As Bitcoin (BTC) topped $90,000, the strategy bought 8,178 BTC for $835.6 million, locking in an average of $102,171, which is currently below the surface.
Harvard Management Company reported 6.8 million IBIT shares worth $442.9 million in its Sept. 30 13F filing, three times the amount from the previous quarter and the foundation’s largest U.S.-listed stock holding by value.
Both moves came as funding rates fell into negative territory, unwinding open interest and dumping short-term holders with realized losses. This profile typically indicates a redistribution from weaker hands to stronger balance sheets.
The question is whether that redistribution represents accumulation or merely an institutional knife into a deeper drawdown. Strategy’s total cost basis is approximately $74,433, meaning the company’s overall position remains profitable despite the latest tranche being in the red.
Harvard University’s disclosure covers only U.S.-listed public stocks and certain ETFs, not the entire endowment. Still, the 13F line shows that $50 billion of institutional investors increased their exposure to Bitcoin as the price fell.
These are bets on mean reversion and structural demand, not panic exits.
who sold the dip
Short-term holders, i.e. wallets that acquired the coin in the past 155 days, realized losses in the decline, a pattern that Glassnode flagged as an on-chain capitulation.
Retail cohorts tend to dominate this segment as they buy on the rise, leverage near the ceiling, and liquidate when volatility spikes or margin calls arrive.
Perpetual swap funding rates turned negative during the decline, consistent with long liquidations and deleveraging rather than new short bets. Open interest decreased across major venues, suggesting position exits rather than aggressive directional trades.
The US Spot Bitcoin ETF recorded an outflow of $2.57 billion from November to the 17th, its worst monthly drawdown since its inception.
Outflows concentrate redemption pressure during U.S. market hours, forcing authorized participants to sell spots or unwind hedges, mechanically squeezing prices.
This coincided with Bitcoin falling below $90,000, and the rotation of ETF vehicles by institutional investors coincided with retail wallets realizing losses.
This dual-source sale created conditions for long-term buyers to enter at a lower liquidation price.
accumulated papers
According to Glassnode data, wallets with more than 1,000 BTC added coins as smaller cohorts exited. Wallet heuristics rely on clustering algorithms and labeled addresses rather than KYC IDs, and positions change rapidly, which limits their interpretation.
However, the net flows from short-term holders to long-term holder cohorts are consistent with the early-cycle redistribution pattern observed in previous drawdowns.
Onchain Lens and Lookonchain have flipped flagged wallets associated with the LIBRA spree that bought Solana during the dip and longs labeled as “anti-CZ whales” in Ethereum while holding large XRP exposures.
Although these are traceable movements, the labels themselves are based on blockchain forensics and exchange tag association rather than verified counterparty disclosure.
They provide directional signals consisting of smart money wallets adding altcoin exposure during times of volatility, but the theory may reverse in the next funding or liquidation cascade.
Ki Young Ju, CEO of CryptoQuant, claimed that whales have withdrawn from Bitcoin futures. At the same time, retail accounts for the majority of open interest, which is supported by venue-level data that shows trends in deleveraging.
Open interest has declined and funding has turned negative, but this is consistent with a prolonged unwinding rather than a whale exit per se. Attributing causes of migration to specific cohorts requires inference from aggregated location data that lacks real-time granularity.
The broader issue is the dynamics of derivatives markets being deleveraged as spot buyers absorb supply, which could precede a reversal or a continuation of the downtrend, depending on whether spot demand persists.
bull trap rebuttal
The outflow of spot Bitcoin ETFs removed the structural demand that was absorbing miner issuance, tightening circulating supply for much of 2024 and early 2025.
Retirement accounts, RIAs, and wirehouse platforms are funneling fiat-native funds into Bitcoin via ETFs. When these trends reverse, stable bids are pulled out of the market just as prices are falling.
While Strategy’s $835 million purchase and Harvard’s IBIT allocation represent meaningful size, they won’t offset the $2.57 billion in ETF redemptions if this trend continues into December.
Short-term holder capitulation and whale accumulation explain what happened during the decline, not what happens next. If ETF outflows continue and macro risks increase, liquidation prices could fall further even as sovereigns, corporations and funds add exposure.
Early cycle accumulation and bull traps can appear identical in real time. The difference will play out over several weeks as durable demand either stabilizes prices or proves buyers wrong with another drop.
Strategy’s latest tranche is submerged at an average price of $102,171, and estimates suggest that roughly 40% of the company’s total holdings are trading below cost. However, that number is not documented in the application and should be treated as an imputed comment rather than a disclosed fact.
The company’s total profitability depends on Bitcoin’s ability to recover and sustain above $74,433. Otherwise, accumulation theory becomes a case study in timing risk.
what determines the outcome
13F snapshots and on-chain wallet labels have scope limitations. Harvard’s application includes only U.S. public stocks and certain ETFs, not private positions, offshore allocations or the entire endowment strategy.
Whale wallet clusters rely on grouping addresses and exchanging tags, which can lead to misattribution of activity or missed storage flows. However, if spot demand continues and ETF outflows stabilize, the directional reading of sovereigns, corporates and endowments absorbing float while short-term holders realize losses is compatible with redistribution.
If the ETF redemption is extended to the end of the year and the macro environment worsens, buyers who entered at $90,000 will likely lower their beliefs further.
Given the capital raising strategy, the strategy can decline indefinitely on average, and Harvard operates on a long-term 10-year plan, so quarterly drawdowns don’t make sense.
Individual investors and leveraged traders don’t have that luxury. So the next move will depend on whether institutional spot demand offsets ETF outflows and whether derivatives funding stabilizes or returns to negative territory.
The crash to $90,000 made it clear who will ride out the volatility and who will exit at the first sign of trouble. Whether that redistribution marks a bottom or just a lull depends on next month’s flows, not last week’s snapshot of wallets.
(Tag translation) Bitcoin
