Hi everyone – welcome back to Evolve’s Bitcoin Monthly newsletter. We hope our views on Bitcoin adoption and market conditions prove useful for investors considering Bitcoin as an investment, or for those managing an existing Bitcoin position. 

After June, we would have settled for a quiet month. July was not that. It delivered a Federal Reserve with three members voting to raise rates, the worst single day for the Magnificent Seven since 2025, a stalled crypto bill in Washington, and a major hardware-wallet exploit. Bitcoin’s response to all of it: up roughly 7.5% on the month.¹ The price slipped briefly below $58,000 on July 1 – marginally under June’s low, and so far the low of this entire drawdown – recovered into the mid-$60,000s, and closed near $63,000, per CoinDesk.¹ That made July the first positive month since April. More importantly, it answered a question June could not: what does this market do when the bad news keeps coming but the leverage is already gone? 

Last month we argued that June’s damage traced to identifiable macro sources – a new Fed regime, a rotation into AI, an ETF redemption wave – rather than anything broken in the thesis. July was the test of that claim. Every one of those pressures continued or intensified, and Bitcoin absorbed all of it. Our framework is unchanged: governments continue to overspend, adoption continues to broaden, and Bitcoin-backed products keep working their way into traditional finance. What July added is evidence that the selling was finishing, not starting. 

The Stress Test

On July 29, Kevin Warsh chaired his second FOMC meeting, and the committee again held the federal funds rate at 3.50–3.75%.² The headline was the same as June; the vote was not. Three members – Beth Hammack, Neel Kashkari, and Lorie Logan – dissented in favour of raising rates, a sharp break from what had been a unanimous vote in June, telling markets that the live debate inside the Fed is between holding and hiking, not holding and cutting.² A month ago, that mix would have been worth a multi-thousand-dollar flush. This time Bitcoin barely moved, trading near $64,000 through the decision, with the Fear & Greed Index at 28 – still fearful, but a long way from June’s reading of 12.³,⁴ 

The sterner test came a week earlier. CoinDesk reported that on July 23, the Magnificent Seven shed roughly $800 billion of market value in a single session – their worst day since the tariff selloff of April 2025 – as investors began asking whether AI infrastructure spending is running ahead of the profits meant to justify it.⁵ Recall the “substitution effect” we described in June – money leaving Bitcoin for AI stocks. July ran that experiment in reverse. The AI trade cracked, and Bitcoin held near $65,000, down less than 1% on the day.⁵ If Bitcoin were merely a risk-proxy appendage of the tech trade, it should have led the market lower. It did not. 

The July 23 session was the sharpest single-day rupture, but a broader semiconductor unwinding had been building since early in the month. Forbes reported that in the first week of July, roughly $1.3 trillion of global chip-sector value had already been erased, with Intel alone down 21% over seven trading days – driven by mounting concerns over its 18A foundry yields and AMD’s growing data-centre revenue advantage over Intel.⁶

Bitfinex’s analysts offered the cleanest explanation: “crypto fell less than levered equity themes because the forced-selling fuel was already spent.”¹ June’s flush took the leverage out of the system, and average daily liquidations ran well below the year’s typical range all month.¹ We would add the macro point: a central bank talking tough while Washington runs historic peacetime deficits remains precisely the environment our thesis was built for. Nothing about July’s hawkishness changes the fiscal arithmetic – it just raises the cost of ignoring it. 

Two Open Files, Still Open 

We have been carrying two open files since the spring, and honesty requires reporting that neither closed in July. 

The CLARITY Act missed its window. CoinDesk reported that Senate Majority Leader John Thune conceded on July 23 that the market-structure bill would not pass before the August recess, with negotiations still stuck on the ethics provisions restricting senior officials’ crypto ventures.⁷ We wrote in June that the realistic window was before the recess; that window has now closed, and the odds of passage this year have clearly lengthened. The bill is not dead – debate resumes in September, and the White House insists it remains a priority – but a catalyst we hoped would fire in July is now a file for the fall.⁷ Our view on the substance is unchanged: the most bipartisan crypto legislation in U.S. history is not stalling for lack of support; it is stalling over who it applies to. 

