# Ethereum ETFs shed $110.6 million as outflows return Author: KriptoMeta Editorial Team Language: English Published: 2026-10-23T09:46:28+03:00 Updated: 2026-10-23T09:46:28+03:00 ![A gloved hand removing a purple glass Ethereum module from a metal array, representing Ethereum fund outflows](https://kriptometa.com/uploads/ethereum-etf-lerinden-milyon-dolar-cikti-00a35e99d69f_article.webp) ## Key takeaways - Investors withdrew $75.5 million from BlackRock’s ETHA, while its staking fund ETHB recorded $17.2 million in outflows. - Fidelity’s FETH received $2.4 million in net inflows; investors withdrew $20.3 million across Grayscale’s two funds. - The figures cover the October 22 US session. Fund flows differ from exchange trading volume and price-driven changes in asset values. US-listed Ethereum funds returned to net outflows after one positive session. Farside’s October 22 table shows $110.6 million leaving the funds, taking net withdrawals for the week’s first four trading days to $225.1 million. US-listed Ethereum [exchange-traded funds](https://kriptometa.com/en/glossary/etf) recorded $110.6 million in net outflows on Thursday, October 22. [Farside Investors’ daily table](https://farside.co.uk/eth/) shows withdrawals from four of the 11 funds, with Fidelity’s FETH the only fund recording a net inflow. Six funds reported zero net flows. BlackRock’s ETHA had the largest outflow at $75.5 million. Investors also withdrew $17.2 million from the company’s staking fund, ETHB. Combined outflows from the two BlackRock funds reached $92.7 million. ## Fidelity’s inflow could not offset four funds’ withdrawals Investors withdrew $9.6 million from Grayscale’s ETHE, while its other fund, trading under the ticker ETH, recorded a $10.7 million outflow. Withdrawals across the four funds totaled $113 million. FETH attracted $2.4 million, leaving a net outflow of $110.6 million for the session. October 22, 2026 US session — Farside data in US$ millions; negative figures indicate outflows | Fund | Net flow | |---|---| | BlackRock ETHA | −75.5 | | BlackRock ETHB | −17.2 | | Fidelity FETH | +2.4 | | Grayscale ETHE | −9.6 | | Grayscale ETH | −10.7 | | ETHW, TETH, ETHV, QETH, EZET, MSSE | 0.0 each | | Total | −110.6 | Farside published the same breakdown and total in [its October 23 post on X](https://x.com/FarsideUK/status/2113477199521108031). The post appeared the following morning in Turkey; the figures refer to the October 22 US session. [Farside’s October 22 Ethereum ETF flow table](https://x.com/FarsideUK/status/2113477199521108031) ## Four trading days bring $225.1 million in net outflows Investors withdrew a net $103.3 million on October 19 and $26.1 million on October 20. An inflow of $14.9 million on October 21 interrupted a five-session withdrawal streak that [began on October 14](https://kriptometa.com/en/ethereum-etfs-189-million-outflows-two-days). Outflows resumed on Thursday. Adding the October 19–22 rows in [Farside’s historical table](https://farside.co.uk/ethereum-etf-flow-all-data/) gives net outflows of $225.1 million for the first four trading days of the week. The calculation uses the table’s figures rounded to one decimal place. Friday’s flows were not yet in the table, so the amount is not a completed weekly total. Farside’s table shows cumulative net inflows of about $12.74 billion from the funds’ inception through October 22. The figure is the value contributed for share creations minus the value returned through redemptions. The [current market value of the funds’ holdings](https://kriptometa.com/en/glossary/assets-under-management) is calculated separately. ## How ETHA and ETHB differ BlackRock’s [ETHA product page](https://www.ishares.com/us/products/337614/fund) says the fund seeks to track ether’s price. [ETHB](https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/348532/ishares-staked-ethereum-trust-etf) also seeks rewards by staking part of its ether holdings. Investors can buy either product through a traditional brokerage account without holding ether in their own wallets. Validators [stake ether](https://kriptometa.com/en/glossary/staking) to help secure the network and validate transactions, locking the assets while they participate. ETHB’s disclosures warn that staking entry and exit queues can prevent the fund from accessing staked ether immediately. Rewards are not guaranteed, and staking can result in losses. In its [March 25, 2026 staking explainer, lasting about 46 seconds](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4RDDxV-SOuw), iShares describes locking ether, network security and potential rewards. The March recording accompanies the October 22 flow data as background on how staking works. BlackRock reported net assets of about $7.85 billion for ETHA and $1.05 billion for ETHB on October 22. Their net asset values per share fell 4.43% and 4.42%, respectively, that day. The percentages measure changes in a share’s value, while Farside’s figures track money entering or leaving the funds. ## Fund outflows are different from trading volume An investor selling an existing ETF share transfers it to the buyer; the fund’s share count need not change with that trade. As the [Investment Company Institute explains](https://www.ici.org/faqs/faqs_etfs), authorized participants create large blocks of shares in exchange for assets or cash under agreements with the fund. They return those blocks to the fund when redeeming them. Trading existing shares between investors is a separate transaction. For both BlackRock products, authorized participants that have signed agreements with the fund create and redeem large blocks of shares. Retail investors cannot redeem their shares directly with the funds. [Net flows track transactions with the fund](https://kriptometa.com/en/how-to-read-bitcoin-etf-flows), while exchange volume records existing shares changing hands throughout the session. Farside’s automated table can be revised. A daily net outflow alone does not establish why investors sold, where ether’s price will go, or whether an equal amount was sold immediately in the spot market. ETHA and ETHB carry cryptoasset risk; BlackRock states that neither product is registered under the US Investment Company Act of 1940.