In May 2026, Goldman Sachs’ quarterly 13F holdings report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission drew widespread attention across the market. The document revealed that the Wall Street giant had fully liquidated its holdings in XRP and Solana-related ETFs during Q1 2026. At the same time, the bank slashed its Ethereum ETF exposure by roughly 70%, but maintained Bitcoin ETF holdings at about $700 million. This portfolio adjustment wasn’t simply a contraction of crypto exposure—it reflected a more nuanced approach, where institutional capital is now pricing different crypto assets in tiers. Bitcoin is treated as a core infrastructure allocation, while altcoin ETFs are viewed as tactical positions that can be scaled up or down as needed.
Which Crypto ETFs Did Goldman Sachs Fully Liquidate?
According to Goldman Sachs’ Q1 2026 13F filing with the SEC, the bank exited all XRP and Solana-related ETF positions during the quarter. The filing shows that in Q4 2025, Goldman held about $154 million in XRP-related ETFs, spread across products from Bitwise, Franklin Templeton, Grayscale, and 21Shares, making it one of the largest institutional holders of XRP ETFs at the time. For Solana, Goldman previously held products including the Grayscale Solana Trust ETF, Bitwise Solana Staking ETF, and Fidelity Solana Fund—all of which have now been fully liquidated.
Goldman maintained significant exposure to Bitcoin, holding approximately $690 million in BlackRock’s IBIT and about $25 million in Fidelity’s FBTC, totaling around $715 million—a reduction of only about 10% from the previous quarter. The changes in Ethereum exposure were more pronounced: its position in BlackRock’s ETHA was cut by about 70%, leaving roughly 7.2 million shares valued at around $114 million.
Additionally, Goldman made a notable shift in crypto-related equities: it increased holdings in companies like Circle, Galaxy Digital, Coinbase, Robinhood, and PayPal, while reducing positions in mining and infrastructure firms such as Strategy, Bit Digital, Riot Platforms, and IREN. This suggests that Goldman’s strategy is not merely a migration from "token-based" to "equity-based" exposure, but also a reevaluation of value across different segments of the crypto industry.
Why Did Goldman Fully Liquidate Altcoin ETFs While Keeping Bitcoin Holdings Stable?
Goldman’s differentiated approach to XRP, Solana, and Bitcoin ETFs fundamentally reflects a core judgment: within institutional asset allocation frameworks, the risk tiers and allocation value of various crypto assets are highly differentiated.
Bitcoin ETFs benefit from deeper institutional liquidity, more mature custody infrastructure, and clearer regulatory status. After years of market validation, BTC has gradually evolved from a "high-risk speculative asset" to a "digital store of value" within some institutional portfolios. In contrast, XRP and Solana ETFs are much newer, and their institutional liquidity and market-making depth remain untested. Both XRP and Solana have faced prolonged regulatory uncertainty— the SEC has repeatedly classified SOL as a security, and while XRP achieved some regulatory clarity in partial litigation in 2023, the overall regulatory landscape remains unresolved, which continues to hamper institutional adoption of related ETFs.
The market environment in Q1 2026 is also noteworthy. During this period, the price of Bitcoin saw a drawdown of over 25%. Yet Goldman chose not to significantly cut its core BTC position, instead maintaining a roughly $700 million stake despite the volatility. This behavior aligns with the "strategic core holding" approach often seen in traditional asset allocation—core positions are retained even when asset prices are under pressure. In contrast, altcoin ETFs are treated as higher-volatility tactical exposures and are the first to be trimmed when macro conditions tighten.
How Do Institutional Fund Flows Validate Goldman’s Allocation Logic?
Goldman’s portfolio adjustments aren’t isolated—they align with broader institutional fund flow trends. According to CoinShares’ weekly fund flows report as of May 18, 2026, global digital asset investment products saw net outflows of $1.07 billion in a single week, ending a six-week streak of inflows. Bitcoin-related products saw net outflows of $982 million, Ethereum products lost $249 million—both marking the largest weekly withdrawals since January 30. Geographically, nearly all outflows were concentrated in the U.S.—U.S.-registered products saw $1.14 billion in outflows, while Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and the Netherlands continued to record net inflows, reflecting divergent regional interpretations of the same macro signals.
