On February 13, 2026, Beijing time, Bitcoin hovered around $68,000 and Ethereum around $2,000, exhibiting narrow fluctuations that appeared calm on the surface, while underneath, the funding landscape underwent intense restructuring: on one hand, BTC and ETH ETFs recorded large net outflows in the same trading day, while SOL ETF defied the trend and attracted funds; the open interest in options surged, intertwining the leverage bets of whales with rumors of mergers from Asian financial institutions. Behind the seemingly stable candlestick patterns lies the result of a multi-faceted game involving spot trading, ETFs, options, and merger capital, raising a suspenseful question — who is propping up the coin price, keeping the market in a high-range fluctuation, rather than letting it plunge directly?
ETF Dual-Line Bloodletting: The Price Paradox at High Levels
● Fund Outflow and Price Stagnation: According to highly reliable data, on February 13, Bitcoin ETFs had a single-day net outflow of 5,042 BTC, while Ethereum ETFs saw a net outflow of 73,075 ETH, which converted to fiat currency, represents a considerable amount. However, that day, the spot prices only fluctuated slightly near $68,000 for BTC and $2,000 for ETH, with no dramatic drops matching the fund outflow, indicating a clear misalignment between funding and pricing.
● Clash of Traditional Expectations and Reality: In traditional logic, ETFs serve as important channels for compliant funds; if there are continuous large net outflows, it is usually interpreted as a phase of institutional withdrawal, exerting sustained selling pressure on the price, often leading the market to follow suit into a trend decline. However, BTC continues to hold steadfastly near the $68,000 mark in a sideways consolidation, and ETH also stabilizes around the $2,000 milestone. This combination of high-level consolidation with ETF "bloodletting" makes the simple causal relationship of "funds leaving lead to price dropping" seem inadequate.
● Structural Rebalancing in Consolidation Range: On-chain data service provider glassnode notes that Bitcoin is forming a new consolidation range between $65,000 and $73,000, indicating more chips are being exchanged and redistributed at high levels. From this perspective, the current outflows from ETFs can be interpreted not as a wholesale retreat, but as a structural rebalancing of different channels and types of funds: some exiting via ETFs, while others may be shifting to the OTC market, spot, or other mediums, completing the chip transfer within the range rather than a uniform direction of escape.
Options Prepare for Rain: Open Interest Jumps from the 20s to 40s
● OI Surge Releases Dual Signals: According to single-source data, the open interest in Bitcoin options has recently jumped from approximately 255,000 contracts to 452,000 contracts, nearly doubling. This change typically indicates that two types of demand are being amplified simultaneously: institutions and large players are expanding hedging operations at high levels by buying protective put options and adjusting their portfolio positions to manage downside risk; meanwhile, speculative funds are leveraging options to position themselves ahead of a volatility expansion.
● Meaning of Rising Defensive Allocations: From the overall position structure and market sentiment, the options market is clearly tilting toward more defensive allocations, with more funds willing to pay a premium for scenarios of "high-level fluctuations or even phase adjustments." This tendency suggests that, while the price is being propped up, most participants do not genuinely believe that the current rise can continue without risk, but rather are buying insurance against potential volatility upgrades, viewing hedging costs as necessary expenses to maintain risk exposure.
● Price Resilience and Risk Transfer: The divergence between resilient spot prices and surging demand for options hedging sketches out a new market structure — prices being propped up, with risks being transferred to derivatives. ETF holders and some spot participants pass down downside risks to options sellers and high-leverage speculators, allowing the market to remain in high-range fluctuations, while the true tail risks have gradually concentrated on the options and other derivatives side.
Whale All-In and Asian Giants' Mergers on the Same Canvas
● Emotional Reflection of Whale Leverage Bets: According to a single source, a whale has mobilized approximately $2 million in funds, leveraging to bet heavily on ETH and SOL. Such single-source cases cannot represent the entire sphere but can serve as a microcosm of high-risk betting sentiment: even as prices are already in historically high ranges, some funds choose to leverage and go all-in on growth assets, betting on the continuation of trend inertia and a resurgence in short-term sentiment rather than a conservative balance of returns and risks.
● Merger Rumors Reflect Long-Term Trajectories: In contrast to this short-term leverage increase, rumors of SBI's intention to acquire a majority stake in Coinhako also emerged in the narrative on February 13. This merger lacks key details regarding amounts and timelines but directionally indicates that large Asian financial institutions are seeking long-term, compliant layouts in the crypto exchange track. This stands in stark contrast to whale bets on single asset price trends — the former aims for business and license premiums over the next few years, rather than trend swings in weeks or months.
● Intertwining Multi-Layer Narratives: On one side, regional financial giants are entering or expanding their crypto business landscape through mergers, attempting to establish compliant infrastructure and channel control in the Asian market; on the other side, retail investors and whales are engaging in high-leverage bets in the secondary market, amplifying short-term volatility on ETH, SOL, and other varieties. Institutional mergers provide the industry narrative with a backdrop of "long-term funds entering," while leveraged trading continually amplifies short-term price elasticity. The interplay of both makes it difficult for the market to easily turn bearish, while at any moment, vulnerabilities in the leverage chain could lead to sharp fluctuations.
