Data Suggests Institutions May Be Accumulating Bitcoin Amid Crash, Relying on Market‑Neutral Leverage

• Institutions accumulated BTC and ETH during the sell‑off, not exited positions.

• Coinbase premium spikes signaled aggressive U.S. buying while global prices fell.

• Bitcoin open interest reached $34.9 billion; basis trades and market‑neutral leverage dominated.

Are institutions buying Bitcoin and Ethereum during the crash? COINOTAG reports institutional accumulation on dips — read evidence and data-driven insights now.

Published: 13 October 2025 | Updated: 13 October 2025 — Author: COINOTAG

Are institutions buying Bitcoin and Ethereum during the crash?

Yes — institutions are buying Bitcoin and Ethereum during the crash. Data from exchanges and market-data providers shows U.S. players accumulated both BTC and ETH as prices plunged on 10 October, using structured, risk-managed strategies rather than retail-style directional bets.

How are institutions using leverage to trade BTC and ETH?

Institutional activity centers on market‑neutral strategies, primarily basis trades and short-term futures positions. Bitcoin Open Interest hit $34.9 billion across exchanges, with roughly one‑third on CME, indicating heavy participation from hedge funds and asset managers. Funding rates remained stable, suggesting limited directional leverage and more emphasis on yield from spread capture. Sources referenced: CryptoQuant, CME, Coinbase, TradingView.

Institutional buyers step in as BTC crashes

On 10 October, Bitcoin dropped from approximately $123,000 to $110,000 in a sharp one‑day move. Rather than exiting, many institutional desks increased allocations to BTC. Exchange-level data showed a pronounced Coinbase premium as U.S.-based buying outpaced liquidity on offshore venues. CryptoQuant data and exchange reports indicate the premium reflected concentrated U.S. demand during the liquidation and immediate rebound.

Source: CryptoQuant

The Coinbase Premium Index, which tracks price differences between U.S.-based Coinbase and global exchange Binance, surged to its highest level since March 2024. This spike coincided with the one‑day liquidation and is consistent with large U.S. players stepping in to accumulate BTC while other market participants reduced exposure.

The market has Ethereum’s back, too

Ethereum experienced an even more pronounced institutional response. On 10 October, the ETH Coinbase premium gap reached 6.0 — the highest level recorded in 2025 — signaling concentrated U.S. demand for ETH during the sell‑off. Market-data providers reported that institutional flow patterns for ETH mirrored those for BTC, with accumulation centered on Coinbase.

Source: CryptoQuant

ETH outperformed BTC in the immediate recovery. The ETH/BTC pair climbed from roughly 0.033 on 11 October to near 0.036 by 13 October, indicating a stronger post‑liquidation bounce for Ethereum. TradingView charts confirmed the relative outperformance.

Source: TradingView

A new kind of leverage is taking over BTC

Open interest across exchanges rose to $34.9 billion, with roughly one‑third on CME. That distribution underscores institutional participation beyond retail futures platforms. The composition of that open interest is important: market participants reported an increase in basis trades and short-term spread strategies designed to capture funding and term premia, rather than high-leverage directional positions.

Source: CryptoQuant

These institutional positions are typically structured to generate steady returns and manage downside risk. Funding rates remained muted during the rebound, supporting the interpretation that leverage was used conservatively. As one institutional trader speaking on condition of anonymity told COINOTAG: “We’re using spreads and basis strategies to harvest predictable returns, not to chase directional gamma.”

Source: CryptoQuant

Overall, the data indicate institutions treated the crash as a buying window and used leverage in a measured way to enhance returns rather than to amplify directional risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did U.S. institutions cause the October 10th liquidation?

The liquidation on 10 October was driven by rapid price moves and short-term liquidity stress across venues. U.S. institutions did not cause the initial sell‑off; rather, data shows they used the resulting dislocation to accumulate BTC and ETH on platforms like Coinbase. (Sources: CryptoQuant, exchange reports.)

How can investors tell institutional accumulation from retail buying?

Institutional accumulation often shows up as sustained Coinbase premiums, rising open interest on regulated venues (e.g., CME), and an increase in market‑neutral positions like basis trades. These signals differ from volatile, high‑leverage retail activity that pushes funding rates and funding‑driven liquidations.

Key Takeaways

• Institutions bought the dip: U.S. hedge funds and asset managers increased BTC and ETH exposure during the October sell‑off, as shown by Coinbase premium spikes and exchange flow data.
• Leverage is different now: Growth in open interest reflects market‑neutral strategies and basis trades rather than directional retail leverage.
• ETH outperformed BTC: Ethereum’s Coinbase premium and ETH/BTC rebound indicate stronger post‑liquidation performance for ETH between 11–13 October.

Conclusion

COINOTAG analysis of exchange and market‑data signals shows that institutions used the October crash to accumulate Bitcoin and Ethereum, favoring market‑neutral and spread strategies over high‑risk directional bets. Official data points include a $34.9 billion Bitcoin open interest figure and a 6.0 ETH Coinbase premium on 10 October (sources: CryptoQuant, CME, Coinbase, TradingView). Institutional flows shifted the narrative from panic to tactical buying — readers should monitor premium indices and regulated open interest for continued evidence of institutional engagement.