‍#夏日创作营
Bitcoin ETF sees five straight days of inflows! First since April—how high can this rebound go?
In late July, while everyone was still stuck in the afterglow of the World Cup, smart money quietly shifted direction. On July 20, US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded about $227 million in net inflow in a single day—this is the fifth consecutive trading day with positive fund flows, and the first time since late April. Over the five days, total net inflows pulled in about $727 million. After June’s record-breaking capital exodus, this is the longest stretch of sustained buying. The total assets under management for Bitcoin ETFs also quietly climbed back from the early-July trough of nearly $75 billion to about $79 billion. Meanwhile, Ethereum ETFs were not idle either: daily net increase of about $38 million, with BlackRock’s ETHA leading the way. At the same time, both Bitcoin and Ethereum have started to rebound—last night they both broke above the 66,000 and 1,950 levels, respectively. So why is capital flowing back to Bitcoin, and what’s behind this rally? Where will the rebound go? Let “Little Caishen” chat with you:
1. Why does this rebound happen?
1. Demand for a rebound after a major selloff. This is the most direct reason. After Bitcoin’s brutal drop in June, it fell a full 25,000 points from May’s 82,000 peak. On the macro cycle technical indicators, it became severely oversold. Even the price broke below the 200-week moving average—an important long-term support level—driving strong rebound demand. Cheap coins also attracted arbitrage capital, forming the most solid foundation for this rebound.
2. ETF buying reappears to fill the most critical gap.‌ During the past quarter of persistent outflows, the market’s biggest missing piece was continuous, institutional-grade buying. Now that there have been net inflows for five straight days—even though the volume isn’t especially staggering, it sends a clear signal: institutions have not completely exited; they’re just waiting for better prices. When panic fades and valuations return to a reasonable range, allocation-oriented capital begins to test the waters again.
3. The “World Cup effect” logic also applies to the crypto market.‌ Whenever there are major global events, speculative capital naturally contracts—whether in China’s A-shares or the coin space. Attention gets diverted and risk appetite declines—this is a shared trait. When the event ends, suppressed short-term funds immediately look for an exit channel. Crypto markets are open 24/7, making this kind of return even more direct: capital doesn’t need to wait for market open, doesn’t need to deal with time zones. Once risk events land and sentiment repairs, buying can surge instantly. In late July, as the World Cup dust settled—right as Bitcoin was consolidating and building strength at low levels—the two created a subtle timing resonance.
4. A subtle shift in macro policy expectations.‌ The market had been betting that the Federal Reserve would start cutting rates in 2026, but due to geopolitical developments, inflation pressure surged and the rate-cut expectations reversed. However, because uncertainty is being gradually digested—whether it’s partial easing in the US–Iran situation or policy signals like the 401(k) plan loosening its allocation to crypto assets—the market’s biggest “unknown fear” is cooling down. When the worst case doesn’t happen, funds dare to re-enter.
2. Why did the funds choose Bitcoin?
The most direct and fundamental reason is that Bitcoin is cheap! This selloff began after Bitcoin hit an all-time high of 12W+ in October 2025. By June 2026’s low, it had fallen to around 57,700. Bitcoin’s drawdown is close to 60%, while Ethereum’s is over 60%. In the same period, the Dow rose nearly 20%, the Nasdaq rose over 25%, the South Korean stock market rose close to 150%, and even though gold had a decline in 2026, it still ended up with gains. If you’re long-term capital, would you choose assets at high levels or choose a low-priced but bullish-in-the-long-run Bitcoin? The answer is obvious.
3. How sustainable is this rally?
How far this rally can go depends on three key variables:
‌Test one: Can ETF inflows turn from a “pulse” into a “trend”?‌ Five days and $727 million sounds like a lot, but compared with the first half’s net outflow of $5.4 billion, it’s just a drop in the bucket. The real turning point requires seeing sustained net inflows at the weekly level, not emotional fund-repair over one or two weeks. If inflows pause again, this rebound is likely just a dead-cat bounce.
‌Test two: The battle between longs and shorts at $69,000–$70,000.‌ From a technical perspective, Bitcoin had been range-bound around $75k for a long time. $65,000 is the line the bulls must defend. If it can hold above $69,000 with increased volume, it may open the door to a mid-term rebound. If it breaks back below $65,000 again, the next stop would be $60,000. Above the $80,000 level, there’s liquidity from massive short liquidations—those are the real “hard bones.”
