Read on for a comprehensive breakdown of the quarter’s defining trends, critical metrics, and ecosystem-shaping events—uncovering what truly moved Ethereum in Q1 2025.
Welcome to Amberdata’s Q1 2025 Ethereum Market Intelligence Report—a quarter distinguished by significant ecosystem developments, sharp price volatility, and shifting institutional dynamics within Ethereum’s vibrant landscape. Early 2025 was marked by Ethereum’s dramatic decline from nearly $4,100 to multi-year lows around $1,400, driven by macroeconomic pressures and exacerbated by major incidents such as the $1.5 billion Bybit hack. Concurrently, Ethereum witnessed critical technological advancements, including Arbitrum’s decentralization via the BoLD upgrade and preparations for the highly anticipated Pectra network update, underscoring the network's resilience and continuous evolution.
At Amberdata, we aim to provide clarity amid Ethereum’s intricate market dynamics by offering deep analytics across key metrics such as staking yields, ETF investment flows, on-chain address behaviors, and stablecoin impacts. By combining granular blockchain data with sophisticated market intelligence, our platform enables institutions, analysts, and traders to confidently interpret complex signals—from liquid staking yields and ownership concentration (Gini coefficient) to exchange funding rates and liquidity shifts. Whether assessing institutional sentiment through ETF positions, identifying accumulation patterns among large ETH holders, or evaluating stablecoin-driven volatility, Amberdata equips market participants with the precision and depth required to navigate Ethereum’s rapidly evolving ecosystem.
Comprehensive, real-time data is essential for effectively navigating the crypto market, particularly given its volatility and rapid evolution. Insights into Bitcoin and Ethereum metrics, such as UTXO age distributions, holder accumulation patterns, and open interest trends, help investors and traders accurately assess market sentiment and underlying network strength. Additionally, stablecoin activity—including issuance trends, transaction volumes, and velocity metrics—can provide early signals about liquidity shifts and investor risk appetite.
Exchange-specific data, such as spot and derivatives volumes, funding rates, and long-short ratios, further enrich this analytical framework, offering crucial visibility into market positioning and potential leverage risks. Amberdata equips institutions and traders with these critical insights, enabling precise risk management and informed investment decisions. For more detailed research and analysis, visit our research blog. To explore how Amberdata can support your market strategies, contact us or request a demo.
Ethereum’s first quarter of 2025 saw dramatic price declines and notable ecosystem developments. ETH fell sharply from approximately $4,100 in late 2024 to multi-year lows near $1,400 by April, driven by severe macroeconomic stress and intensified by the $1.5 billion Bybit hack—the largest Ethereum-related security breach to date. Despite turbulence, Ethereum’s technological advancements progressed significantly, including Arbitrum’s decentralization via the BoLD upgrade and the confirmed May 7 launch date for the critical Pectra network upgrade focused on scalability. ETF flows on Ethereum fluctuated markedly; Grayscale Mini surged dramatically in March, accumulating approximately 3.24 million ETH, then drastically reduced holdings in April by about 3.52 million ETH due to heightened investor caution. Ethereum’s Gini coefficient slightly increased to 0.6603, reflecting continued high but stabilizing concentration. Liquid staking yields fluctuated notably, with oETH’s APY peaking at 4.32%, highlighting selective investor interest despite ongoing volatility.
The first quarter of 2025 was marked by significant developments and intense volatility specifically within Ethereum's Layer-1 and Layer-2 ecosystems. Starting from its late-2024 highs near $4,100, Ethereum's price experienced substantial corrections influenced by both technical events and ecosystem disruptions.
January brought significant advancements in Ethereum’s decentralization and scalability, primarily through its Layer-2 solutions. On January 26, the Arbitrum DAO approved the Bounded Optimistic Liveness Delay (BoLD) protocol upgrade. This major step removed centralized validator whitelists, enhancing security, decentralization, and community participation within Ethereum's most prominent Layer-2 scaling solution. Shortly afterward, on January 31, Uniswap v4 was launched, introducing advanced customizable liquidity "hooks". This important upgrade was deployed not only on Ethereum mainnet but also across several Layer-2 networks including Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base, demonstrating Ethereum's commitment to scalable decentralized finance solutions.
