The post Bitcoin, ETFs, and the ‘dual strategy’ analysts are talking about today appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin [BTC] has spent the past year being pulled in two directions. One is Wall Street’s neatly packaged ETFs, the other is back to its roots of “not your keys, not your coins.” And instead of choosing a side, the crowd is choosing to embrace both. In 2025, the real Bitcoin strategy isn’t maximalist or institutional. It’s a split personality that finally makes sense. ETFs vs. self-custody ETFs have become the most convenient doorway into Bitcoin for a growing class of investors who want exposure without the hassles of private keys. Institutional access, deep liquidity, and integration with retirement accounts have turned them into the default entry point. Source: SoSoValue And the numbers back that up. Across 2024 and most of 2025, monthly spot Bitcoin ETF flows were overwhelmingly positive, with multiple months posting $4B to $6B inflows. This is especially during late 2024 and mid-2025. Even total net assets climbed steadily toward the $140B range by July 2025, so institutional allocations are aggressive. ETF analyst Eric Balchunas seems to agree, saying in an X post, “What I don’t understand is why the snobby OG’s were totally fine with crypto exchanges holding your bitcoin and not ETFs? It’s the same outsourced custody concept, except ETFs are waaay cheaper and safer.” For many new investors, that clarity is important. Bitcoin held in an ETF feels familiar and regulated. And that, packaged for the TradFi world, seems to be exactly what a large part of the market wants. However, for long-time Bitcoin users, the appeal has always been sovereignty. That’s why self-custody remains non-negotiable for many OGs, even as ETFs gain mainstream momentum. As Sam Wouters, Director of Marketing at River, put it, “On an exchange you can withdraw to self-custody at any time, that’s not the case with an ETF.” That… The post Bitcoin, ETFs, and the ‘dual strategy’ analysts are talking about today appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin [BTC] has spent the past year being pulled in two directions. One is Wall Street’s neatly packaged ETFs, the other is back to its roots of “not your keys, not your coins.” And instead of choosing a side, the crowd is choosing to embrace both. In 2025, the real Bitcoin strategy isn’t maximalist or institutional. It’s a split personality that finally makes sense. ETFs vs. self-custody ETFs have become the most convenient doorway into Bitcoin for a growing class of investors who want exposure without the hassles of private keys. Institutional access, deep liquidity, and integration with retirement accounts have turned them into the default entry point. Source: SoSoValue And the numbers back that up. Across 2024 and most of 2025, monthly spot Bitcoin ETF flows were overwhelmingly positive, with multiple months posting $4B to $6B inflows. This is especially during late 2024 and mid-2025. Even total net assets climbed steadily toward the $140B range by July 2025, so institutional allocations are aggressive. ETF analyst Eric Balchunas seems to agree, saying in an X post, “What I don’t understand is why the snobby OG’s were totally fine with crypto exchanges holding your bitcoin and not ETFs? It’s the same outsourced custody concept, except ETFs are waaay cheaper and safer.” For many new investors, that clarity is important. Bitcoin held in an ETF feels familiar and regulated. And that, packaged for the TradFi world, seems to be exactly what a large part of the market wants. However, for long-time Bitcoin users, the appeal has always been sovereignty. That’s why self-custody remains non-negotiable for many OGs, even as ETFs gain mainstream momentum. As Sam Wouters, Director of Marketing at River, put it, “On an exchange you can withdraw to self-custody at any time, that’s not the case with an ETF.” That…

Bitcoin, ETFs, and the ‘dual strategy’ analysts are talking about today

2025/12/09 11:13

Bitcoin [BTC] has spent the past year being pulled in two directions. One is Wall Street’s neatly packaged ETFs, the other is back to its roots of “not your keys, not your coins.”

And instead of choosing a side, the crowd is choosing to embrace both.

In 2025, the real Bitcoin strategy isn’t maximalist or institutional. It’s a split personality that finally makes sense.

ETFs vs. self-custody

ETFs have become the most convenient doorway into Bitcoin for a growing class of investors who want exposure without the hassles of private keys.

Institutional access, deep liquidity, and integration with retirement accounts have turned them into the default entry point.

