hedge funds, pensions or retail holders.
The distinction between net flows and assets under management matters as well. A fund’s reported assets can fall when Bitcoin’s price drops even without corresponding redemptions. Conversely, share creations can occur on a day when the asset price weakens. Analysts who blend these concepts can make demand appear stronger or weaker than it actually was.
What would signal a more durable turn?
The next test is whether the large-issuer selling eases over several completed reporting sessions. One positive day would interrupt the streak but would not, by itself, demonstrate that buyers have regained control. It is also worth watching whether inflows broaden across products or remain confined to a single issuer.
These numbers are current through the November 9 US trading session, not an estimate of November 10 while trading is still under way. A better measure of sentiment combines a completed ETF flow series with spot volume, derivatives positioning and the changing rates outlook. For now, the latest evidence is that listed-fund demand remains weak even as the scale of net redemptions has moderated from last week’s peaks.
Written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.