February proved turbulent, primarily due to the significant security breach on the Bybit exchange on February 21, where approximately $1.5 billion worth of ETH was stolen, marking the largest Ethereum-related hack to date. Despite this setback, Ethereum’s Layer-2 developments progressed notably. On February 11, Tether selected Arbitrum One as the primary Layer-2 infrastructure for its new cross-chain stablecoin solution, USDT₀. This decision further reinforced the critical role of Layer-2 networks in Ethereum’s broader scaling vision. Additionally, the Ethereum Foundation released detailed specifications of the upcoming "Pectra" network upgrade on February 14, outlining major enhancements in scalability, including account abstraction and increased data throughput capabilities for Layer-2 rollups.
In March, Ethereum encountered heightened network congestion, evidenced by gas fees briefly surging to approximately 109 Gwei on February 17 due to increased network activity and demand, underscoring the pressing need for scalability enhancements. Ethereum’s core development team responded actively, and by March 27, officially targeted early May as the mainnet activation date for the highly anticipated Pectra upgrade, reflecting confidence in addressing these scalability concerns effectively.
By April, Ethereum faced further price pressures, hitting multi-year lows around $1,400 due to broader market stress. Nevertheless, Ethereum's technological roadmap remained firmly on track. On April 3, developers confirmed May 7 as the definitive date for the Pectra upgrade activation, a critical milestone promising substantial improvements in Ethereum's Layer-1 efficiency and Layer-2 scaling capabilities.
Throughout this period, Ethereum’s technological developments were closely aligned with shifts in investor sentiment, reflected by fluctuations in staking activities and institutional behaviors. Despite ongoing challenges from security incidents and macroeconomic uncertainty, Ethereum’s core infrastructure improvements—particularly the upcoming Pectra upgrade and substantial Layer-2 advancements—position the network strategically for resilience and future growth.
Since the beginning of 2025, cumulative ETH holdings in ETFs have exhibited significant volatility, closely mirroring Ethereum’s turbulent price movements and shifting market sentiment. In January, cumulative ETH holdings experienced a sharp decline from their December highs. BlackRock's holdings notably dropped to approximately 545,250 ETH, aligning with Ethereum’s pullback from its December peak of around $4,100 toward the $2,900 range. This decrease indicated increased institutional caution amid renewed macroeconomic uncertainties, including a more hawkish Federal Reserve stance and diminishing investor risk appetite.
February 2025 saw increased turbulence due to the catastrophic Bybit hack, where roughly $1.5 billion worth of ETH was stolen. This event deeply impacted investor confidence, triggering volatility in ETF flows. Despite broader market sentiment remaining bearish, BlackRock substantially increased its exposure by approximately 480,219 ETH, bringing its total holdings to around 1,025,469 ETH, suggesting opportunistic institutional buying amid price weakness. Conversely, Fidelity saw modest outflows, while Grayscale reduced its ETH exposure by approximately 216,906 ETH, reflecting ongoing market panic and widespread risk aversion.
ETF inflows briefly rebounded in March as Ethereum attempted a short-lived price recovery from sub-$2,000 lows. This period saw substantial speculative activity, with Grayscale Mini's holdings surging dramatically by roughly 3.24 million ETH to reach a peak of about 3.71 million ETH. BlackRock also sharply increased its ETH allocation by approximately 751,168 ETH to reach approximately 1.77 million ETH. These inflows indicated renewed institutional optimism, albeit tempered by ongoing macroeconomic concerns, including U.S.- China trade tensions and lingering apprehension from February’s security breach.
