U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have recorded $730.9 million in net inflows in their strongest single trading session since mid-January, led by more than $450 million entering BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust.

According to SoSoValue data for Sept. 3, the group posted its largest daily inflow since Jan. 14, when the funds attracted $843.6 million, pushing cumulative net inflows since their January 2024 launch to $55.44 billion.

Bitcoin ETF inflows reach $731 million

BlackRock’s IBIT accounted for $454 million of Thursday’s inflows, representing more than 60% of the total. The latest allocation brought the fund’s cumulative net inflows to $63.94 billion.

ARK Invest and 21Shares’ ARKB ranked second with $138 million, while Fidelity’s FBTC received roughly $74 million. Grayscale’s two Bitcoin products drew a combined $57 million during the session.

VanEck’s HODL and WisdomTree’s BTCW were the only products to record withdrawals. HODL lost close to $20 million, while approximately $5 million left BTCW.

The inflows arrived as Bitcoin rebounded sharply, with the U.S.-listed funds gaining between 5.7% and 5.9% during Thursday’s trading session. Their combined net assets climbed to $103.34 billion, equivalent to 6.32% of Bitcoin’s market capitalization.

Thursday’s result was more than three times the size of any single daily inflow recorded during an 11-session run of positive flows in late August.

The latest buying followed an active August for the products. U.S. Bitcoin ETFs collected $1.92 billion during the five trading sessions ending Aug. 21, when Bitcoin and Ether ETFs together attracted $2.61 billion in their strongest combined week since October 2025.

Bitcoin funds accounted for roughly 73% of those flows, while spot Ether ETFs received $697.47 million during the same five-day period.

BlackRock’s IBIT remains the main source of ETF demand

IBIT has repeatedly accounted for a large share of the money entering U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs during recent periods of buying.

Crypto.news previously reported that the funds attracted $853.5 million over five days from Aug. 3 through Aug. 7. BlackRock’s fund brought in an estimated $693 million during the run, equivalent to roughly 81% of the group’s total inflows.

The pattern continued later in August. QCP Capital said Bitcoin’s advance from approximately $63,500 to above $80,000 was supported by spot buying while futures positioning declined. During part of the rally, spot Bitcoin ETFs drew $2.8 billion across eight consecutive sessions.

Futures open interest fell from 646,000 BTC to 588,000 BTC as Bitcoin advanced, according to QCP, separating the price move from rallies driven primarily by an increase in leveraged positions.

IBIT has remained the largest U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF by assets through the changes in daily flows. BlackRock had reported $60.52 billion in net assets for the fund as of Aug. 26, before Bitcoin’s latest advance and Thursday’s increase in ETF asset values.

Institutional filings have shown large positions in the fund as well. Jane Street reported more than $1 billion in U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF shares as of June 30, including approximately $828 million in IBIT. The quarterly filing represented positions at the end of June and did not disclose the trading firm’s current exposure.

ETF flows have remained volatile between large buying sessions

Large inflows have not produced a continuous run of buying across every trading day.

The U.S. products recorded $201.9 million in net outflows on Aug. 28, ending nine consecutive sessions of inflows. ARK 21Shares’ ARKB led the withdrawals with $114.9 million, while IBIT lost $33.4 million.

Despite the final negative session, the funds still attracted a combined $924.5 million during the Aug. 24 to Aug. 28 trading week.

Flows reversed again as September began. Investors withdrew $236 million from the funds on Sept. 1, with IBIT accounting for roughly $201 million of the redemptions.

SoSoValue data showed the group returned to net buying the following session, taking in approximately $101 million on Sept. 2. IBIT received roughly $115 million, offsetting withdrawals elsewhere in the group before Thursday’s much larger allocation.

The $454 million that entered IBIT on Sept. 3 therefore came two sessions after the fund recorded a $201 million withdrawal, putting BlackRock’s product on both sides of the largest daily moves during the opening days of September.

The recent swings follow a period when Bitcoin ETF demand had already recovered from sustained withdrawals earlier in the year. The products entered July after eight consecutive negative weeks, including $527 million in withdrawals during the four trading days ending July 2.

