Bitcoin’s Coinbase Premium Stays Negative for 51 Days
CoinGlass data showed Coinbase’s Bitcoin price below its Binance comparison for 51 consecutive days, starting Sept. 23. The latest reported reading was −0.10%. That points to relative weakness in the exchange-price comparison, but does not prove US institutions were selling.
- The negative streak began Sept. 23 and lasted 51 days.
- ETF flows and derivatives sent separate, mixed signals.
- The premium does not show who traded or why.
What the Coinbase premium measures
CoinGlass calculates the Coinbase Premium Index by comparing Bitcoin’s price on Coinbase’s BTC-USD market with its price on Binance’s BTC-USDT market. A negative reading means Bitcoin is priced lower on Coinbase in that comparison.
The latest reading of −0.10% was 0.04 percentage points less negative than the 30-day average of −0.14%, but 0.04 percentage points below the annual average of −0.06%. So the reading had improved against the recent monthly average, while remaining weaker than the annual average.
CoinGlass also reported a one-year Z-score of −0.95, which its dashboard labeled within the normal range. A Z-score shows how far a reading sits from its historical average in statistical terms. It is separate from the streak length, which simply counts consecutive negative days. The dashboard does not specify its threshold for the “normal range.”
The comparison does not directly measure US buying or selling. Coinbase quotes BTC against US dollars, while the Binance market in the calculation quotes it against USDT, a dollar-pegged stablecoin. The USDT-to-dollar basis, liquidity and trading conditions can all contribute to price differences between venues. The index does not identify traders, distinguish weaker buying from stronger selling, or track institutional portfolio flows.
ETF flows point to pressure, not a complete picture
US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded five consecutive sessions of net outflows through Nov. 11, totaling roughly $1.44 billion, according to figures reported by crypto.news. SoSoValue data cited for Nov. 11 put that session’s net outflows at $299.9 million.
The reported breakdown listed $269.73 million in outflows from BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust and $39.13 million from Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust, alongside $8.96 million in inflows to a Morgan Stanley Bitcoin trust. The year and exact product identification for that Morgan Stanley line are not specified, so it should not be treated as independently verified. The dataset showed no net movement from the remaining products that session.
Those outflows came against a much larger cumulative record. The same report put net inflows since the funds launched in January 2024 at $55.1 billion, with combined net assets of $93.7 billion. BlackRock’s fund held $58.71 billion. A run of net outflows matters, but it does not show on its own that investors have abandoned the products.
Futures activity persisted as Bitcoin fell
Bitfinex analysts reported that futures open interest reached 701, 900 BTC after rising 3.3% between Nov. 8 and Nov. 11, while Bitcoin’s price fell 2.6%. Open interest measures outstanding contracts. The BTC figure expresses their value in Bitcoin terms, not the number of traders or the market’s net direction.
Traders use futures to speculate or hedge. Rising open interest alongside a falling price shows that outstanding positions increased during the decline, but it does not reveal whether the new positions were bullish or bearish.
After a US inflation release, open interest fell 0.2% despite approximately $729 million in liquidations, Bitfinex said. The analysts read the small decline as evidence that traders were quickly replacing positions that had been forcibly closed. That is their interpretation of the figures, not proof of each trader’s intent.
Bitfinex also estimated that the average purchase price of coins held for fewer than 155 days was $75, 717, and that 1.6 million BTC acquired between $75, 000 and $80, 000 were underwater. These are on-chain estimates, not records of each holder’s actual purchase price. “Underwater” means the estimated cost basis is above the market price. It does not mean those coins have been sold or will necessarily be sold. The measurement date and calculation methodology were not specified.
Options hedging reflected concern about downside
In comments published Nov. 10, CoinShares managing director Marc des Ligneris said investors were still paying more to hedge against downside, pointing to a rise in one-month options skew. Options skew compares the relative prices of options. The measure described here points to greater demand for downside-protective puts than for calls that offer upside exposure.
That positioning can signal caution, but it is not a forecast. Investors may buy protection for existing holdings without expecting an imminent crash, and options prices can shift quickly. The specific venue, dataset and comparison period behind the cited skew reading were not identified.
Bitget Wallet Research analysts said a sustained recovery would require positive ETF flows and more balanced derivatives positioning. They also said the selloff had removed some speculative excess while fresh demand remained insufficient. Those are the analysts’ assessments. The premium, ETF flows, futures data and options positioning measure different things, and none of them, individually or together, establishes a single cause for Bitcoin’s price moves.
What do these signals show?
-
Does a negative Coinbase premium prove US institutions are selling?
No. It shows Coinbase’s BTC-USD price below Binance’s BTC-USDT price in CoinGlass’s comparison. It does not identify traders or measure institutional withdrawals.
-
Was the latest premium reading unusually extreme?
CoinGlass reported a one-year Z-score of −0.95 and labeled it within the normal range. The latest reading was less negative than the 30-day average but below the annual average.
-
Does rising futures open interest mean traders were bullish?
No. Open interest counts outstanding contracts, not their direction. Futures positions can be speculative or used to hedge other exposure.
-
What separate evidence suggested caution?
The reported ETF outflows, Bitfinex’s assessment of spot demand and futures positioning, and CoinShares’ comments on options hedging each offered a different signal. None proves who was trading or where Bitcoin’s price would go next.
The dates for the 51-day streak and the November ETF and derivatives figures do not include a year, and no timestamp is given for the latest premium reading. That makes it harder to place the figures in market context or treat them as current. The next useful checks are dated CoinGlass readings, subsequent ETF net flows, and updated futures and options data.