However, by April, ETF holdings sharply retraced, reflecting Ethereum’s severe price decline to multi-year lows near $1,400, driven by broader market distress following new U.S. import tariffs. Grayscale Mini notably reduced its holdings dramatically by approximately 3.52 million ETH, down to about 194,732 ETH. BlackRock also significantly cut back its exposure by approximately 862,144 ETH, reducing its holdings to around 914,493 ETH. This substantial reduction highlighted severe institutional risk-off behavior, underscoring persistent uncertainty regarding Ethereum's near-term stability amid continuing macroeconomic shocks.
In 2025, monthly changes in ETH ETF holdings closely followed Ethereum's price volatility and macroeconomic conditions.
January began with significant declines in ETF holdings, reflecting Ethereum’s sharp price drop from near $4,000 down to around $2,900. Major funds including 21Shares (-14,663 ETH), Bitwise (-481,916 ETH), BlackRock (-605,561 ETH), and Fidelity (-203,761 ETH) reduced their ETH positions significantly, indicating institutional caution triggered by market fears of a hawkish Federal Reserve and profit-taking after previous gains.
In February, ETF activity became mixed amidst further market turmoil. Despite Ethereum's ongoing weakness around $2,500 and the severe Bybit hack on February 21, BlackRock added 480,220 ETH, aggressively buying the dip. However, others remained cautious: Fidelity (-12,007 ETH), Bitwise (-102,601 ETH), and Grayscale (-216,906 ETH) reduced holdings. The Bybit hack significantly affected investor confidence, causing hesitation and uncertainty among institutions.
March saw a sharp turnaround in ETF inflows, corresponding with Ethereum’s temporary recovery above $2,000. The standout was Grayscale Mini, which dramatically increased its holdings by 3.24 million ETH. BlackRock also added significantly (+751,168 ETH), and Franklin Templeton (+106,773 ETH) notably reversed earlier reductions. This positive inflow suggested renewed optimism among institutions, likely betting on an oversold bounce and improved macro sentiment.
However, optimism vanished quickly in April, driven by Ethereum’s plunge below $1,500 following news of sweeping U.S. import tariffs and renewed recession fears. Grayscale Mini sharply reduced holdings, losing 3.52 million ETH, erasing the previous month's gains. BlackRock (-862,144 ETH) also made substantial cuts. VanEck (-47,260 ETH) joined the selling, confirming widespread risk aversion among institutions. By mid-April, ETF holdings mirrored Ethereum’s multi-year lows, highlighting persistent market sensitivity to macroeconomic and security-related shocks.
From late February through mid-April 2025, the 30-day Annual Percentage Yield (APY) for Ethereum-based liquid staking assets displayed significant variations, reflecting shifting investor preferences and market conditions. Ethereum's native staking APY remained relatively stable, hovering around 3.0%, indicating consistent baseline staking returns despite Ethereum’s price volatility.
Among liquid staking derivatives (LSDs), distinct trends emerged. oETH saw the most pronounced fluctuations, with APY increasing sharply from around 3.02% in late February to a peak above 4.32% by late March, likely reflecting increased demand or protocol incentives attracting investors amid bearish price action. By mid-April, however, APY moderated back towards 3.14%, suggesting normalization as market volatility decreased.
lsETH similarly demonstrated an upward trajectory from approximately 3.05% to a notable peak of about 3.95% in early April. This rise aligns with investor preference for platforms potentially offering better incentives or improved liquidity amid turbulent market conditions.
Other major staking assets such as cbETH, stETH, and swETH displayed relatively steadier APYs. For example, stETH increased modestly from around 2.87% to just above 2.76% in mid-March before experiencing a brief decline. This stability could imply steady institutional or retail staking confidence in these larger platforms, despite volatile ETH prices.
Meanwhile, wbETH and swETH experienced more volatility in yields during March, indicating fluctuating demand for wrapped or alternative LSD forms likely driven by liquidity shifts or incentive adjustments by competing protocols.