A $221.7 million inflow on July 2 ended a 10-day daily withdrawal run, while BlackRock returned to larger allocations days later. IBIT received $209.4 million on July 7 as total daily inflows across the U.S. Bitcoin ETFs reached $265.7 million.

By July 30, another $233.1 million entered the products, with BlackRock taking $183.4 million. The fund accounted for 78.7% of that session’s inflows.

Thursday’s $730.9 million allocation has now exceeded each of those daily totals, while the combined net asset value of the U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF market has moved above $103 billion.

Today, 4 September, the market’s main focus is the August US employment report. According to CNBC, the consensus forecast calls for just 53,000 nonfarm jobs to be added following July’s decline, highlighting the continued weakness of the labour market. At the same time, the Federal Reserve’s focus is shifting towards inflation risks. In the eurozone, a Reuters poll showed that all 65 economists surveyed expect the ECB to raise its deposit rate by 25 basis points to 2.50% at its 10 September meeting, while around 91% expect the rate to remain at that level through the end of the year.

Technical Analysis of EUR/USD

On 21 August, a peak formed around 1.1700 on the four-hour chart, from which a trend and a descending trendline developed. The price repeatedly rejected this trendline to the downside, eventually reaching a low of 1.1570 on 2 September. The following day, the trendline was broken to the upside on increased volume, and the price is now attempting to establish itself above it, as well as above the upper boundary of the current market profile at 1.1610.

A red resistance area is located around 1.1660 above the established market density. In the event of a false breakout followed by a further decline, the asset could trade within the market density or continue lower. However, for this to happen, the price would need not only to test the upper boundary but also break through the Point of Control (POC) at 1.1600 and the lower boundary of the profile at 1.1580. Just below the lower boundary of the profile, there is also a green support area around 1.1570.

The RSI + MAs indicator is showing readings of 58, 45 and 45. The oscillator has moved above the neutral zone, while both moving averages remain red and close to its lower boundary, so they are not yet confirming the breakout.

Key Takeaways

The divergence between the RSI and its moving averages leaves the sustainability of the recovery uncertain, and the market may need more time for the other components of the breakout to develop. The August US employment report could provide an additional catalyst for the pair over the coming hours, with its significance for the Fed’s September decision having increased further against the backdrop of an expected ECB rate hike.

Trade over 50 forex markets 24 hours a day with FXOpen. Take advantage of low commissions, deep liquidity, and spreads from 0.0 pips (additional fees may apply). Open your FXOpen account now or learn more about trading forex with FXOpen.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

El Salvador’s Bitcoin reserve increases after the IMF began reviewing its financing program do not involve new purchases funded by public resources, according to the International Monetary Fund. In documents shared with the lender, Salvadoran authorities attributed the growth to private donations after the IMF’s first review of the program concluded in June 2025.

In a Thursday statement, the IMF said it verified the explanation through materials provided by local authorities, concluding that the additions therefore should not be treated as additional government-funded Bitcoin buying within the terms of the program. The IMF also said control of the Chivo wallet—El Salvador’s state-linked Bitcoin wallet—has been shifted to a private operator, while the government retains a minority stake and certain custodial responsibilities.

Key takeaways

• The IMF says post–June 2025 Bitcoin reserve increases were supported by documents showing they came from private donations, not government financing.
• The lender expects no further Bitcoin accumulation beyond the donation activity it says is documented.
• IMF said majority ownership and operational control of the Chivo wallet moved to a private operator, with the state keeping minority and custody roles.
• El Salvador’s public announcements about ongoing accumulation have previously renewed scrutiny over compliance with IMF conditions.

IMF verification after the June 2025 review

The IMF’s latest explanation is aimed at clarifying the source of Bitcoin increases during the period following its first review of El Salvador’s IMF-supported financing arrangement. In its statement, the IMF said the documents submitted by Salvadoran authorities verified that the accumulation did not rely on “public resources.”

The distinction matters because El Salvador’s IMF deal includes restrictions on how the public sector can engage with Bitcoin. When Bitcoin-related activity appears to expand after key compliance checkpoints, investors and stakeholders typically look for whether the activity aligns with the program’s conditions—particularly around public funding and state-led accumulation.