The Strait of Hormuz file is quieter, but no more resolved. Since the blockade lifted, CNBC reported Iran has exported more than 40 million barrels of crude – selling, by its own account, at a roughly 20% premium.⁸ Oil markets have calmed. But the 60-day clock on a final agreement expires in mid-August, and the hardest question – who governs the strait afterward – remains open: As Newsweek reported in late June, President Trump had floated collecting tolls on transits once the window closes, while Tehran insists the waterway is sovereign territory and has already threatened re-closure once.⁹ We will say what we said in May and June: progress, not resolution. By our next edition, the deadline will have passed – one way or the other. 

A $38 Million Lesson in Custody 

CoinDesk reported that on the morning of July 31, an attacker drained 594 BTC – roughly $38 million – from about 500 Coldcard hardware wallets in 25 minutes.¹⁰ The cause was a firmware bug introduced in March 2021: affected devices silently skipped their hardware randomness generator and fell back to a predictable software fallback, producing wallet keys an attacker could eventually reconstruct.¹⁰ Five years of quietly compromised wallets, swept in under half an hour. 

Two things are worth separating. First, this was not a failure of Bitcoin. The protocol did exactly what it was designed to do; the flaw lived in one manufacturer’s device firmware, and newer models appear unaffected.¹⁰ Second, it was a failure of a model. Self-custody is one of Bitcoin’s foundational freedoms, and for technically sophisticated holders it remains a legitimate choice. But “be your own bank” means being your own security department, and July showed that even the most respected hardware in the industry can carry a silent, five-year-old flaw. Market observers were quick to name the likely consequence: an acceleration toward regulated custodians and ETF wrappers, where custody is professional, audited, and institutionally supervised.¹¹ We have long argued that institutional-grade custody was the single biggest thing the ETF structure brought to this asset class. Weeks like this one are why. 

Under the Hood 

The ETF complex turned positive – barely. Cointelegraph reported U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs took in a net $172.4 million in July, the first positive month since April and the end of a nearly $7 billion redemption wave across May and June.¹² It was also among the more modest positive months in the products’ history, and year-to-date flows remain roughly $5.3 billion negative.¹² We read it the way Bitfinex’s traders do: an institutional bid that is “aggressive or price-agnostic” is the signal that a durable bottom is in, and that signal has not fired yet.¹ What has changed is the direction of travel – redemptions exhausted themselves, and the marginal flow flipped from out to in. 

On-chain, Glassnode’s early-July assessment carried a title we appreciate for its bluntness: “Bottom Building in Progress.”¹³ Bitcoin has now spent roughly five months below both the short-term holder cost basis (about $72,000) and the “true market mean” near $76,600 – one of the more extended deep-value episodes in its history, and conventionally the foundation from which cyclical bottoms are built.¹³ Long-term holder capitulation was still running hot in early July, with realized losses peaking near $280 million per day, the heaviest since December 2022.¹³ That is the anatomy of a bottom being built, not a bottom confirmed. The standard we set in June still applies: capitulation must exhaust, and price must reclaim the short-term holder cost basis. But extended stretches where patient capital accumulates below everyone’s break-even are, historically, how cycle lows form. 

Looking Ahead

Three voices we respect looked at the same market in July, reached for three different vocabularies, and arrived at the same conclusion. 

Fidelity’s Jurrien Timmer noted that Bitcoin is approaching the power-law support line his model has tracked since 2015 – a line that has caught every major bottom in that span, currently sitting near $58,000 – and described current prices as a probable accumulation zone, while carefully declining to call the low or the catalyst.¹⁴ Bitwise’s Matt Hougan went further: “I think we may be at a turning point. By the end of the year, we could be substantially higher,” arguing the baton is passing from retail and corporate buyers to institutions.¹⁵ And Lyn Alden – describing the weakest Bitcoin sentiment she has personally observed, with “nothing coming to save” the asset – still sees Bitcoin near the low end of its historical valuation range, with a base case that grinds flat-to-higher, earning its next advance on fundamentals rather than hype.16 

August brings a jobs report, the Hormuz deadline, and a thin seasonal stretch; the trading desks’ base case is choppy and range-bound until real yields ease or ETF demand returns in force.¹ We make no monthly calls – July is a reminder of why. But consider what the month showed: a market that opened at its lows, absorbed a hawkish Fed, a trillion-dollar tech unwind, a stalled bill, and a $38 million exploit, and finished up 7.5% is not a market where sellers are in control. It is a market where the impatient have finished leaving and the patient are quietly taking their place. That process rarely announces itself in real time; it shows up later, in hindsight, as the stretch of the chart everyone wishes they had bought. 