For market participants, the variations in APY suggest clear implications. Assets showing higher APY volatility, such as oETH and lsETH, indicate short-term opportunities or higher speculative activity. In contrast, the stability of assets like stETH and cbETH suggests continued confidence from conservative, long-term investors. These insights can guide strategic staking decisions, enabling investors to balance risk tolerance and yield optimization amidst dynamic market conditions.
Ethereum's Gini coefficient, reflecting wealth concentration, showed a steady increase from early 2023 (0.6007) through late 2024 (0.6553), signaling rising centralization of ETH holdings. However, a notable flattening emerged in early 2025, with the Gini moving only slightly from 0.6573 in January to 0.6603 by April. This suggests ETH ownership became less concentrated or that wealth accumulation among major holders slowed significantly during Ethereum's sharp price corrections and market turmoil in Q1 2025.
This flattening trend coincides with substantial market instability driven by the Bybit hack, economic fears from U.S. tariffs, and broad institutional ETF sell-offs. As prices plunged nearly 64% from December highs, large holders likely diversified or reduced ETH positions to manage risk, distributing holdings more evenly across market participants. Additionally, retail and smaller institutional buyers may have taken advantage of lower ETH prices, incrementally redistributing ownership away from historically concentrated wallets.
If this trend continues, Ethereum's decreasing concentration could improve the weaker decentralization optics, potentially boosting long-term confidence. However, persistent macroeconomic uncertainty could still reverse these gains if major holders again consolidate ETH holdings at lower price levels.
In 2025, Ethereum's ownership landscape shows continued concentration, with notable shifts among holder groups. While the percentage of holders with 10,000+ ETH decreased from approximately 0.00077% in January to 0.00071% by April, their share of total ETH supply increased marginally, from 74.63% to 74.97%. This inverse trend indicates that although fewer ultra-large holders remained, those who did accumulated more ETH amid the market turbulence, likely taking advantage of lower prices during the February Bybit hack and subsequent macroeconomic pressures.
Meanwhile, mid-sized holders (100–1,000 ETH and 1,000–10,000 ETH) saw their holder percentages decline consistently from January to April (from 0.0259% to 0.0248% and 0.00368% to 0.00365%, respectively). Correspondingly, their share of total ETH supply also decreased slightly, suggesting these groups likely reduced their positions or redistributed holdings amid uncertainty, contributing to increasing dominance by the largest holders.
Smaller investors (0.1–1 ETH and 1–10 ETH) also experienced declines in their share of holders, indicating potential retail investor caution or liquidation of holdings due to price volatility. Their combined share of total ETH supply fell marginally, reflecting diminished participation during market downturns.
Overall, the data suggests Ethereum’s supply continues to concentrate among the largest wallets, despite fewer holders in this elite category. This trend aligns with the flattening Gini coefficient observed, pointing to slowing but persistent accumulation at the top. Market implications include heightened vulnerability to selling pressure from large holders and potential challenges to decentralization optics.
From January to April 2025, Ethereum holder counts showed interesting month-to-month trends, highlighting changing investor sentiment.
January saw retail accumulation, with the smallest bucket (0.1–1 ETH) adding 29,358 new holders, possibly attracted by the lower prices following December’s peak. However, mid-sized holders (1–10 ETH and 10–100 ETH) continued reducing positions (-11,368 and -3,036 holders, respectively), indicating caution among moderate investors despite a minor increase (+111 holders) in larger holders (1,000–10,000 ETH).
February marked a positive shift as retail enthusiasm strengthened further (+23,221 holders, 0.1–1 ETH bucket), supported by renewed buying from small to medium-sized holders (+3,312 holders, 1–10 ETH). Meanwhile, larger groups also increased slightly (+74 holders in 1,000–10,000 ETH), suggesting some institutional or high-net-worth investors saw value at lower prices despite recent market turbulence.
March displayed continued retail optimism with small holders (0.1–1 ETH and 1–10 ETH) growing notably (+27,075 and +5,538 holders). However, mid-range investors (10–100 ETH) still reduced exposure (-996 holders), reflecting persistent uncertainty amid macroeconomic tensions and lingering effects from the February hack. The largest holders (10,000+ ETH) also sharply decreased (-38 holders), highlighting strategic selling among whales as Ethereum’s price remained under pressure.
