ON-CHAIN METRIC
Assets Under Management
What the funds hold, split into money actually paid in and gain added on top.
Open the ETF dashboard
What gets quoted everywhere is the worth of everything these funds are sitting on. A substantial slice of that worth was never contributed by anybody: it is what price has added on top of the money that was.
Separating the two answers a question the headline figure cannot. How much capital has actually been committed is a different and considerably more durable fact than what that capital happens to be worth on any given afternoon, and only one of the two reflects a decision anybody made.
What it actually measures
The split moves with price while the paid-in half does not move at all. A rising total during an advance can happen with no new money having arrived, which is a routine occurrence rather than an unusual one.
The paid-in figure is much the harder of the two numbers. It reflects decisions people actually made and money they actually parted with, and it does not evaporate the moment price falls.
A record total is a record for the combination of the two. It says they have never been larger together and says nothing at all about which of them did the work of getting there.
The ratio between the halves is worth watching in its own right. A complex where most of the value is gain is a complex whose headline figure is unusually sensitive to price.
A record total can be reached without anyone buying anything
Total value rising is reported as demand, and quite often it is nothing of the kind. A stable set of holdings in a rising market produces a rising total on its own.
The split is what makes that visible immediately. Watching the paid-in line rather than the total is the difference between tracking commitment and tracking the price of what was already committed.
What it does not tell you
It covers the spot funds only, which is one slice of institutional exposure rather than the whole of it, and the slice that happens to report most clearly.
Paid-in capital is inferred from reported flows, so it inherits their reporting lag and revisions.
It cannot speak to who the holders are or how long they intend to stay, and both would change what the figure implies.
The gain is unrealised throughout. Nothing on this chart has been crystallised by anybody.
How to read it
At record. The combination of paid-in capital and gain has never been larger.
Below peak. The total sits under its previous high.
Find Assets Under Management on the ETF dashboard, alongside Total Flow, Unrealised P&L and Asset Held.
Common questions
Why split the total at all?
Because a large part of it is usually gain rather than money anyone contributed. How much capital was committed is a different and more durable fact than what that capital is worth today.
Can the total rise with no new money?
It can, and it often does. A stable set of holdings in a rising market produces a rising total by itself, with nobody having bought anything.
Which of the two is the harder number?
The money paid in. It reflects decisions people actually made and it does not evaporate when price falls, which is more than can be said for the other half.
Does a record total mean record demand?
No. It means the two components together have never been larger, and it cannot speak to which of them did the work of getting there.
How complete is the coverage?
It covers the spot funds and nothing besides, which is one slice of institutional exposure rather than the whole of it. Other routes to the same position leave no mark here.
ON-CHAIN METRIC
Assets Under Management
What the funds hold, split into money actually paid in and gain added on top.
Open the ETF dashboard
What gets quoted everywhere is the worth of everything these funds are sitting on. A substantial slice of that worth was never contributed by anybody: it is what price has added on top of the money that was.
Separating the two answers a question the headline figure cannot. How much capital has actually been committed is a different and considerably more durable fact than what that capital happens to be worth on any given afternoon, and only one of the two reflects a decision anybody made.
What it actually measures
The split moves with price while the paid-in half does not move at all. A rising total during an advance can happen with no new money having arrived, which is a routine occurrence rather than an unusual one.
The paid-in figure is much the harder of the two numbers. It reflects decisions people actually made and money they actually parted with, and it does not evaporate the moment price falls.
A record total is a record for the combination of the two. It says they have never been larger together and says nothing at all about which of them did the work of getting there.
The ratio between the halves is worth watching in its own right. A complex where most of the value is gain is a complex whose headline figure is unusually sensitive to price.
A record total can be reached without anyone buying anything
Total value rising is reported as demand, and quite often it is nothing of the kind. A stable set of holdings in a rising market produces a rising total on its own.
The split is what makes that visible immediately. Watching the paid-in line rather than the total is the difference between tracking commitment and tracking the price of what was already committed.
What it does not tell you
It covers the spot funds only, which is one slice of institutional exposure rather than the whole of it, and the slice that happens to report most clearly.
Paid-in capital is inferred from reported flows, so it inherits their reporting lag and revisions.
It cannot speak to who the holders are or how long they intend to stay, and both would change what the figure implies.
The gain is unrealised throughout. Nothing on this chart has been crystallised by anybody.
How to read it
At record. The combination of paid-in capital and gain has never been larger.
Below peak. The total sits under its previous high.
Find Assets Under Management on the ETF dashboard, alongside Total Flow, Unrealised P&L and Asset Held.
Common questions
Why split the total at all?
Because a large part of it is usually gain rather than money anyone contributed. How much capital was committed is a different and more durable fact than what that capital is worth today.
Can the total rise with no new money?
It can, and it often does. A stable set of holdings in a rising market produces a rising total by itself, with nobody having bought anything.
Which of the two is the harder number?
The money paid in. It reflects decisions people actually made and it does not evaporate when price falls, which is more than can be said for the other half.
Does a record total mean record demand?
No. It means the two components together have never been larger, and it cannot speak to which of them did the work of getting there.
How complete is the coverage?
It covers the spot funds and nothing besides, which is one slice of institutional exposure rather than the whole of it. Other routes to the same position leave no mark here.