Interestingly, altcoin products exhibited the opposite trend. XRP-related products saw net inflows of $67.6 million, and Solana products attracted $55.1 million, together pulling in over $120 million in new capital. This "broad market outflow + altcoin inflow" structure suggests that institutions are not abandoning digital assets wholesale, but are selectively reallocating within the sector: pulling capital from the most liquid, macro-sensitive BTC exposure, while shifting some funds into assets with improving regulatory prospects or unique ecosystem narratives.
It’s important to note that 13F filings only provide a snapshot of positions at quarter-end and may include market-making and client-driven inventory, so they don’t necessarily represent Goldman’s directional bets. However, Goldman’s move to fully liquidate XRP and SOL ETFs, while increasing stakes in crypto equities like Circle and Coinbase, sends a clear signal: institutions are increasingly favoring assets with clear regulatory frameworks, real revenue, and mature business models, rather than passively holding token price exposure via ETFs.
How Does ETF Liquidity Impact Institutional Allocation Decisions?
Institutions’ preferences for crypto ETFs are directly linked to the liquidity profile of different products. As of May 19, 2026, according to Gate market data, BTC was priced around $76,500, ETH at $1,600, XRP at $1.32, and SOL at $90.50. However, differences in liquidity depth are far more telling than price alone when explaining institutional behavior.
Since their approval in January 2024, spot Bitcoin ETFs have built up over two years of trading history and substantial institutional participation. By the end of Q1 2026, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs collectively held about 1.29 million BTC, totaling roughly $86.9 billion. This scale of capital means deeper markets, lower trading costs, and greater price stability—all core metrics for institutional investability.
In comparison, the ETF ecosystems for XRP and Solana are still in their early stages. Even after regulatory reforms in 2025 attracted about $1 billion each into XRP and Solana categories, these sums pale in comparison to the near-$100 billion managed by Bitcoin ETFs. Smaller scale means greater volatility and less resilience against market shocks. For an institution like Goldman Sachs, which manages trillions in assets, a multi-hundred-million-dollar position in XRP or SOL ETFs would represent a significant share of those products’ total assets. When market conditions shift and adjustments are needed, unwinding such positions could face liquidity constraints—a risk that directly influenced Goldman’s decision to liquidate these holdings first.
This is precisely why Goldman retained its Bitcoin ETF position while exiting altcoin ETFs—assets with deeper liquidity naturally enjoy higher "tolerance" in institutional allocation frameworks.
Are Institutions Shifting from "Token Exposure" to "Crypto Industry Stocks"?
Another key clue from Goldman’s Q1 portfolio moves lies in its crypto-related equity holdings. The bank significantly increased its stakes in Circle, Galaxy Digital, Coinbase, Robinhood, and PayPal, while reducing positions in crypto mining firms like Strategy, Bit Digital, Riot Platforms, and IREN.
This shift follows a clear logic. Equity-based crypto assets offer valuation frameworks rooted in traditional accounting—stable revenue, transparent business models, and regulatory-compliant governance structures, all of which are easier for institutional investors to assess and price. Circle, as the primary issuer of the USDC stablecoin, benefits directly from growing digital dollar demand; Coinbase, as a regulated exchange, enjoys predictable trading fee revenue. These features align with institutions’ preference for "valued" assets.
In contrast, holding XRP or SOL ETF exposure means being fully exposed to the underlying token’s price swings, without the buffer of revenue or dividends. Institutions are generally cautious about such "pure price exposure." Goldman’s portfolio shift—reducing direct token ETF exposure while increasing crypto infrastructure equities—points to a deeper trend: institutions are integrating crypto assets into traditional asset allocation frameworks, using revenue- and cash flow-based valuation methods, rather than relying solely on narrative and supply-demand dynamics.
Does This Differentiated Allocation Signal a Broader Institutional Shift?
