Compare IBIT vs FBTC vs ARKB

Bitcoin ETFs like IBIT, FBTC, and ARKB offer investors exposure to Bitcoin with varying fees, structures, and liquidity, making it essential to compare expense ratios, tracking methods, and tax implications before investing.

Jul 17, 2025 at 09:29 pm

Understanding the Basics of Bitcoin ETFs

Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) have become a popular way for investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin without directly holding the cryptocurrency. Among the most talked-about options are IBIT, FBTC, and ARKB. These funds track the price of Bitcoin but differ in structure, fees, and performance characteristics. Understanding these differences is crucial for making informed investment decisions.

Each of these ETFs operates under different management strategies and expense ratios. For instance, IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Trust) is managed by BlackRock, one of the largest asset managers globally. FBTC (Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund) is backed by Fidelity Investments, while ARKB (ARK 21 Shares Bitcoin ETF) is a collaboration between ARK Invest and 21Shares. These distinctions influence how each fund performs and how it might fit into an investor’s portfolio.

Fees and Expense Ratios: A Key Differentiator

One of the most significant factors when comparing IBIT vs FBTC vs ARKB is the fee structure. Investors must consider the expense ratio, which directly impacts long-term returns. As of recent data:

• IBIT has an expense ratio of 0.12%, which is relatively low compared to other crypto ETFs.
• FBTC initially launched with a 0% expense fee until mid-2024, after which it increased to 0.25%.
• ARKB carries an expense ratio of 0.21%, slightly higher than IBIT but lower than FBTC post-promotional period.

These fees may seem minor, but over time, they can significantly affect returns. Therefore, investors who plan to hold these ETFs for the long term should pay close attention to these costs.

Tracking Methodology and Underlying Assets

Another important aspect to compare is how each ETF tracks Bitcoin. While all three aim to mirror the price of Bitcoin, their underlying methodologies vary:

• IBIT holds physical Bitcoin stored in cold storage through regulated custodians. This approach reduces counterparty risk.
• FBTC also holds physical Bitcoin and emphasizes transparency and security through its custodial partnerships.
• ARKB utilizes a combination of direct Bitcoin ownership and futures contracts to maintain its exposure.

The use of futures contracts in ARKB could lead to tracking discrepancies during periods of high volatility or backwardation in the futures market. In contrast, both IBIT and FBTC aim for more direct correlation due to their reliance on physical holdings.

Liquidity and Trading Volume

Liquidity plays a critical role in ETF trading, especially for investors who want to enter or exit positions quickly without affecting the price. High trading volumes generally indicate better liquidity and tighter bid-ask spreads.

• IBIT has consistently shown the highest average daily trading volume among the three, often surpassing $1 billion in daily turnover.
• FBTC follows closely behind, benefiting from Fidelity’s strong retail presence.
• ARKB typically trades at lower volumes compared to the other two, though it remains sufficiently liquid for most investors.

Higher liquidity means investors can trade these ETFs more efficiently, especially during volatile market conditions. Therefore, those prioritizing ease of entry and exit may lean toward IBIT or FBTC.

Premiums and Discounts to Net Asset Value (NAV)

An essential yet often overlooked factor is whether the ETF trades at a premium or discount to its Net Asset Value (NAV). This metric reflects how the market values the fund relative to its actual Bitcoin holdings.

• IBIT tends to trade very close to its NAV, thanks to its large size and efficient creation/redemption mechanism.
• FBTC has historically experienced slight premiums, particularly in the early stages of its launch.
• ARKB occasionally shows small deviations from NAV, influenced by supply-demand imbalances in the secondary market.

Investors should monitor these premiums or discounts because buying at a premium could reduce potential gains if the price reverts to NAV.

Tax Considerations and Investor Structure

Each ETF has unique tax implications based on its structure. In the U.S., most Bitcoin ETFs are structured as grantor trusts, meaning investors are treated as direct owners of the underlying Bitcoin.

• IBIT is a grantor trust, so investors receive a K-1 tax form and are subject to collectibles tax treatment (up to 28% capital gains rate).
• FBTC also uses a grantor trust structure and follows similar tax rules.
• ARKB was originally structured as a commodity pool and issued Form 1099, but it later converted to a grantor trust structure, aligning more closely with IBIT and FBTC.

This structural change affects reporting requirements and potential tax liabilities, so investors should consult with a tax professional before investing.

FAQs

Can I hold IBIT, FBTC, or ARKB in my retirement account?

Yes, all three ETFs can be held in standard brokerage accounts, including IRAs and 401(k)s, provided your custodian allows investments in cryptocurrency-related products.

Which ETF offers the best custody solution for Bitcoin?

All three ETFs utilize reputable custodians—BlackRock for IBIT, Fidelity for FBTC, and third-party partners like Coinbase for ARKB. Each claims robust security measures, including cold storage and insurance.

Do these ETFs pay dividends?

No, Bitcoin ETFs do not pay dividends because Bitcoin itself does not generate income. Any gains come solely from changes in the ETF’s net asset value.

Is there a minimum investment required for these ETFs?

There is no formal minimum investment. Since they trade like stocks, you can purchase as little as one share, depending on your broker's policies.