In April, sentiment turned sharply negative among small retail investors, with a dramatic drop in the 0.1–1 ETH bucket (-47,153 holders), coinciding with Ethereum’s price collapsing toward multi-year lows ($1,400). However, medium-sized holders showed resilience, slightly increasing positions (1–10 ETH up +3,203 holders, 10–100 ETH up +571 holders). The largest investors (1,000–10,000 ETH) continued cautious accumulation (+120 holders), potentially signaling strategic positioning at low prices despite the uncertain macro environment.
In 2025, the distribution of ETH supply across holder buckets revealed dynamic shifts that closely mirrored Ethereum's dramatic price movements and evolving market sentiment.
Early in the year, January saw sharp declines in holdings among mid-sized investor groups (1–10 ETH, 10–100 ETH, and 100–1000 ETH), reflecting widespread caution after Ethereum’s rapid descent from nearly $4,100 to below $3,000. Notably, the largest holders (10,000+ ETH) significantly accumulated (+1.26 million ETH), suggesting deep-pocketed investors viewed the drop as an opportunity to increase stakes amid widespread panic selling.
February provided mixed signals. Medium-sized investors (1–10 ETH, +8,108 ETH; 100–1000 ETH, +75,947 ETH) moderately re-entered, likely responding to price stabilization around $2,500. However, smaller institutions (10–100 ETH bucket) continued to trim holdings, reflecting lingering anxiety after the devastating Bybit hack in late February. Despite the uncertainty, the largest ETH holders (10,000+ ETH) maintained a cautious stance, adding nearly 1 million ETH, possibly capitalizing on depressed valuations.
In March, trends shifted again. Smaller and medium-sized retail investors (0.1–1 ETH, 1–10 ETH) cautiously added positions, signaling renewed optimism as Ethereum briefly rebounded above $2,000. Conversely, medium-to-large investors (10–100 ETH, 100–1000 ETH) reduced exposure, possibly locking in short-term gains or minimizing further downside risks amid persistent macroeconomic tensions. Significantly, institutional-level holders (10,000+ ETH) aggressively increased holdings by approximately 1.37 million ETH, a strong indicator that institutional confidence was tentatively returning despite the broader caution.
By April, Ethereum's plunge toward $1,400 following the announcement of significant U.S. import tariffs triggered mixed responses. Smaller retail groups (0.1–1 ETH) reduced positions (-6,798 ETH), reflecting panic-driven selling. Medium-sized retail holders (1–10 ETH, +9,850 ETH) and moderate institutional investors (1,000–10,000 ETH, +162,120 ETH) took advantage of lower prices, suggesting selective confidence at these depressed levels. The largest holders, however, sharply reduced accumulation to only about 500,000 ETH, indicating growing caution among the whales amid deteriorating macroeconomic conditions.
Between late February and mid-April 2025, Ethereum's supply dynamics across liquidity buckets mirrored significant market volatility and macroeconomic uncertainties. "Highly liquid" ETH supply showed initial stability near 14 million ETH through late February into early March, rising slightly to approximately 14.48 million ETH on March 18 during Ethereum’s brief stabilization around $2,000. This increase indicated short-term readiness among holders to trade, likely due to traders positioning for potential market rebounds amid Ethereum’s sharp price fluctuations.
However, as macroeconomic headwinds intensified, notably following the announcement of U.S. tariffs in early April, "highly liquid" ETH gradually declined from around 14.23 million ETH in late March to approximately 14.07 million ETH by mid-April. This reduction suggests growing caution, with holders pulling ETH away from exchanges and liquid wallets into safer, long-term storage due to deepening bearish sentiment.