‌Test three: Can Ethereum keep up with the pace?‌ Ethereum is currently around $1,880. Over the past 30 days it’s up about 10%, but over the past year it’s still down nearly 48%. If Bitcoin rises while Ethereum remains weak, it indicates that funds only dare to embrace the “safest” assets and that risk appetite hasn’t truly recovered. Only when ETH breaks out in sync with a surge in volume can we confirm this is a real market recovery—not just a Bitcoin-only show.
4. Where should we look for targets in this rebound?
Although large funds have started to flow back into the crypto market, don’t get blindly optimistic. Remember: in the first half of 2026, the total net outflow from Bitcoin ETFs reached $5.4 billion. This is the first time since the product launched it has recorded a half-year net outflow. From May 15 to June 3—during a streak of 13 consecutive trading days—capital fled the market, and to date it remains the longest-ever “bleeding” record for spot ETFs. The $4.4 billion selling pressure wiped out the rebound gains from April. BlackRock’s IBIT—once a top cash magnet—saw $5 billion in redemptions in just May and June, exceeding the total of all outflow months in its history. So rather than calling these five days of net inflows a “victory of buying,” it’s better described as “successful bleeding control.” The market is nowhere near time to celebrate, but at least the most panicked phase may be behind us.
As for rebound targets, Little Caishen also mentioned this in an earlier article: on the weekly chart, pay attention to the resistance around 72,500. This is both the position of the 30-week moving average and the bull-bear boundary—the strong resistance zone of the 200-day moving average. If it can break through, it would suggest the bear market has fully ended and a bull market has returned. Of course, that’s a longer-term topic. Looking at the present, with institutional funds quietly returning and coins remaining cheap, getting on this rebound’s tailwind is the top priority. Before the price reaches 72,500, you should hold and wait for gains. Never short based on a hunch. Moving alongside smart money is always your most correct choice!
How are you all viewing the upcoming market? Institutions are buying, buying, buying—are you still holding short positions? It’s not easy to create original work—drop a comment and chat!

$PI
Which big shot can take me up
Little Princess
Sis Little Princess 👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸👸
Can you let us be happy all day long?
Please accept a bow from Little Princess.
Energy blessing
Love you—muah muah ^3^

#夏日创作营 US stock market trend analysis: The key for the next year isn’t simply deciding whether US stocks will rise or fall
RBC latest US equities outlook: Tech becomes the main theme again; S&P 500 target of 8,150 points for the next 12 months
In its latest published US stock strategy report, RBC Capital Markets made clear adjustments to its allocation recommendations across major S&P 500 sectors.
The report’s core signal is: RBC still likes the US stock market over the next year, but the path of market gains will not be smooth. The investment mainline may shift again from value stocks, small caps, and non-US markets back to US large-cap tech, artificial intelligence, and mega-cap growth stocks.
On sector allocation, RBC raised the Information Technology sector from “neutral” to “overweight,” while lifting Consumer Discretionary from “underweight” to “neutral.” In contrast, Communication Services was cut from “overweight” to “neutral,” and Utilities was reduced from “neutral” to “underweight.”
After the adjustments, the three sectors RBC currently has at “overweight” are Information Technology, Financials, and Materials.
Tech returns as the preferred growth segment. RBC’s most important change this time is to re-establish Information Technology as the preferred growth segment. Over the past month or more, the tech sector has lagged the S&P 500 at times due to profit-taking in AI bellwethers, semiconductor valuation pressure, and rotations in market style. But from a fundamentals perspective, tech companies’ earnings and revenue expectations remain among the strongest across all sectors, and capital has started flowing back into tech funds.
More importantly, RBC believes that although the tech sector’s overall valuation is not cheap, it is only slightly above its long-term average and has not reached an out-of-control level. Given that tech stocks’ market-cap share in the S&P 500 is already above one third, if investors remain bullish on the S&P 500’s performance over the next year, it is difficult to be bearish on the tech sector at the same time. Opportunities within tech are also not identical.
RBC thinks Software, IT services, and tech hardware, storage, and peripherals currently have both favorable earnings-revision trends and attractive relative valuations. Among them, the Software sector’s valuation is close to historical lows, but earnings expectations remain strongly upward; its risk-reward is improving. By comparison, the semiconductor industry still has very strong earnings growth, but valuations remain at historical highs. Even with recent pullbacks, RBC reminds investors that there is no guarantee within the year that profit-taking won’t happen again in AI and semiconductor “hot” stocks.
Consumer sentiment may be overly pessimistic. RBC lifted Consumer Discretionary from underweight to neutral, but that does not mean RBC thinks US consumers have fully recovered. Instead, RBC believes market pessimism about the consumer sector may already be excessive.
