JPMorgan says Bitcoin could get more support than gold as ETF hedges unwind

<p dir="ltr">JPMorgan says Bitcoin's hedging overhang could work in its favour against gold</p><p dir="ltr">What happened</p><p dir="ltr">JPMorgan analysts said in a note dated September 17 that Bitcoin could gain more support than gold if investors start unwinding the short positions and options currently used to hedge Bitcoin ETF holdings. The bank pointed to a gap in how the two ETF markets have recovered since inflows returned after the Federal Reserve's late-July meeting: gold ETFs have clawed back all of their earlier 2026 outflows, while Bitcoin ETFs have only recovered about half of theirs.</p><p dir="ltr">The evidence behind the call is positioning data, not price action. Short interest in BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) remains close to its highest level this year, while short interest in the SPDR Gold Shares ETF (GLD) sits below its historical average. IBIT's put-to-call open interest ratio is also higher than GLD's, which JPMorgan reads as a sign that Bitcoin ETF investors are paying up for downside protection at a rate gold investors simply are not.</p><p dir="ltr">Why it matters</p><p dir="ltr">This is a mechanical argument about market positioning, not a fundamental case for Bitcoin over gold. JPMorgan's own framing is that Bitcoin still faces a more sceptical positioning backdrop than gold, likely due to more elevated hedging demand. The logic runs like this: a large pool of shorts and protective puts represents pressure that has to go somewhere. If confidence improves and hedges get unwound while investors keep their underlying ETF exposure, that unwind itself becomes a source of demand, and because Bitcoin's hedge overhang is proportionally larger than gold's, unwinding it could give Bitcoin a bigger relative boost.</p><p dir="ltr">It is worth noting this is JPMorgan's second Bitcoin-over-gold call this year. In February, the bank made a similar case built on volatility comparisons and set a long-term Bitcoin target of $266,000. The September note reaches a similar conclusion through different data, this time options and short-interest positioning rather than volatility.</p><p dir="ltr">What readers should watch or consider</p><p dir="ltr">The most important thing to flag here is the condition JPMorgan itself attaches to the call: the support only materialises if investors are closing hedges because they are getting more comfortable, not because they are heading for the exits. Closing a short position is a different action from opening a new long. If bitcoin ETFs instead see persistent net outflows, that selling pressure in the underlying fund can outweigh whatever support comes from hedges unwinding.</p><p dir="ltr">The bank also noted the broader trade has already cooled somewhat over the past week, as inflation-adjusted bond yields rose and the US Senate failed to advance the Clarity Act, which had been feeding into the "debasement trade" narrative that lifted both gold and Bitcoin ETFs from late July.</p><p dir="ltr">What could change the interpretation</p><p dir="ltr">If IBIT short interest and its put-to-call ratio start falling alongside genuine net inflows into the ETF, that would support JPMorgan's thesis playing out. If short interest stays elevated, or if inflows into Bitcoin ETFs stall or reverse even as some hedges close, the positioning gap may simply reflect ongoing wariness rather than an unwind opportunity. Real yields and dollar strength also remain relevant, since both have historically moved against the debasement trade that revived flows into both assets in the first place.</p><p dir="ltr">What to watch next</p><p dir="ltr">Track IBIT's short interest and put-to-call ratio against GLD's in the coming weeks, alongside the next few Farside Bitcoin ETF flow prints, and check whether they move together (hedges unwinding plus fresh inflows) or apart (hedges unwinding while outflows continue). A move together would tend to confirm JPMorgan's read; a move apart would suggest the positioning gap on its own is not yet a reliable signal. No trade recommendation is required here, this is a mechanics story worth monitoring rather than acting on directly.</p><p dir="ltr"></p> This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.