The "liquid" category, meanwhile, showed consistent declines from approximately 20.4 million ETH in late February down to roughly 19.1 million ETH by early April. This steady decrease aligns with Ethereum's falling prices and heightened market fear, as investors steadily reduced actively traded holdings, possibly reallocating to less risky positions or moving assets off exchanges in response to broader market turmoil.
Conversely, "illiquid" Ethereum supply rose substantially over this period—from roughly 109.8 million ETH in late February to about 112.6 million ETH in mid-April. This growing illiquidity signals increased long-term accumulation and a strategic shift toward holding positions amid price downturns and macroeconomic stress. It underscores holders' caution about market risks, prioritizing security over immediate liquidity as Ethereum hovered near multi-year lows around $1,400.
From January to April 2025, Ethereum’s market capitalization, realized capitalization, and the Market Value to Realized Value (MVRV) ratio highlighted major shifts in market sentiment amid substantial price volatility.
Market capitalization represents Ethereum’s current price multiplied by total circulating supply, reflecting real-time market sentiment. Realized capitalization measures the average cost basis of all circulating ETH—essentially, the aggregate price paid historically by investors. The MVRV ratio (market cap divided by realized cap) indicates if investors are generally in profit (>1) or loss (<1), signaling market tops or bottoms.
In January, Ethereum's market cap declined steadily from $441 billion to $397 billion, paralleling a price drop from $3,660 to $3,300. Realized cap rose marginally, suggesting investors still held at relatively high average costs. The declining MVRV from 1.38 to around 1.22 revealed diminishing investor profitability, marking weakening market sentiment likely triggered by Fed hawkishness and profit-taking after ETH's Q4 2024 peak.
February saw ETH fall sharply below $2,700, pulling market cap down to $283 billion, briefly below the realized cap ($330 billion). This caused MVRV to dip below 1 (0.99), a strong bearish signal typically associated with market distress—exacerbated by the Bybit hack ($1.5 billion stolen ETH).
March and April intensified bearish conditions. Market cap fell drastically to a low of $176 billion by April 8 as ETH prices plummeted to $1,460. Realized cap declined slowly, showing minimal investor selling despite losses, reflecting hope for recovery. By mid-April, the MVRV reached a severe low (~0.58), indicating extreme undervaluation and market capitulation, highlighting potential oversold conditions that could eventually attract value buyers.
Between late February and mid-April 2025, Ethereum’s price movements and the Net Unrealized Profit/Loss (NUPL) metric demonstrated deepening bearish sentiment and increasing investor capitulation.
NUPL measures the market's overall profitability by calculating the difference between market cap and realized cap, divided by market cap. Positive values indicate net unrealized profits (investor optimism), while negative values suggest net unrealized losses (investor pessimism or capitulation).
Starting late February, Ethereum’s price dropped from around $2,550 to about $2,210 by month's end. NUPL fell from near-neutral levels (-0.07) into deeper negative territory (-0.24), indicating growing unrealized losses and rising pessimism.
March saw conditions worsen significantly. By mid-month, Ethereum had fallen to approximately $1,880, and NUPL reached -0.45, signaling substantial investor losses and heightened fear. A temporary bounce to roughly $2,080 in late March saw NUPL briefly improve (-0.31), but confidence remained fragile, and prices quickly resumed their downward trend.
April intensified investor distress further. Prices plunged sharply, hitting a low near $1,460 by April 8, driving NUPL to an extreme low of -0.86. This dramatic drop signaled severe market capitulation—investors were realizing heavy losses amid panic selling following news of macroeconomic stress and regulatory concerns. While brief rebounds occurred—such as a recovery to approximately $1,670 (NUPL improving slightly to -0.62)—sentiment remained deeply negative.
By mid-April, Ethereum’s persistent negative NUPL below -0.70 indicated extreme undervaluation, with the market firmly in capitulation territory, highlighting conditions potentially favorable for long-term accumulation despite widespread bearishness.
From late February to mid-April 2025, Ethereum’s price dynamics analyzed alongside the Pi Cycle indicator and key moving averages (30-day and 200-day) showed substantial bearish momentum and extreme market pessimism.