At present, US consumer confidence is still relatively weak, but some survey data show signs of stabilizing. Historical experience suggests that when University of Michigan consumer confidence starts to rise, both consumer discretionary and consumer staples tend to capture relatively favorable returns. From an earnings perspective, the earnings revisions in the consumer discretionary sector are roughly balanced. Valuation is not low, but it is not clearly so expensive that it must remain underweighted.
RBC also believes that in sub-sectors such as auto parts, diversified consumer services, and specialty retail, there are starting to be more opportunities worth watching. Therefore, this adjustment looks more like a “repair” from excessive pessimism rather than a strong bullish call on the consumer cycle.
Financials and Materials remain overweight. Other than tech, RBC continues to overweight Financials and Materials. Financials is one of the best-rated sectors in RBC analysts’ surveys.
Analysts generally like the financial industry’s outlook for the next 6 to 12 months and hold a positive view on sector valuations, demand, and the US domestic policy environment. At the same time, earnings and revenue expectations for the financial sector are improving, and capital flows have turned positive. Banks, insurance, and consumer finance are the sub-segments RBC considers relatively most attractive.
For capital markets businesses at investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, RBC is comparatively cautious.
Capital markets is not the most attractive direction within the financial industry right now, but its valuation is already clearly below last year and is no longer in an obviously expensive state. If M&A, IPOs, securities issuance, and private credit activity continue to pick up, capital markets business could still benefit.
Materials also remains overweight. Its main advantage is relatively lower valuation, with earnings and revenue expectations turning positive again, and capital flows starting to stabilize. Metals and mining, and chemicals are among the more watched directions. Energy fundamentals are strong, but capital flows remain a constraint. Energy was at one point an object RBC considered upgrading to overweight.
From a fundamentals perspective, the energy sector has strong earnings and revenue revisions, relatively cheap valuation, and analysts generally take a positive view of demand, the policy environment, and future performance. Meanwhile, amid ongoing global geopolitical uncertainty, energy stocks can also provide some portfolio “insurance” effect. However, RBC ultimately keeps the energy sector at neutral allocation, mainly because there have been notably clear capital outflows from energy funds recently. That means RBC is not denying the energy sector; rather, it believes there is currently insufficient confirmation from the capital-flow side. Once capital flows improve again, energy could become one of the next sectors to be upgraded.
The industrial sector has good fundamentals, but valuation is already too high. Industrial sector earnings and revenue expectations remain robust; manufacturing activity, infrastructure investment, supply-chain reshaping, and AI infrastructure capital expenditures all provide long-term support for related companies. However, the industrial sector has already become one of the most expensive sectors by valuation within the S&P 500, and the previously strong capital inflows have started to weaken.
Therefore, while RBC acknowledges its fundamentals, it temporarily maintains neutral allocation and does not recommend chasing upside at these elevated valuation levels.
Within industrials, the professional services industry has relatively more attractive valuation and earnings-revision dynamics. Areas such as electrical equipment and building & engineering still have strong earnings trends, but valuations have clearly risen. Utilities was cut to underweight. Utilities is the clearest underweight direction in this round of adjustments. Although utilities’ earnings and revenue expectations continue to improve, RBC believes the sector currently faces three main problems: valuation is too high, capital flows are too weak, and analysts lack sufficient confidence in future performance.
In addition, as US midterm elections approach, the affordability of electricity prices and living costs could become a policy focus, which may create potential pressure on utilities companies’ pricing power and earnings expectations. As a result, RBC cut utilities from neutral to underweight. Within the sector, only independent power producers and renewable energy producers are relatively more attractive in terms of valuation and earnings revisions.
S&P 500 target of 8,150 points remains. On the overall market view, RBC maintains its S&P 500 target of 8,150 points for the next 12 months. Based on the index level at the time the model locks, this implies roughly 10.8% upside potential.
RBC’s core logic is that over the next year, US corporate earnings growth—especially for AI-related companies—can, to some extent, offset the negative impacts from rising interest rates, inflation pressure, and valuation contraction. Its valuation model assumes that the S&P 500 P/E ratio gradually falls to about 24x, and it applies a 5% haircut to market consensus earnings expectations. Under assumptions of inflation around 3%, one Fed rate hike, and a 10-year US Treasury yield of about 4.5%, the model yields a reasonable value for the S&P 500 of about 8,162 points, which is broadly consistent with the official target of 8,150 points.
Therefore, RBC’s view for the coming year is not “valuations expand indefinitely,” but rather that earnings growth can push the index higher even as valuations contract slightly.