We remain constructive Bitcoin investors, and we look forward to what August brings. 

Sources 

1 CoinDesk, “Bitcoin holds monthly gain, faces ‘choppy’ August as ‘forced-selling’ exhausted, analysts say,” July 31, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/31/bitcoin-holds-onto-july-gain-as-forced-selling-fuel-was-already-spent-analysts-say 

2 Federal Reserve, “Federal Reserve issues FOMC statement,” July 29, 2026. https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20260729a.htm 

3 Cointelegraph (via Bloomingbit), “Crypto Fear & Greed Index Falls to 12 as Extreme Fear Deepens,” June 25, 2026. https://en.bloomingbit.io/feed/news/114994 

4 TheStreet Crypto, “Crypto markets react to Fed’s July interest rate decision,” July 29, 2026. https://www.thestreet.com/crypto/fed/markets-react-to-feds-july-interest-rate-decision 

5 CoinDesk, “Bitcoin steady around $65,000 as ‘Mag 7’ have worst day since 2025,” July 24, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/24/bitcoin-holds-near-usd65-000-as-usd800-billion-ai-selloff-leaves-crypto-largely-untouched 

6 Forbes, “Intel Stock Down 21%: Inside The July 2026 Semiconductor Selloff,” July 8, 2026. https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2026/07/08/intel-stock-down-21-inside-the-july-2026-semiconductor-selloff/ 

7 CoinDesk, “CLARITY Act expected to miss its window before Congress’ summer break, leadership says,” July 23, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2026/07/23/clarity-act-expected-to-miss-its-window-before-congress-summer-break-leadership-says 

8 CNBC, “Iran says it is selling oil at 20% premium as end of U.S. blockade sees 40 million barrels exported,” July 1, 2026. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/01/iran-us-mou-negotiation-war-oil-exports-strait-of-hormuz-.html 

9 Newsweek, “Who controls the Strait of Hormuz? Uncertainty grows after 60-day deal,” June 21, 2026. https://www.newsweek.com/hormuz-uncertainty-grows-as-questions-mount-over-control-after-60-day-deal-12100981 

10 CoinDesk, “Major bitcoin wallet flaw drains 594 BTC in 25-minute sweep,” July 31, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/07/31/major-bitcoin-wallet-flaw-drains-594-btc-in-25-minute-sweep 

11 CoinDesk, “Coldcard’s $38 million (so far) exploit shakes faith in self-custody, may push investors to ETFs,” July 31, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/business/2026/07/31/coldcard-s-usd38-million-so-far-exploit-shakes-faith-in-self-custody-may-push-investors-to-etfs 

12 Cointelegraph, “Bitcoin ETFs post first monthly inflow since April,” August 1, 2026. https://cointelegraph.com/markets/bitcoin-etfs-july-green-despite-late-month-selling 

13 Glassnode, “The Week Onchain (Week 27, 2026): Bottom Building in Progress,” July 8, 2026. https://research.glassnode.com/the-week-onchain-week-27-2026/ 

14 CoinDesk, “Bitcoin is nearing a power law support line Fidelity has tracked since 2015,” July 12, 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/12/bitcoin-is-nearing-a-power-law-support-line-fidelity-has-tracked-since-2015 

15 CNBC, “Bitcoin at a turning point, could be ‘substantially higher’ by year end, says Bitwise CIO,” July 15, 2026. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2026/07/15/bitcoin-at-a-turning-point-could-be-substantially-higher-by-year-end-says-bitwise-cio.html 

16 Benzinga, “Bitcoin Isn’t The ‘Fastest Horse’ Anymore, Top Analyst Says,” July 8, 2026. https://www.benzinga.com/crypto/cryptocurrency/26/07/60336711/bitcoin-isnt-the-fastest-horse-anymore-top-analyst-says-theres-nothing-coming-to-save-btc 

Disclaimer 

Published August 7, 2026. 

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. The Evolve Bitcoin ETF (“EBIT”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers. 

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice or a recommendation or solicitation to buy, sell, stake or hold any crypto asset or engage in any specific strategy. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/  

The unpredictable nature of the cryptoassets can lead to loss of funds. 

Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated. 

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. 

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice. 

Hi everyone – welcome back to Evolve’s Bitcoin Monthly newsletter. We hope our views on Bitcoin adoption and market conditions prove useful for investors considering Bitcoin as an investment, or for those managing an existing Bitcoin position.

There is no way to dress up June, so we will not try. According to CoinDesk, Bitcoin fell roughly 20% in June, closing below $60,000 — its worst monthly performance since June 2022.¹ The selling was relentless: no meaningful bounce, no relief rally, and a monthly candle that chartists call a Marubozu – all body, no wicks, a rare showing of one-directional pressure.¹ Forbes reported that the June 25 intraday low of $58,131 was Bitcoin’s weakest print since September 2024.² Year-to-date, Bitcoin is down close to 30%, according to Crypto Briefing.³

Our macro framework has not changed: governments continue to overspend, adoption continues to broaden, and Bitcoin-backed products keep working their way into traditional finance. In our December edition we argued that the absence of a blow-off top made a deep, prolonged bear market less likely – this cycle never hit euphoria, so there is less excess to purge. That argument is being stress-tested in real time, and we will not pretend the test is comfortable. But there is a difference between a painful month and a broken thesis. June’s damage traces to three identifiable sources – a new Fed regime establishing its credibility, a rotation of capital into AI, and a record ETF redemption wave – and none of them, in our view, touches the reasons to own Bitcoin over the next decade.

The Warsh Fed Shows Its Cards

On June 17, Kevin Warsh – whose narrow confirmation we covered in May – chaired his first FOMC meeting. The committee held the federal funds rate at 3.50–3.75% by a unanimous 12–0 vote, and did so with a statement stripped to a handful of short paragraphs, closing with six blunt words: “The Committee will deliver price stability.”⁴ The familiar forward-guidance language was simply gone.

The projections did the talking instead. The median committee member now sees the federal funds rate at 3.8% at the end of 2026 – above the current target midpoint – which means the committee’s base case has shifted from cuts toward a possible hike.⁵ When the discount rate on every risk asset moves, Bitcoin moves with it. That is the cost of joining the institutional portfolio – a cost we have written about all year.

Step back from the single meeting, though, and the picture looks different. The Fed’s own statement concedes that inflation remains elevated “in part reflecting supply shocks that have driven price increases in certain sectors, including energy” – a direct reference to the Hormuz conflict.⁴ Meanwhile, nothing about the fiscal trajectory has improved: according to the Congressional Budget Office, Washington is still spending roughly $7.4 trillion against $5.6 trillion in revenue,⁶ and according to Canada’s Spring Economic Update, the federal deficit sits at $66.9 billion.⁷ A central bank forced to talk tough on inflation while its government borrows historic sums in peacetime is not an argument against scarce assets – it is the fiscal dominance thesis playing out on schedule. Hard money gets squeezed while rates reset higher; it is also precisely what the other side of that squeeze favours.

Two Open Files: Hormuz and the Senate

The Strait of Hormuz file – open since April – finally produced a signature. NPR reported that on June 17, President Trump and Iranian President Pezeshkian signed a memorandum of understanding to end the war: the U.S. lifted its blockade of Iranian ports the next day, Iran committed to letting tankers transit the strait, and a 60-day clock started on a final agreement covering sanctions relief, reconstruction funds, and Iran’s nuclear stockpile.⁸ Markets exhaled – briefly. Euronews reported that on June 20, Iran declared the strait closed again after fresh Israeli strikes in southern Lebanon, though the U.S. military reported that shipping continued to move.⁹ We described May’s developments as a hopeful inflection rather than a resolution, and that is still the right frame: the deal is signed but fragile, the 60-day window runs to mid-August, and Israel is not a party to it. Note how directly this file feeds the previous section – the energy supply shock is a large part of the inflation keeping the Fed hawkish. This month, geopolitics and monetary policy were the same story.