Goldman’s differentiated allocation strategy isn’t unique. Other 13F filings from the same period reveal similar trends among major institutions. Harvard’s endowment fund cut its IBIT holdings by about 43% to $117 million and closed its recently added Ethereum ETF position. Jane Street reduced its IBIT holdings by about 71% and FBTC by around 60%. Meanwhile, some institutions moved in the opposite direction—Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala increased its IBIT holdings by about 16% to $566 million, and Brown University maintained its IBIT exposure unchanged. This suggests that while institutions haven’t reached a consensus on direction, "trimming altcoin exposure while retaining or moderately adjusting BTC positions" is becoming a common approach among many mainstream players.
From a broader perspective, the introduction of ETFs has fundamentally changed the demand structure of the crypto market, shifting the primary driver from the supply side (e.g., miner halvings) to the demand side (institutional allocations). Within this framework, different crypto assets are entering distinct allocation tiers based on liquidity depth, regulatory clarity, and institutional adoption. Bitcoin, with its first-mover advantage, largest ETF scale, and clearest regulatory status, is likely to remain the "core holding" in institutional portfolios. For XRP, Solana, and other altcoin ETFs that may be approved in the future, institutions are more likely to treat them as "tactical tools"—trimmed first in volatile environments, selectively added when risk appetite returns.
The next batch of Q2 13F filings will be released around August, offering further insight into whether this allocation divergence continues or if institutional interest in altcoin ETFs rebounds. For now, the signals point to an increasingly stratified and differentiated flow of institutional crypto capital—the gap between Bitcoin’s "institutionalization" and other tokens may still be widening.
Summary
In Q1 2026, Goldman Sachs fully liquidated its XRP and Solana ETF positions, slashed its Ethereum exposure, and retained about $700 million in Bitcoin ETF holdings—sending a clear signal of differentiated allocation to the market. The data shows Goldman isn’t bearish on crypto assets overall, but is repricing the market: Bitcoin ETFs, with their liquidity and regulatory clarity, are positioned as core holdings, while altcoin ETFs are treated as high-volatility tactical exposures to be exited first. This view is corroborated by CoinShares’ fund flow data—despite overall net outflows, XRP and SOL products continued to attract new capital, reflecting selective rotation within the market rather than a wholesale rejection of altcoins. Meanwhile, Goldman’s increased holdings in crypto infrastructure stocks like Circle and Coinbase point to another evolution in institutional participation: moving from pure token exposure to industry investments based on revenue and cash flow. As more 13F filings are released, the stratified positioning of crypto assets within institutional allocation frameworks is becoming increasingly clear.
FAQ
Q: Does Goldman’s liquidation of XRP and Solana ETFs mean it’s bearish on these projects?
This liquidation mainly reflects institutional differences in risk assessment among crypto assets, not a fundamental judgment on the XRP or Solana projects themselves. Goldman fully exited both XRP and SOL ETFs and cut Ethereum exposure by about 70%, but retained roughly $700 million in Bitcoin ETFs. This approach likely points to considerations around asset liquidity depth and regulatory clarity, rather than a targeted bearish stance on specific projects.
Q: How much weight should be given to 13F position data?
13F filings are snapshots of long positions at quarter-end and do not include short positions, derivatives, or off-exchange activity. Position data may also be influenced by market-making and client-driven inventory. Therefore, Goldman’s liquidation should be seen as a signal of quarter-end risk reduction, not a complete disclosure of capital flows for the entire quarter.
Q: What were the overall institutional fund flows in Q1 2026?
According to CoinShares’ report as of May 18, 2026, global crypto ETPs and ETFs saw net outflows of $1.07 billion in a single week, ending a six-week streak of inflows. Outflows were mainly concentrated in Bitcoin ($982 million) and Ethereum ($249 million), while XRP and SOL products recorded net inflows during the same period. This indicates that institutions aren’t exiting crypto assets entirely, but are selectively reallocating among different assets.
Q: Do non-Bitcoin crypto ETFs still have value for institutional allocation?
Yes. CoinShares data shows that during the recent net outflow period, XRP and SOL products recorded net inflows of $67.6 million and $55.1 million, respectively, indicating that some institutions are still allocating to these assets. However, as more altcoin ETFs are approved, institutions may adopt a "core-satellite" strategy—Bitcoin ETFs as the core holding, with XRP, SOL, and similar products serving as satellite positions for tactical allocation.
