JPMorgan: Unwinding IBIT Hedges Could Give Bitcoin an Edge Over Gold
JPMorgan analysts say IBIT's near-record short interest and elevated put-to-call ratios give Bitcoin a mechanical edge over gold, if that defensive positioning unwinds. Bloomberg's Eric Balchunas sees Bitcoin ETFs eventually holding three times gold's AUM.
JPMorgan analysts say Bitcoin's elevated short interest and put-buying versus gold isn't a liability, it's a coiled spring.
Key takeaways
- JPMorgan's September 17 note finds IBIT short interest near its 2026 high while GLD short interest sits below its historical average, leaving Bitcoin with more mechanical upside if that hedging overhang clears.
- Gold ETFs have fully recovered all 2026 outflows; Bitcoin ETFs have recovered roughly half, yet JPMorgan analysts say the positioning gap is what gives Bitcoin its relative edge from here.
- Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas separately predicted on September 17 that Bitcoin ETFs will ultimately hold three times the assets of gold ETFs, driven by generational wealth transfer and declining Bitcoin volatility.
JPMorgan analysts, in a note dated September 17, 2026 and first reported by The Block, say Bitcoin could outperform gold if the elevated short interest and put-buying on BlackRock's IBIT unwinds, a mechanical dynamic gold's more normalized positioning cannot replicate. The note, led by Managing Director Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou, frames what looks like institutional skepticism as the precise condition that gives Bitcoin an asymmetric edge.
The analysts' data show gold ETFs have fully recovered all 2026 outflows, while Bitcoin ETFs have clawed back only about half. Despite that gap, IBIT short interest sits near its highest level of the year, and the put-to-call open interest ratio for IBIT runs above that of the SPDR Gold Shares ETF (GLD), whose short interest is already below its historical average. Both assets caught a bid after the Federal Reserve's July 28-29 meeting as the debasement trade returned, but that bid has softened over the past week as real bond yields moved higher.
The Coiled Spring
Panigirtzoglou's team put the thesis plainly in the note:
"This contrast suggests that bitcoin still faces an overall more sceptical positioning backdrop than gold, perhaps due to more elevated hedging demand, despite the recent inflows and build up of futures positioning."
That skeptical backdrop is the point. Every short position on IBIT and every put in the open interest stack is a future buy order waiting to happen. When those hedges get unwound, through covering, expiration, or a sentiment shift, the reflexive bid lands on Bitcoin, not gold. GLD doesn't have the same fuel because institutional players already reduced their hedges there. JPMorgan's analysts are effectively telling clients that TradFi's lingering defensiveness on Bitcoin is the setup for its next relative outperformance.
The firm published an earlier note in February 2026 estimating a long-term volatility-adjusted Bitcoin price of $266,000 based on comparison to gold, which gives context for how far the desk thinks the gap can close over a longer horizon. The short-term positioning note is the nearer-term mechanism.
The CLARITY Act's recent failure in the Senate is cited as a headwind in the note. The bill's collapse removes a potential catalyst for fiduciaries sitting on the fence. Bitcoin's re-rating, however, is already happening despite that regulatory drag. When legislative clarity eventually arrives, the positioning bid gets another leg.
What the Math Says
Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas added a longer-term dimension on September 17, saying on X that Bitcoin ETFs will "triple gold in assets," citing younger investors growing up with Bitcoin as a store of value, falling Bitcoin volatility, and deeper institutional sales infrastructure as the drivers.
Global gold ETFs held approximately $615 billion at the end of August 2026, per the World Gold Council. Three times that is roughly $1.85 trillion in Bitcoin ETF assets under management. That figure implies a Bitcoin price well into the six-figure range, depending on accumulation pace. The institutional infrastructure is being built in real time, even as the hedging data show many of the same institutions still treating Bitcoin as the asset that needs to prove itself.
That gap between behavior and positioning is the actual signal. Every basis point of excess hedging on IBIT versus GLD is a confession that Bitcoin hasn't yet been priced as a peer monetary asset. The unwind isn't just a price catalyst, it's the moment the asterisk comes off.
What to Watch
Track IBIT short interest levels against BTC/GLD relative price performance over the next two quarters. If IBIT short interest and put-to-call ratios decline materially but Bitcoin still underperforms GLD over that same window, the coiled-spring thesis is wrong and the hedging overhang was masking genuine fundamental preference for gold. That's the clean falsifying condition. Until then, the positioning data favor Bitcoin's relative trade.
Sources
Frequently Asked Questions
Short sellers who are short IBIT must eventually buy shares to close their positions. Investors holding puts either let them expire worthless or sell them, removing downward pressure. When both happen at scale, the resulting buy flow hits Bitcoin's price directly through IBIT's creation mechanism. The more compressed the short and put positioning going in, the sharper the reflexive move coming out. That's the mechanical logic JPMorgan's analysts are pointing to.
Gold ETFs globally held approximately $615 billion at the end of August 2026, per the World Gold Council. Bitcoin ETFs have recovered roughly half of their 2026 outflows, leaving a substantial AUM gap. Balchunas' "triple gold" scenario implies Bitcoin ETFs would need to reach roughly $1.85 trillion in assets to close that ratio, which requires sustained inflows and price appreciation over years, not quarters. The gap is real; the direction of travel, per both JPMorgan and Balchunas, is toward closure.
The bill's Senate failure removes a near-term regulatory clarity catalyst, and JPMorgan's analysts cite it as a headwind. For fiduciaries with compliance constraints, a clear statutory framework matters. The practical effect is that some institutional allocators will stay on the sidelines longer. What the positioning data make clear, though, is that significant institutional capital is already moving into Bitcoin ETFs despite the absence of that clarity. The failure delays a leg of the rally; it doesn't reverse the structural trend.