In Washington, the CLARITY Act took another step: according to PYMNTS, in early June it was placed on the Senate legislative calendar, making it eligible for a floor vote – the furthest any comprehensive digital asset market-structure bill has ever advanced.¹⁰ It needs 60 votes, ethics language remained unresolved heading into June, and the realistic window is now before the July recess. Senator Cynthia Lummis put it plainly: “We are closer to a functioning digital asset market structure than we have ever been. Now is not the time to flinch.”¹⁰ Worth noting: JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon has vowed that banks will fight the bill.¹⁰ Incumbents do not spend lobbying dollars fighting legislation that does not matter. Both files remain open – and both, resolved favourably, are catalysts sitting in plain sight.

Under the Hood

The ETF complex had its hardest month yet. Crypto Briefing reported that U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $4.06 billion in net outflows in June – the worst month since the products launched in January 2024 – taking total assets to roughly $72.8 billion and putting 2026 on track to be the first negative calendar year for flows.³ Two pieces of context matter. First, measured in Bitcoin rather than dollars, ETF holdings remain near their historical peaks – the redemptions are large in headline terms but small against the stock of coins the wrappers have absorbed.³ Second, corporate treasuries kept buying through the dip, demand that never shows up in ETF flow data.³ Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan’s read is that the selling is concentrated among retail holders rotating capital into AI stocks, a substitution dynamic he sees as distinct from the institutional bid, which continues arriving on its own slower schedule.¹¹ The marginal seller has a destination, not a grievance.

For the record on Strategy: CoinDesk reported the company’s first disclosed net Bitcoin sale since December 2022 – 32 BTC, about $2.5 million, sold above its cost basis to fund preferred-stock dividends – generated headlines wildly out of proportion to a transaction representing less than 0.004% of its 843,706 BTC.¹² We covered Strategy’s structural evolution in May; June added nothing new.

On-chain, the word is capitulation. Coinspeaker reported that the long-term holder spent output profit ratio fell below 1.0 – meaning coins held for more than 155 days were being sold at a loss – with long-term holders realizing roughly $2.4 billion in losses over one 48-hour stretch in early June.¹³ That signal is rare, and its history is notable: comparable readings marked the January 2015, December 2018, and November 2022 lows. The MVRV Z-score sits near -1.5 standard deviations, territory that has previously defined accumulation zones, and the Fear & Greed Index touched 12 – sentiment last seen at the COVID crash and the FTX collapse.¹³ We will be honest about what this does and does not say: capitulation is visible, but a confirmed bottom is not – that requires long-term holder selling to exhaust and price to reclaim the short-term holder cost basis. What the data does show is coins moving from weaker hands to stronger ones at fire-sale prices. Historically, that is how bottoms get built.

Looking Ahead

Matt Hougan’s early-June assessment is worth quoting: “I do think we’re in the process of bottoming… this feels a lot to me like early 2019-era crypto winter.” All of the negative news he can imagine, he argues, is already known and priced.¹¹ Lyn Alden’s June letter makes the longer argument: we have entered a “Wild West” era of fiscal dominance, weaker international coordination, and run-it-hot deficits, in which the durable strategy is to own scarce, high-quality assets and avoid excessive exposure to long-duration fiat claims.¹⁴ She has also argued for months that a cycle without a euphoric top carries low odds of a major capitulation. Neither of them is making a call about July. Neither are we. The thesis is macro, not monthly.

July brings the CLARITY Act’s floor window, the middle stretch of the Iran deal’s 60-day clock, and a market that has just flushed an enormous amount of leverage and sentiment. The four-year-cycle debate will rage on; our view remains that this drawdown – painful, orderly, and heavily macro-driven – looks more like a repricing within a structural adoption trend than the end of one. Drawdowns like June are the price of admission for an asset with Bitcoin’s asymmetry, and the investors who understand that in advance are the ones who get to collect on it.

We remain constructive Bitcoin investors – conviction is never more useful than in months like this one – and we look forward to what the second half brings.

