U.S. Bitcoin and Ether ETFs have recorded $530.1 million in combined net outflows on Nov. 5, as AMINA Banks derivatives chief has pointed to renewed fund buying as the key to sustaining crypto gains into 2027.
Andreja Cobeljic, head of derivatives trading at AMINA Bank, told crypto.news that ETF flows and corporate Bitcoin purchases offer the clearest signals of institutional adoption, while futures activity can be driven by trades that do not depend on prices rising.
His comments describe what could support another rally, with the latest fund data showing investors withdrawing money after a brief return to buying.
Bitcoin ETF outflows erase a brief recovery
According to Farside Investors‘ Bitcoin data, U.S. spot funds lost $430.2 million on Nov. 5, reversing a $74.6 million inflow the previous day. Fidelity’s FBTC led withdrawals with $199.9 million, while BlackRocks IBIT lost $105 million.
The reversal followed a particularly uneven recovery. Fidelity had attracted $236.7 million on Nov. 4, even as BlackRock recorded $201.2 million in withdrawals. Positive flows across the category therefore masked selling at its largest fund.
Across the five sessions from Oct. 30 through Nov. 5, Bitcoin ETFs recorded approximately $1.51 billion in net withdrawals, calculated from Farsides daily totals.
Ether funds followed a similar pattern. Farside‘s Ethereum table showed $99.9 million leaving on Nov. 5 after $53 million entered on Nov. 4. BlackRock’s ETHA accounted for $75.2 million of the latest withdrawals, with another $22 million leaving ETHB.
Ether ETF buying is Cobeljics preferred signal
Asked which indicators would convince him institutional demand could continue into 2027, Cobeljic singled out Ether flows.
“Simply put, ETH flows,” he said.
He expects sustained crypto outperformance to depend on money rotating from assets such as gold and artificial intelligence equities. In his view, ETF subscriptions offer the most visible evidence of that rotation because institutional allocators prefer funds to holding cryptocurrencies directly.
“Yet the market is now large enough that it requires institutional-scale capital flows to grow meaningfully — retail alone cannot move the needle.”
Recent Ethereum market conditions have been weaker. During the Nov. 6 selloff, Ether traded around $2,220, down approximately 8.3% over 24 hours, while Bitcoin fell roughly 6.1% to $75,500.
Ethereums tracked derivatives open interest had fallen to around $11.4 billion from nearly $16 billion in late September, according to CryptoQuant data cited in that coverage.
Futures activity does not necessarily signal bullish demand
In Cobeljics assessment, futures positioning needs a different reading from ETF subscriptions or treasury purchases.
“When futures positioning is genuinely bullish and directional, the basis expands,” he said. “Recently, the basis has remained very low even on rallies.”
Basis describes the gap between futures and spot prices. Cobeljic interpreted the subdued premium as evidence that much of the activity involved basis trades and arbitrage, instead of outright bets on higher prices.
He characterized futures exposure as shorter term and vulnerable to frequent stops. A substantial part of the market, he said, pursues returns from pricing differences without taking a directional view.
Leverage has recently produced substantial losses. A Nov. 5 market snapshot recorded $954.38 million in long liquidations against $127.30 million in shorts, taking total forced closures to $1.08 billion.
Institutions are paying for protection
Cobeljic said rising U.S. long-term yields, dollar strength and election uncertainty had prompted deleveraging and more demand for protection.
In his assessment, Bitcoin and Ether options skew had moved toward puts, reversing the historical preference for calls. Puts can provide protection against falling prices, while calls give buyers exposure to potential gains.
He sees the appetite for hedging as a possible foundation for recovery.
“Once the existing investor base is well protected, the asymmetry for a move higher improves considerably.”
Corporate purchases occupy a different category in his framework. He described them as long-term treasury decisions, typically one-directional and less sensitive to price.
Venture funding, meanwhile, signals investment in innovation and carries a separate risk profile, Cobeljic said. He does not view it as having the same effect on cryptocurrency prices as ETF flows and corporate purchases.