SOL Attracts Funds Against the Trend: Fund Rotation of Alternative Chains
● Distinct Contrast of ETF Flows: Amid the backdrop of large-scale net outflows from BTC and ETH ETFs on the same day, Solana ETF recorded a net inflow of approximately 19,170 SOL (medium confidence). Relative to the massive market caps of Bitcoin and Ethereum, this value does not seem astonishing, but it forms a striking contrast in direction: mainstream assets are being redeemed while SOL is quietly allocated, indicating that funds are making starkly opposing choices regarding different assets simultaneously.
● Signals of Repricing for Alternative L1: Some market analysts point out that the fund inflow into the SOL ETF may reflect that the market is repricing alternative L1 assets. With Bitcoin and Ethereum viewed as "index-like" allocations, some higher-risk capital is beginning to look for the next high-growth narrative — whether through the ecological expansion of high-performance public chains or the sensitivity of on-chain applications to throughput and costs, both becoming key references for pricing assets like SOL. This suggests that risk is rotating from assets with the "strongest consensus" towards sectors with the "greatest growth potential."
● Searching for the Next Layer of Growth Story: As BTC and ETH engage in a tug-of-war at high levels, some investors choose to direct their offensive toward SOL and other targets representing the "next layer of growth story." Behind this behavior lies a worry about the diminishing space of mainstream assets and a forward bet on a new round of innovation cycles: if the macro environment and liquidity remain friendly, funds hope to amplify returns on more elastic assets; if the environment worsens, these assets may become experimental grounds that correct faster and release risks more violently.
Inflation Metrics Clash: Macro Narrative Supporting High-Level Fluctuations
● Huge Discrepancies in Inflation Readings: Currently, the official core PCE statistic for the United States remains around 2.7%-2.8%, while estimates from independent institutions fall within the range of 1.48%-1.50%, creating a gap of nearly a full percentage point. Based on historical experience, CPI data typically runs about 0.5 percentage points higher than PCE, indicating a quite intense debate in the market concerning the “real inflation level," with different metrics pointing toward different realities and policy spaces.
● Anti-Inflation Narrative and Price Resilience: Amid this data divergence, a significant portion of funds in the market is betting on the macro narrative of "continuing anti-inflation", meaning that even if official metrics still appear somewhat elevated, actual inflation trends are aligning closer to the 2% target; future monetary policy easing and liquidity recovery are merely a matter of time. For crypto assets, this provides logical support for the current high-level consolidation and reluctance to plunge — as long as future easing expectations remain intact, investors have reason to tolerate inflated valuations, opting for volatility management rather than completely reducing positions in response to uncertainty.
● Different Approaches Hedging the Same Macro Uncertainty: The dispute over inflation data is being hedged by different market participants in entirely different ways: cautious funds are reducing exposure through ETFs and extending durations; more aggressive institutions are utilizing options defenses to strengthen downside protection; high-risk enthusiasts are leveraging on ETH, SOL, and other varieties for speculative gains; while Asian financial institutions are making longer-term bets through acquisitions, licenses, and infrastructure layouts. Macro uncertainty has not vanished but has been segmented into multiple layers, dispersed and redistributed among mergers in the primary market, secondary spots, ETFs, and derivatives.
The Next Act of High-Level Tug-of-War: Who Will Surrender First?
The ongoing bloodletting from ETFs, surging options positions, the counter-trend allocation in SOL, and Asian institutional mergers present a scenario far more complex than just a "simple bull/bear market switch": on one hand, ETF outflows and options defenses indicate that some funds are decelerating and reducing leverage at high levels; on the other hand, allocations toward high-elasticity assets like SOL and whales’ leveraged bets reveal that risk appetite is not truly extinguished. Overall, it appears more like a structural reorganization: chips are moving between different carriers, while risks shift from spot to derivatives, rather than a straightforward downward reversal.
If the macro narrative of "continuing anti-inflation" is ultimately validated by data, and easing expectations materialize, then the current passive or active ETF outflows and options defensive positions might at some point be reinterpreted as a preparation phase for a new round of positioning and accumulation, making a breakout after the high-level consolidation seem entirely reasonable. Conversely, if inflation proves stubborn and policy turns more hawkish, those most pressured first will likely be the currently crowded high-leverage and high-valuation assets, with options and leveraged bulls becoming the first group needing to concede.
In such an environment, a more prudent approach is to recognize the market norm of high-level fluctuations and volatility amplification in the short term, rather than casually betting on one-sided trends; from a mid- to long-term perspective, it is more worthwhile to continue tracking institutional mergers, compliance progress, and the evolution of macro paths, rather than focusing on a single whale transaction or the candlestick form of a single trading day. Who will surrender first depends on the trajectory of macro data and which funds can least endure the tests of time and volatility.
Join our community, let’s discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
