Share
As of January 2026, XRP ETFs have pulled in $1.44 billion in cumulative inflows since their November 2025 launch. The products have held up through a 45% price drop, logging only four days of net outflows across the entire period. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst, James Seyffart, called it a product that has “held up pretty well.” However, the data underneath that headline is more interesting than the number itself.
The XRP ETFs have actually held up pretty well despite the massive pullback in price. They've taken in a cumulative $1.4 billion since launch. pic.twitter.com/Bjtmb0y40D
— James Seyffart (@JSeyff) March 10, 2026
Only about 15.9% of XRP ETF assets are attributable to 13F filers – institutional holders required to disclose positions to the SEC. The remaining 84% is almost certainly retail. That’s the buyer carrying $1.44 billion in XRP ETF exposure through a brutal drawdown, not Goldman Sachs, not Citadel, not Millennium Management – even though all three appear on the 13F list.
Goldman’s XRP allocations were closely balanced across all four issuers:
That equal-weight distribution across issuers reads less like a directional conviction bet and more like a structured position designed to maintain optionality, or fulfil client facilitation requirements, without overcommitting to any single product.
Who were the buyers of those Solana ETFs? The top of the list is a who's who of market makers and crypto investment firms. https://t.co/NHu9ul4nt1 pic.twitter.com/aFI0CLubB1
— James Seyffart (@JSeyff) March 9, 2026
In a move that appears entirely deliberate, Goldman simultaneously cut its Bitcoin ETF exposure by 39.4% and its Ethereum holdings by 27.2%, pivoting to enter XRP and Solana for the first time. However, the motivation behind this rotation remains a mystery, as 13F filings only show us the quarter-end inventory, not the strategy behind the trades.
The XRP picture looks very different next to Solana’s. Roughly 49% of Solana ETF assets are identifiable through 13F filings, with investment advisers holding approximately $270 million, and hedge funds holding $186 million.
Electric Capital Partners lead all filers at $137.8 million and Goldman Sachs sits second at $107.4 million. These are followed by Elequin Capital, SIG, and Multicoin Capital; a roster of firms with established crypto investment theses, not index rebalancers.
Who are these buyers/holders? Well we only know a small portion of them because the vast majority don't file 13Fs. But here are the holders as of 12/31/2025 pic.twitter.com/ymIyy1mobx
— James Seyffart (@JSeyff) March 10, 2026
Unmasking nearly 50% of Solana ETF holders via 13F filings is a striking achievement for such new products, according to Bloomberg Intelligence’s James Seyffart. It took Bitcoin ETFs two to three quarters to reach that level of institutional transparency; Solana managed it in months – at 16%, XRP hasn’t.
The practical implication for XRP is structural. Retail holders are more likely to sell during drawdowns, creating sharper liquidation cycles and making sustained price recovery harder to establish.
LATEST: 📈 Solana ETFs still hold $1.5 billion in cumulative inflows despite price declines, with institutions accounting for half of all inflows, according to Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas. pic.twitter.com/OjL3NQVpSx
— CoinMarketCap (@CoinMarketCap) March 6, 2026
Some of the initial Solana ETF capital likely reflects investors shifting existing exposure into the ETF wrapper rather than entirely new buying. But even accounting for that, a significant share of inflows represents fresh institutional capital entering at a loss. That’s the kind of holder that’s likely to stay through the drawdown rather than panic-sell at support.
The $3 billion AUM threshold that Canary Capital’s CEO has identified as a potential trigger for BlackRock’s XRP ETF filing gets harder to reach organically when 84% of your buyer base is retail. Retail accumulates during dips, but not at the pace or scale that institutional mandates deploy capital. Until the 13F percentage for XRP ETFs starts closing the gap with Solana’s, the institutional conviction story remains more narrative than data.
Share