Second-quarter earnings growth still strong. The market currently expects S&P 500 constituent companies’ earnings per share in 2Q 2026 to grow year over year by about 24%. While this is lower than the roughly 30% pace in 1Q, it is still at a very strong level. Among companies that have reported early, about 94% had earnings above market expectations, up from 84% in 1Q. However, the proportion of companies with revenues above expectations is about 65%, down from 80% in 1Q. This result suggests that US corporate profits remain strong, but the breadth of growth is not as optimistic as the earnings numbers alone might indicate. Some companies may deliver upside earnings through cost control, margin improvement, or capital-structure optimization, rather than relying entirely on rapid revenue growth.
More worth noting is that the trend of upward revisions to overall S&P 500 earnings expectations has recently weakened, though this weakening is mainly concentrated among the other 490 companies outside the top 10. For the S&P 500’s top 10 by market value, the upward revision proportion for earnings expectations is currently about 90%, already near historical highs. This indicates that mega-cap companies still have a clear earnings advantage.
Market leadership may return to large growth stocks. Since the start of this year, the market has gone through multiple style switches. Value stocks, small caps, non-US markets, and companies with relatively lower weights in the S&P 500 have all outperformed large tech and mega-cap growth stocks at various times. RBC believes this kind of “market breadth” rally may still persist in the short term, but it looks more like episodic trading rather than a fundamental change in long-term leadership.
Conditions for large growth stocks to regain leadership are gradually forming.
First, earnings growth over the next few years for AI-related companies and the “Magnificent Seven” is expected to remain higher than for other companies in the S&P 500.
Second, earnings expectations for the top 10 companies in the S&P 500 have improved again, while earnings revisions for other companies are starting to cool.
Third, after recent pullbacks, valuation pressure on large tech stocks has eased noticeably compared with earlier levels.
RBC’s valuation model shows that the relative P/E for the S&P 500’s top 10 companies can now be explained by their long-term earnings-growth advantage, and they are no longer as clearly overvalued as they were earlier. As a result, RBC is on alert that the market could shift back toward US stocks, the tech sector, AI themes, and mega-cap growth stocks.
The small-cap rally may continue, but its durability needs monitoring. Russell 2000 has recently clearly outperformed the S&P 500, and small caps have broken upward out of the prior trading range. Factors supporting small caps include improved manufacturing and employment data, high levels of short positioning in the market, and an expectation that earnings growth in 2027 could accelerate meaningfully. According to market consensus expectations, small-cap profit growth in 2027 is expected to exceed both the overall S&P 500 and some AI bellwethers. Still, RBC does not fully pivot to small caps. After the Russell 2000 index annual adjustment, its valuation has already fallen back from the high end, but it is currently only near the long-term average and has not reached a level that is extremely attractive. At the same time, small caps are more sensitive to financing costs and changes in interest rates. If the market reprices the risk of additional Fed hikes, or capital returns to mega-cap tech stocks, the relative performance of small caps could be pressured. Therefore, small caps still have cyclical opportunities, but for now they are unlikely to replace large tech as the long-term core mainline.
Pullbacks may be capped at 5% to 10%. While RBC continues to like the market’s outlook for the next year, it does not think the upside path will be a straight line. As long as the US economy does not fall into recession and the Fed does not launch a large-scale rate-hike cycle, RBC expects the typical correction range for the S&P 500 is likely to be between 5% and 10%. Risks that could trigger a pullback include worsening Middle East geopolitical conditions, downward revisions to 2027 earnings forecasts, overly optimistic AI and semiconductor earnings expectations, policy repricing triggered by midterm elections, and further increases in US Treasury yields. Of particular note is the 10-year US Treasury yield. If yields merely stay near current high levels, the equity market still has the capacity to absorb them. But if yields continue breaking above 5%, or the Fed enters a stronger rate-hike cycle, the market adjustment could exceed the ordinary 5% to 10% range.
Conclusion
The core takeaways from RBC’s latest report can be summarized as: the logic behind the US stock bull market is not over, but investors need to re-emphasize earnings quality and sector selection. Tech, Financials, and Materials remain RBC’s top three preferred sectors. Pessimistic expectations for Consumer Discretionary may already be excessive and there is some room for a rebound. Energy has attractive fundamentals and valuation, but investors still need to wait for improved capital flows. Industrials have strong earnings, but valuation is too high. Utilities has been cut to underweight due to valuation and policy risks. From the perspective of market style, the sector rotation among small caps, value stocks, and non-US markets over the past period may not be fully finished yet, but the earnings advantage of large tech, AI, and mega-cap growth stocks remains clear.
As tech stock valuations continue to correct, market leadership is approaching a new turning point. For investors, the key for the next year isn’t just deciding whether US stocks will go up or down, but rather finding sectors and companies where earnings can be sustained and delivered, valuations remain relatively reasonable, and there is supportive capital behind them while the index still has room to rise.