The IMF also framed expectations going forward: it said it does not anticipate additional accumulation beyond what can be tied to documented donations. That message effectively sets a compliance ceiling for future reserve growth, at least as the IMF continues to monitor the arrangement.

Chivo wallet control reshuffle

Beyond the donation-source question, the IMF’s statement addressed governance of the Chivo wallet. According to the lender, majority ownership and operational control have been transferred to a private operator. At the same time, the government retains a minority stake and custodial responsibilities.

This matters because earlier IMF commitments emphasized reducing the government’s role in Bitcoin-related activity. A shift in operational control can be seen as consistent with a broader effort to move away from state-driven Bitcoin operations—though the exact implications for users and custody arrangements depend on how the private operator manages day-to-day functions.

How previous rules set the stage for scrutiny

El Salvador’s IMF controversy around Bitcoin centers on the line between government involvement and private-sector activity. In December 2024, the IMF agreement required changes that included limiting public-sector involvement in Bitcoin under the IMF package. The arrangement also made private-sector Bitcoin acceptance voluntary and required that taxes be paid in US dollars, while calling for government involvement in Chivo to be unwound.

Then, in March 2025, the IMF issued new documents that barred “voluntary accumulation” of Bitcoin by the public sector. President Nayib Bukele responded publicly, saying purchases were “not stopping” and that El Salvador would continue adding at least one BTC daily.

The tension between El Salvador’s statements about ongoing accumulation and the IMF’s restrictions has repeatedly reemerged in subsequent months. After the March 2025 update, the country’s Bitcoin Office often posted that El Salvador continued to accumulate Bitcoin, which prompted renewed questions about whether the additions were consistent with the program’s constraints.

From a private-donation explanation to a reserve tracker snapshot

The IMF previously addressed the issue after El Salvador’s December 2024 commitments. In July 2025, the IMF offered an initial explanation, stating that it had found no new Bitcoin purchased since the December agreement. At that time, it attributed increases to consolidation among government wallets.

However, El Salvador’s November 2025 announcement that it had acquired 1,090 BTC worth $100 million—after the first review timeline—brought the question back to the forefront. Coverage at the time highlighted compliance concerns tied to the $1.4 billion IMF program, and an IMF representative reportedly indicated the lender would not provide “running commentary” on announcements, assessing compliance in due course.

Now, the IMF says those due diligence efforts produced a clearer result: it verified that accumulation after the June 2025 review came from private donations rather than additional Bitcoin purchases financed with government resources.

For readers tracking the scale of El Salvador’s holdings, the National Bitcoin Office’s reserve tracker reports that El Salvador holds about 7,764 BTC. Using CoinGecko’s cited BTC price of $80,900, the stockpile is valued at roughly $628 million. The IMF’s framing suggests that the higher balance relative to earlier points should be interpreted, at least for IMF monitoring purposes, as donation-linked additions rather than new public-sector purchases.

What to watch next for investors and market participants

While the IMF’s latest statement provides a compliance-oriented explanation and sets expectations for future accumulation, uncertainty remains around how independently verifiable the donation documentation is over time and whether future reserve changes match the “documented donations only” boundary the IMF described. Market participants should continue to monitor subsequent IMF reviews, alongside updates from El Salvador’s Bitcoin Office and any further disclosures tied to the Chivo wallet’s private operator arrangements.

El Salvador’s Bitcoin holdings grew after the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reviewed part of its $1.4 billion program in June 2025, but the IMF says the country did not use public money for the additional accumulation. In a Thursday statement, the lender said documents provided by Salvadoran authorities confirmed that the increase came from private donations rather than government-financed purchases.

The IMF also said operational control of El Salvador’s Chivo wallet has been transferred to a private operator, with the government keeping a minority stake and custodial responsibilities. The IMF added that it does not expect any further Bitcoin accumulation beyond donations that can be documented.