The Pi Cycle indicator combines two long-term moving averages to identify potential market tops and bottoms. When ETH price significantly deviates below the Pi Cycle line, it suggests substantial undervaluation and bearish sentiment; the wider the gap, the deeper the pessimism.
In late February, Ethereum's price declined sharply from around $2,550 to approximately $2,210 by month's end. Meanwhile, the Pi Cycle value hovered steadily around $6,190, revealing a deepening gap and highlighting growing undervaluation and bearish investor sentiment. Additionally, ETH consistently traded below both its 30-day moving average ($2,930), further signaling sustained bearish momentum.
Throughout March, ETH's price continued deteriorating, hitting a low near $1,880 by mid-month, significantly beneath declining short-term (30-day MA ~$2,400) and long-term averages (200-day MA ~$2,890). By late March, ETH briefly rebounded to around $2,080, but this was short-lived, failing to challenge key resistance levels. The Pi Cycle steadily declined but remained high (near $6,000), underscoring a continued state of deep undervaluation.
April brought intensified bearish conditions, with ETH prices plunging further to around $1,460 by April 8, far below the Pi Cycle indicator ($2,830). This massive divergence highlighted extreme market distress and potential capitulation, suggesting ETH was highly oversold, potentially attracting long-term value investors despite pervasive short-term pessimism.
From January through mid-April 2025, Ethereum’s on-chain address activity reflected significant shifts in investor behavior, correlating closely with its volatile price movements and deteriorating market conditions. The 30-day moving average (MA) of total active Ethereum addresses dropped notably from approximately 508,000 in late February to a low of around 446,000 by early April. This decline coincided directly with Ethereum’s price collapse from roughly $2,550 to below $1,460. The reduction in active addresses signifies lowered network engagement, mirroring investor caution and diminished transactional activity amid bearish sentiment.
Meanwhile, new address creation (30-day MA) showed resilience, increasing slightly from around 116,000 addresses per day in late February to approximately 119,000 by mid-April, despite sharply declining prices. This counterintuitive rise suggests the market turmoil attracted speculative new entrants or value-focused buyers taking advantage of price weakness. However, sustained growth in new addresses amid falling prices should be cautiously interpreted, as it might also reflect short-term speculative interest rather than long-term accumulation.
Conversely, passive addresses—those holding ETH without actively transacting—steadily decreased from around 297,000 to approximately 283,000 (30-day MA) by mid-April. This trend points toward heightened selling pressure, indicating the activation or liquidation of previously dormant holdings. Such behavior typically corresponds to market capitulation and increased investor anxiety during periods of extreme downside volatility.
For market participants, these insights have important implications. The decline in active addresses signals weakened overall market health and suggests caution regarding short-term price expectations. At the same time, rising new addresses indicate potential accumulation interest at depressed prices, possibly hinting at the formation of a market floor. Lastly, decreasing passive addresses highlight ongoing capitulation pressures, reinforcing the need for vigilance but also suggesting possible exhaustion of selling activity that could eventually lead to stabilization.
From late February to mid-April 2025, Ethereum's transaction dynamics, captured by the 30-day moving averages of new sending and receiving addresses, reflected important shifts in investor sentiment amidst significant market volatility. The average daily count of new sending addresses increased notably, rising from approximately 109,400 in late February to about 115,200 by mid-April. This growth indicates a steady rise in users initiating transactions, likely due to increased selling pressure or asset repositioning amid declining prices.
Similarly, new receiving addresses displayed a clear upward trajectory, growing from roughly 116,000 addresses daily in late February to nearly 118,800 by mid-April. This consistent increase suggests continued buying activity or new accumulation, despite falling Ethereum prices—from around $2,550 down to below $1,460 during the period. The parallel increase in both new sending and receiving addresses indicates heightened transactional activity and network engagement driven by market distress, where some investors liquidated positions while others sought opportunities at lower valuations.