Sources

1 CoinDesk, “Bitcoin’s 20% June crash looks even deadlier on the charts. Here’s why,” July 1, 2026.

2 Forbes, “Bitcoin Hits 21-Month Low As Expiring Crypto Bets Threaten More Selling,” June 25, 2026.

3 Crypto Briefing, “US spot Bitcoin ETFs face record $4.1B in outflows in June,” June 30, 2026.

4 Federal Reserve, “Federal Reserve issues FOMC statement,” June 17, 2026.

5 Federal Reserve, “Summary of Economic Projections,” June 17, 2026.

6 Congressional Budget Office, “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036,” February 11, 2026.

7 Government of Canada, “Spring Economic Update 2026,” April 28, 2026.

8 NPR, “U.S. lifts blockade on Iranian ports as 60-day clock for a final deal starts ticking,” June 18, 2026.

9 Euronews, “Iran recloses Strait of Hormuz, citing Israeli strikes on Lebanon,” June 20, 2026.

10 PYMNTS, “CLARITY Act Nears Senate Floor Ahead of Recess Deadline,” June 2, 2026.

11 Crypto Briefing, “Matt Hougan: The crypto market may be nearing a bottom… | The Wolf Of All Streets,” June 4, 2026.

12 CoinDesk, “Strategy sold 32 BTC for $2.5 million in late May, filing shows,” June 1, 2026.

13 Coinspeaker, “On-Chain Capitulation: Bitcoin in ‘Fire-Sale’ Zone as Long-Term Holders Bleed $2.4Bn,” June 5, 2026.

14 Lyn Alden, “June 2026 Newsletter: The Wild West,” June 4, 2026.

Disclaimer

Published July 2026.

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. The Evolve Bitcoin ETF (“EBIT”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/.

The unpredictable nature of the cryptoassets can lead to loss of funds.

Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

Hi everyone, welcome back to Evolve’s Bitcoin Monthly newsletter. As always, we aim to provide perspective on the forces shaping Bitcoin’s adoption and market conditions to help investors evaluate both new and existing allocations.

We continue to maintain a constructive long-term outlook on Bitcoin. Periods of volatility are not unusual for a monetizing asset, and historically have played an important role in strengthening market structure and broadening participation. While recent price action has reflected tighter financial conditions and shifting liquidity expectations, the core investment thesis remains intact.

Liquidity remains the dominant driver of risk assets.

We approach Bitcoin investing through a macro lens. Liquidity continues to be one of the most important drivers of risk assets, and recent market volatility underscores how sensitive Bitcoin can be to changes in financial conditions. As investors assess the implications of a potentially more disciplined Federal Reserve leadership, markets have begun pricing in a more hawkish policy path. Higher real rates and reduced liquidity typically challenge speculative assets, and Bitcoin has not been immune to this dynamic. ¹

The sharp drawdown entering February reflects more than sentiment alone. A broad unwinding of leveraged positions triggered a cascade of forced selling, reinforcing a familiar pattern seen during prior tightening cycles. When leverage exits the system, price discovery tends to be abrupt rather than orderly. Yet this process is not inherently negative. Deleveraging often removes excess speculation and can ultimately reset the foundation for healthier market structure.

Looking ahead, interest-rate markets increasingly suggest the possibility of policy easing throughout 2026. Should financial conditions loosen, liquidity would likely return to risk assets, historically a constructive backdrop for Bitcoin.²

Adoption continues to broaden, even during volatile periods.

Bitcoin’s recent behavior has resembled that of a high-growth technology asset, with price movements correlating more closely to risk equities than to traditional safe havens. While this challenges the near-term “digital gold” narrative, it also reflects Bitcoin’s ongoing integration into global capital markets.³

Institutional participation continues to deepen, and regulatory momentum remains a critical piece of that evolution. Policymakers have increasingly emphasized the importance of clear market structure for digital assets, recognizing that legal certainty is a prerequisite for large-scale institutional engagement. Clarity tends to reduce perceived risk, and reduced risk expands the potential investor base.⁴

Major index decisions related to crypto-exposed companies further illustrate this shift. Markets are closely watching whether firms with significant Bitcoin exposure, including corporates that hold Bitcoin as a treasury asset, will be added to or maintained within MSCI global indices. Inclusion in these widely tracked benchmarks could trigger substantial automatic allocations from passive strategies such as index funds, ETFs, and institutional model portfolios, while also signaling that Bitcoin-linked balance sheets are increasingly being recognized as part of mainstream financial infrastructure rather than a peripheral market segment.⁵

Gold is having its moment in the sun.

With gold doubling in less than a year, Bitcoin skeptics are having their moment. It’s worth noting that this is nothing new. We are in a Bitcoin bear market which, by definition, provides investors with better value as an entry point, or an opportunity to add to their position. Gold has done so well recently that some are questioning the need for a digital store of value asset. We believe the thesis for Bitcoin remains unchanged, and when we look at the Bitcoin/Gold ratio for the past 5 years it seems to be suggesting we could be near a bottom.

