Bitcoin traded around $68,780 on Tuesday as US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded their strongest daily inflow in over a month.
The funds added a total of $471 million on April 6, according to SoSoValue data, marking the largest inflow since February 25 and the sixth-largest daily total this year. This figure remains below the peak throughput regime of January, when several trading days exceeded $700 million.
These high inflows come as Bitcoin continues to languish below $70,000, with weak spot demand and weak distribution from large holders capping the upside. ETFs are increasingly offsetting this pressure, acting as the primary source of marginal buying.
Macro signals offer limited direction. Markets are pricing in a 98% chance that the Federal Reserve will keep rates steady at its April meeting, according to Polymarket data, with minimal expectations for cuts or hikes in the near term.
The relationship between Bitcoin and global monetary policy may be changing, with ETFs changing not only the scale of demand, but also its timing.
A recent report from Binance Research reveals that the correlation between Bitcoin and its Global Easing Breadth Index, which tracks 41 central banks, has become significantly negative since 2024, the same year that US spot ETFs were approved. Before this, Bitcoin tended to follow easing cycles with a lag. This relationship has now been reversed, with an inverse effect almost three times stronger.
This change reflects who sets the marginal price. Retail has already reacted to the macro situation after the fact. Institutional flows driven by ETFs are more forward-looking and positioned ahead of expected policy measures.
“BTC may have moved from a lagging macro receiver to a leading price,” Binance Research wrote.
ETF inflows continue to absorb supply and anchor prices, which could explain the continued daily inflow.
If what Binance Research is proposing is valid, bitcoin could continue to be traded as a forward-looking asset, with central bank prices pivoting before traditional markets rather than reacting to them after the fact.