Source: SoSoValue

And the numbers back that up.

Across 2024 and most of 2025, monthly spot Bitcoin ETF flows were overwhelmingly positive, with multiple months posting $4B to $6B inflows. This is especially during late 2024 and mid-2025.

Even total net assets climbed steadily toward the $140B range by July 2025, so institutional allocations are aggressive.

ETF analyst Eric Balchunas seems to agree, saying in an X post,

For many new investors, that clarity is important. Bitcoin held in an ETF feels familiar and regulated. And that, packaged for the TradFi world, seems to be exactly what a large part of the market wants.

However, for long-time Bitcoin users, the appeal has always been sovereignty. That’s why self-custody remains non-negotiable for many OGs, even as ETFs gain mainstream momentum.

As Sam Wouters, Director of Marketing at River, put it,

That freedom of movement is the core of this side of the argument. To them, “snobby OGs love bitcoin as money that creates freedom.”

To them, an ETF is a bird in a cage.

The new middle ground

The custody debate ultimately comes down to one thing: control.

Early Bitcoiners tolerated keeping coins on exchanges because, at any moment, they could pull them out and return to full sovereignty. ETFs don’t offer that. They package Bitcoin but lock away the ability to ever touch it.

That’s why a new dual-strategy is emerging. As Bitcoin maxi Fred Krueger puts it,

Investors today use ETFs for ease and cold wallets for principle. This is a balance that proves that Bitcoin is maturing.

AMBCrypto previously reported that 2025 has already logged 171 negative Bitcoin days, potentially pushing the market into a sideways pattern.

With corporate treasuries now holding over 1 million BTC (more than major exchanges, mind you), this growing base is starting to act as a new structural floor for the asset.

ETFs are a structural part of the Bitcoin market

They add liquidity and give institutions a regulated path to participate without operational complexity. At the same time, self-custody continues to protect Bitcoin’s core promise.

That is open access, user control, and the ability to move value without permission.

These two tracks aren’t competing… as much as they are stabilizing each other.

The balance is helping create a more durable ecosystem. ETF demand brings predictable inflows, while self-custody makes sure that Bitcoin doesn’t drift too far from its original design.

Miners, custodians, exchanges, and asset managers now operate in a shared loop rather than on opposing sides.

The resulting offer is a clearer identity for Bitcoin going forward. BTC will be an asset that can live comfortably inside traditional finance without losing the option to exist outside it.

If anything, the dual structure makes this a market that is growing more flexible, more accessible, and more capable of supporting the next wave of users.

The fact that it comes with no purity tests required, is a huge plus.


Final Thoughts

  • Bitcoin’s future is a place where ETFs and self-custody reinforce each other.
  • With 171 red days and over 1 million BTC held by corporations, the market is stabilizing even with its changing identity.
Next: Bitcoin price enters ‘controlled volatility’ phase – What this means for $90K

Source: https://ambcrypto.com/bitcoin-etfs-and-the-dual-strategy-analysts-are-talking-about-today/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The U.S. OCC has warned Wall Street about the "de-banking" of industries such as digital assets, calling such practices "illegal."

The U.S. OCC has warned Wall Street about the "de-banking" of industries such as digital assets, calling such practices "illegal."

PANews reported on December 11th, citing CoinDesk, that President Trump's actions against the "debanking" of controversial industries such as digital assets have prompted the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to release a new report. The report further confirms past practices and warns that banks suspected of involvement could face penalties. This brief OCC report reviewed nine of the largest national banks in the United States, concluding that "between 2020 and 2023, these banks developed public and private policies that restricted certain industries from accessing banking services, including requiring escalating reviews and approvals before providing financial services." The report states that some large banks set higher barriers to entry for controversial or environmentally sensitive businesses, or activities that contradict the banks' own values. Financial giants such as JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citigroup are highlighted, with links to their past public policies, particularly those concerning environmental issues. The report states, "The OCC intends to pursue accountability for any illegal 'debanking' activities by these banks, including referring related cases to the Attorney General." However, it remains unclear which specific laws these activities may have violated.
Share
PANews2025/12/11 09:04