Interview: SynFutures CEO Rachel Lin explains why ETFs change the shape of Bitcoin’s drawdowns, not the cause

As Bitcoin navigates recent price volatility, market participants are questioning how much structural dynamics have shifted.

We spoke with Rachel Lin, CEO and Co-Founder of decentralized derivatives exchange SynFutures, to unpack the current landscape.

From the reliability of ETF cost-basis clusters to the changing behaviours of long-term holders, Lin offers a clear-eyed assessment of the forces shaping price action.

She discusses the tension between on-chain accumulation and macroeconomic headwinds, analysing whether current derivatives data signals complacency or a healthy reset.

Here are the excerpts from the interview.

Invezz: Do ETF cost-basis clusters meaningfully function as market floors that materially change downside dynamics, or are they being over-interpreted in a market where price is still largely macro-driven?

ETF cost-basis clusters act as soft support, not guaranteed floors.

They matter because ETF holders are structurally long and less reactive, but price only respects those levels if macro liquidity and risk conditions cooperate.

Traders often over-index on them without accounting for broader flows.

ETFs are cushioning downside by absorbing spot supply, but they don’t dictate direction.

Rates, dollar strength, and global risk sentiment still dominate marginal pricing—ETFs change the shape of drawdowns, not their cause.

Invezz: How has on-chain positioning evolved since October’s drawdown, and what distinguishes this current setup from prior 30% corrections in terms of holder composition and conviction?

The key difference is ownership. Earlier cycles were dominated by crypto-native, leverage-sensitive holders.

Today, a growing share of supply sits with ETFs and long-only allocators who rebalance slowly and operate on multi-year horizons.

That raises baseline conviction, even if it doesn’t eliminate volatility

Since October, we’ve seen lower exchange inflows, slower coin velocity, and steadier accumulation behaviour.

ETFs are absorbing supply and reducing reflexive sell pressure, but macro still dominates marginal pricing.

Invezz: What are derivatives markets signalling during this retracement?

Derivatives are signalling normalisation rather than stress.

Open interest has declined from highs without forced liquidations, and funding has reset closer to neutral.

That suggests positioning has been cleaned up rather than violently unwound.

Invezz: Does lower implied volatility signal a healthy reset where leverage has been fully flushed, or is it a sign of complacency masking fragilities that could trigger if $83k breaks?

It looks more like a healthy reset. After October’s washout, leverage has been reduced, and risk is being priced more rationally. Vol compression alone isn’t complacency—context matters.

Leverage has come down meaningfully, but it hasn’t disappeared.

Fragility remains in short-dated options, basis trades, and directional perp positioning. A clean break below $83k could still trigger localized pressure.

Invezz: Does the current macro backdrop position Bitcoin as a hedge or a tech proxy, and if $83k holds, will the recovery look materially different from the patterns seen in 2021 or 2024?”

In that environment, Bitcoin still behaves more like a high-beta risk asset.

Until inflation persistence or policy response clearly undermines fiat credibility, BTC remains correlated with broader risk assets rather than acting as a pure hedge.

This recovery likely looks slower and more durable. Instead of a V-shaped bounce driven by aggressive leverage, we’re likely to see a grind-up led by spot accumulation, ETF inflows, and lower systemic leverage—less explosive, but structurally healthier over time.

The post Interview: SynFutures CEO Rachel Lin explains why ETFs change the shape of Bitcoin’s drawdowns, not the cause appeared first on Invezz