Key takeaways

• The IMF verified that post–June 2025 Bitcoin increases were funded by private donations, not public resources.
• The Chivo wallet’s majority ownership and day-to-day control moved to a private operator, while the government retained a minority stake and custody role.
• The explanation is aimed at addressing renewed compliance concerns after El Salvador publicly reported large Bitcoin purchases in late 2025.
• El Salvador is still holding a sizable Bitcoin reserve—about 7,764 BTC—valued at roughly $628 million at the price level cited by CoinGecko.

IMF: June 2025 accumulation did not involve government funds

According to the IMF, the key point from its June 2025 review was whether El Salvador’s Bitcoin accumulation reflected spending from public resources. In Thursday’s release, the IMF said it checked supplied documentation and found that the additional holdings were linked to private donations.

That matters because El Salvador’s IMF-supported financing arrangement is tied to economic and policy conditions, including boundaries around how public institutions engage with Bitcoin. The IMF’s statement effectively separates “donation-driven” increases from purchases that would otherwise imply further public financing.

Thursday’s release also states that the government does not intend to accumulate additional Bitcoin beyond what is documented as coming from donations—another signal that the IMF is drawing a line around what it considers compliant behavior under the program.

Chivo wallet control shifts, but custodial duties remain

In addition to the funding source question, the IMF’s statement addressed the structure around El Salvador’s Chivo Bitcoin wallet. The lender said majority ownership and operational control of the wallet have been transferred to a private operator, while the government retains a minority stake and custodial responsibilities.

For observers, this distinction goes beyond corporate housekeeping. Earlier IMF discussions around Bitcoin policy placed emphasis on reducing public-sector involvement. By describing a change in operational control and retaining only a narrower government role, the IMF is clarifying how it views the current setup relative to those earlier conditions.

Why the explanation became necessary again

While IMF scrutiny around El Salvador’s Bitcoin purchases has been ongoing, the latest clarification followed renewed controversy after El Salvador said in November 2025 that it had acquired 1,090 BTC valued at $100 million.

That November claim resurfaced questions about whether El Salvador was complying with its IMF program. Earlier coverage noted that the IMF arrangement includes restrictions intended to limit certain kinds of public-sector participation in Bitcoin.

The IMF’s June 2025 verification therefore appears aimed at reconciling the country’s reported reserve increases with the conditions the lender has set—particularly when El Salvador’s Bitcoin office posted that accumulation continued after earlier understandings were reached.

From “unwind Chivo involvement” to “no voluntary accumulation”

The current dispute has roots in the IMF’s original conditions under the financing arrangement. In December 2024, El Salvador agreed to limit public-sector involvement in Bitcoin. The deal outlined several elements: private-sector acceptance of Bitcoin was to be voluntary, taxes were to be paid in US dollars, and government involvement in Chivo was to be unwound.

In March 2025, the IMF issued additional documents barring what it described as “voluntary accumulation” of Bitcoin by the public sector. President Nayib Bukele publicly pushed back, saying purchases were “not stopping” and that El Salvador would continue adding at least one BTC daily.

Subsequently, the Bitcoin Office frequently posted that it was accumulating Bitcoin. In July 2025, the IMF offered an initial explanation for earlier reserve changes, saying no new Bitcoin had been purchased since the December agreement and attributing increases to consolidation among government wallets.

However, the November 2025 announcement about a much larger acquisition renewed doubts. An IMF representative previously told Cointelegraph that the lender would not provide “running commentary” on announcements and would assess compliance in due course. Thursday’s statement can be read as that due-course assessment for the period after the first review.

How big is El Salvador’s Bitcoin reserve now?

Based on the National Bitcoin Office’s official reserve tracker, El Salvador currently holds about 7,764 Bitcoin. Using a price level of $80,900 cited via CoinGecko, the reserve is valued at approximately $628 million.

Importantly, the IMF’s position suggests that at least part of the post-agreement reserve growth is not explained by government purchases, but rather by donation flows that Salvadoran authorities say can be documented. Readers should note that the IMF’s verification focuses on the source of accumulation, not on whether the reserve increased in absolute terms.

Going forward, market participants will likely watch two things closely: whether El Salvador continues to produce documentation supporting donation-linked increases, and how the operational role of the Chivo wallet evolves under the private operator structure. As the IMF turns compliance checks into formal findings, the durability of El Salvador’s Bitcoin narrative under the program may hinge on the clarity—and consistency—of that evidence.