For market participants, these patterns have critical implications. The rise in sending addresses underscores ongoing selling pressures or asset transfers amid bearish market conditions, signaling potential caution for short-term price expectations. Conversely, the simultaneous rise in new receiving addresses reflects increased participation from investors viewing price declines as an attractive entry point. This could be indicative of speculative buying or longer-term accumulation strategies emerging amidst market turmoil, suggesting a potential approach to equilibrium or the market bottom.
In conclusion, the first quarter of 2025 was characterized by significant volatility across the cryptocurrency markets, driven by macroeconomic uncertainties, regulatory developments, and notable security incidents.
Ethereum faced similar challenges, experiencing sharp declines from highs near $4,100 to multi-year lows around $1,400. Despite price turbulence exacerbated by the $1.5 billion Bybit security breach, Ethereum continued to advance technologically, with significant progress in scalability upgrades like Arbitrum's decentralization via BoLD and the upcoming Pectra upgrade. Fluctuations in ETF flows, particularly with Grayscale Mini and BlackRock, underscored the intense investor caution and selective optimism in response to Ethereum’s evolving ecosystem.
If you're looking to enhance your market strategies, gain clarity through comprehensive analytics, or leverage detailed insights for informed decision-making, don't hesitate to contact us. Additionally, we invite institutional investors, brokers, and traders interested in our advanced analytical tools to book a personalized demo to experience firsthand how Amberdata can empower your crypto investment strategies and operational efficiencies.
Explore extensive blockchain analytics and market research by Michael Marshall, Head of Research at Amberdata, on our comprehensive research blog. Michael brings deep expertise across a diverse range of critical topics, delivering detailed analyses on market volatility, decentralized finance (DeFi), and actionable trading strategies tailored for institutional and retail investors alike. Below is a selection of featured pieces, highlighting the variety of insights you can discover:
Dive into Bitcoin volatility with the foundational On-chain Metrics BTC Volatility Part 1, introducing essential indicators such as liquidity patterns, mining influence, and investor behaviors. Further deepen your understanding with Part 2, exploring on-chain activity from miners and institutional traders during significant market events.
Examine Ethereum’s dynamic relationship with stablecoins in our DeFi Activity Stablecoins series, beginning with an overview of their liquidity impacts and risk implications. Part 2 provides a deeper statistical analysis, uncovering how stablecoin lending affects Ethereum’s intraday volatility, illustrating their dual roles in market stability and systemic risk.
For those interested in advanced trading strategies, our comprehensive Crypto Pairs Trading series starts by explaining cointegration and its advantages over simple correlation in Part 1. Part 2 and Part 3 offer essential statistical validations and practical trading strategy guidelines. Conclude with Part 4, reviewing empirical results and strategy performance evaluations.
Finally, understand market liquidity and volatility drivers through practical applications, like our Orderbook Analysis, which examines real-world impacts on cryptocurrency trading during major macroeconomic disruptions.
These topics represent just a snapshot of the extensive insights available. Visit our blog to uncover more data-driven research and market analyses.
The information contained in this report is provided by Amberdata solely for educational and informational purposes. The contents of this report should not be construed as financial, investment, legal, tax, or any other form of professional advice. Amberdata does not provide personalized recommendations; any opinions or suggestions expressed in this report are for general informational purposes only.
Although Amberdata has made every effort to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, it cannot be held responsible for any errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or outdated information. Market conditions, regulations, and laws are subject to change, and readers should perform their own research and consult with a qualified professional before making any financial decisions or taking any actions based on the information provided in this report.
Past performance is not indicative of future results, and any investments discussed or mentioned in this report may not be suitable for all individuals or circumstances. Investing involves risks, and the value of investments can go up or down. Amberdata disclaims any liability for any loss or damage that may arise from the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this report.
By accessing and using the information provided in this report, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Amberdata, its affiliates, and their respective officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, or expenses (including reasonable attorney’s fees) arising from your use of or reliance on the information contained herein.
Copyright © 2025 Amberdata. All rights reserved.