US spot crypto ETF flows on March 3, 2026 totaled approximately $223.69 million in net inflows, with Bitcoin ETFs adding $225.20 million and Ethereum ETFs recording the only outflow at negative $10.80 million across the tracked products.
Bitcoin spot ETFs: net positive 3,270 BTC, worth $225.20 million. Ethereum spot ETFs: net negative 5,329 ETH, worth negative $10.80 million. Solana spot ETFs: positive 8,084 SOL, worth $700,000. XRP spot ETFs: positive 5.42 million XRP, worth $7.53 million. Hedera spot ETFs: positive 10.92 million HBAR, worth $1.06 million. DOGE, LTC, AVAX, and LINK recorded zero flows.
Total net inflow: approximately $223.69 million.
The day’s headline number is clean. But the internal composition shows meaningful divergence between issuers.
On Bitcoin: BlackRock bought 4,690 BTC worth $322.40 million. Fidelity sold 1,300 BTC worth $89.30 million. Grayscale sold 410 BTC worth $28.20 million. BlackRock’s single-day purchase exceeded the entire net Bitcoin inflow by approximately $97 million. Fidelity and Grayscale outflows partially offset it, producing the $225.20 million net.
On Ethereum: BlackRock bought 20,674 ETH worth $41.90 million. Fidelity sold 32,911 ETH worth $66.70 million. Grayscale bought 6,908 ETH worth $14 million. Fidelity’s ETH redemptions exceeded both BlackRock and Grayscale’s combined purchases, producing the $10.80 million net outflow.
The pattern shows BlackRock and Grayscale both adding to ETH exposure while Fidelity’s clients are redeeming. Whether that reflects Fidelity client reallocation out of ETH specifically or broader portfolio rebalancing is not determinable from flows data alone.
The $10.80 million Ethereum outflow is small in absolute terms but notable given the broader Ethereum data covered this week. The 31.6 million ETH withdrawn from exchanges in February, the 837,200 daily active addresses, and the prior week’s $116.9 million ETF inflow all pointed toward Ethereum accumulation. A single day of net ETF outflow driven primarily by Fidelity redemptions does not reverse that picture. It introduces a data point that the prior week’s uniformly positive reads did not include.
The prior March 3 article covering the larger $521 million total inflow reflects a different data source or methodology than this update. The $521 million figure covered the full day across all products. The $223.69 million figure may reflect a subset of products or a different reporting cutoff time. Both data points are presented as March 3 flows. Readers comparing them should note the methodological difference in what each source includes.