A Bitcoin address named in a New York lawsuit involving 39,069 allegedly abandoned addresses transferred 40 BTC on Sept. 3 after remaining inactive since Nov. 5, 2011.

The transaction was confirmed in Bitcoin block 965,330. Galaxy Research valued the transfer at approximately $3.1 million and identified the sending address as “Noah Doe #38097,” linking it to the pending ownership lawsuit.

The transfer proves that someone controls the private key associated with the address. However, public blockchain data does not reveal that person’s identity or establish whether the Bitcoin was sold.

Bitcoin address moved funds after nearly 15 years

Bitcoin traded near $3 when the wallet received its coins in November 2011. Galaxy calculated that their market value had increased by approximately 2,571,899% by the time of the latest transfer.

That figure represents price appreciation rather than a confirmed realized gain. Moving Bitcoin between addresses does not prove a sale, and the receiving address has not been publicly linked to an exchange.

Bitcoin was trading near $81,100 on Sept. 4, up about 4.3% over 24 hours. No evidence linked the broader market increase directly to the 40 BTC transaction or the New York case.

The latest movement follows several transfers from older addresses during 2026. In related coverage, six long-dormant wallets moved more than 553 BTC during a ten-day period in August. Two carried labels connecting them to the same lawsuit.

New York lawsuit targets 39,069 Bitcoin addresses

The case, ABC Company, XYZ Company and Noah Doe v. John Does 1–39,069, was filed in New York County Supreme Court under Index No. 153119/2026. The plaintiffs seek a declaration giving them legal title to Bitcoin associated with 39,069 addresses.

Those addresses held an estimated 3.7 million to 3.8 million BTC when researchers examined the complaint. Their combined dollar value has varied with Bitcoin’s price and was estimated at approximately $293 billion during earlier reporting.

The list reportedly includes addresses attributed to Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, an address associated with the Mt. Gox theft and an unspendable burn address. Such labels are based on blockchain analysis and do not necessarily establish legal ownership.

The plaintiffs claim the addresses qualify as abandoned property under Article 7-B of New York’s Personal Property Law. They say the wallets were identified through an algorithm, reported to police and notified through small Bitcoin transactions containing on-chain messages.

Wallet movement challenges but does not end the claim

Activity from a listed address conflicts with the assertion that nobody controls its private key. The plaintiffs have previously removed addresses from their claim after those addresses moved funds.

In July, Galaxy Research’s Alex Thorn said the plaintiffs had dropped 44 addresses that became active after the case began. Those removals show that on-chain activity can narrow the addresses covered by the complaint.

However, the latest transaction does not automatically “thwart” or end the entire case. It directly concerns one listed address. Any legal effect will depend on the plaintiffs’ response and subsequent court filings.

The transfer also does not prove that the person moving the Bitcoin is its lawful owner. It demonstrates technical control, while ownership remains a separate legal question involving evidence and applicable property law.

Opponents say inactivity does not prove abandonment

Attorney Ian Cohen, the Digital Chamber and the Bitcoin Policy Institute have challenged the plaintiffs’ theory. Their arguments maintain that an address is not property that somebody can “find” merely by viewing it on a public blockchain.

The Digital Chamber warned that treating inactivity as abandonment could create uncertainty for people who deliberately hold Bitcoin in self-custody for extended periods. As crypto.news reported, the organization urged the court to reject the dormant-wallet ownership claim.

A New York judge previously paused the proceedings, preventing the plaintiffs from immediately obtaining a default judgment. The court has not ruled that the addresses are abandoned or awarded their Bitcoin to Noah Doe and the two companies.

What happens next in the Bitcoin ownership case

The plaintiffs may remove address No. 38097 from their requested relief, as they reportedly did with previously activated addresses. Any change should appear through an amended filing or another submission on the case docket.

The broader case will still require the court to consider jurisdiction, ownership and whether New York’s lost-property statute can apply to Bitcoin addresses. Even a favorable judgment would not provide the plaintiffs with private keys or enable an on-chain transfer without them.