Today 1 Bitcoin buys 13.6 ounces of gold which is roughly where the ratio stood back in 2022 through 2023. In some respects, this is a more useful way to look at Bitcoin’s price than using US dollars because gold is subject to less manipulation and debasement and is widely considered a store of value asset. Since bitcoin exhibits many characteristics of a hard asset, using the price of a hard asset is at least internally consistent.

Market structure is strengthening over time.

Periods of volatility often test conviction, but they also reveal how the investor base is changing. Bitcoin is no longer dominated solely by speculative capital; it is increasingly held by institutions, corporates, and long-duration investors with lower sensitivity to short-term price movements.

Importantly, despite recent turbulence, the long-term thesis has not been invalidated. Bitcoin’s scarcity, portability, and independence from traditional monetary systems continue to differentiate it from conventional assets, even if the safe-haven characteristics many expect have yet to fully materialize.³

Market maturation rarely occurs in a straight line. As ownership broadens and leverage becomes less central to price formation, Bitcoin may gradually transition from a high-beta asset toward a more established macro allocation.

Market Update

Bitcoin entered February under pressure as tighter financial expectations and widespread deleveraging weighed on prices. After losing its 50-week moving average in late 2025, historically a key support level during prior bull markets, Bitcoin retraced toward the 200-week moving average, which currently sits near US$58,000. In each of the last several major cycles, including 2013–14, 2017–18, and 2021, a break below the 50-week moving average ultimately resulted in price gravitating toward this longer-term trendline.⁶

From a broader perspective, Bitcoin is undergoing a market reset after reaching its October 6 all-time high. Although prices have declined roughly 50% over the past 120 days, this pullback has so far been both shorter and less pronounced than the five previous major downturns in Bitcoin’s history.7 Such periods have historically created opportunities for long-term investors and helped support the foundation for future market expansion.⁷

Source: River Financial, As at February 10, 2026. For illustrative purposes only. This chart is a logarithmic (base 10) scale chart where each line on the Y-axis represents an equal % change.

The speed of the recent decline reflected a self-reinforcing cycle, as the unwinding of leveraged positions accelerated selling pressure. More than $1 billion in leveraged trades were liquidated, pushing prices toward levels historically associated with bear-market drawdowns.⁸

Source: Bloomberg, As at Feb 5, 2026. For illustrative purposes only.

Importantly, this type of reset has precedent. Comparable episodes have often cleared excess speculation from the system and established a more durable base for the next phase of price discovery.

At the same time, several forward-looking catalysts remain in view. A potential shift in monetary policy could reintroduce liquidity into the system, while continued institutional integration, supported by clearer regulatory frameworks such as the Clarity Act, may provide a stronger foundation for future demand.

Market cycles evolve alongside market participants. Today’s Bitcoin ecosystem looks materially different from prior years, characterized by deeper capital pools, expanding infrastructure, and growing strategic interest from large institutional investors.

We cannot predict the precise path forward. However, the underlying trajectory continues to point toward broader adoption and increasing relevance within the global financial system.

For every seller, there is a buyer, and the persistence of institutional engagement suggests that many investors continue to view volatility not as a signal to exit, but as part of the price of admission for a scarce, monetizing asset.

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/01/30/here-s-why-fed-contender-kevin-warsh-is-seen-as-bearish-for-bitcoin

[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-11/treasuries-fall-as-better-than-expected-job-data-resets-fed-bets

[3] https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/02/10/bitcoin-a-tech-trade-for-now-not-digital-gold-says-grayscale

[4] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/passing-clarity-act-critical-for-bitcoin

[5] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-06/msci-backs-off-on-crypto-exclusion-plan-but-signals-wider-review

[6] https://www.galaxy.com/insights/research/bitcoin-drawdown-nears-40-weakness-suggests-lower-prices-coming

[7] https://river.com/content/why-bitcoin-crashed-feb-2026

[8] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-05/bitcoin-drops-below-70-000-as-forced-deleveraging-accelerates

Credit: LightFieldSolutions Source: Envato 

Disclaimer:

Published March 10, 2026.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Leverage increases risk.

The unpredictable nature of the cryptoassets can lead to loss of funds.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

Canada’s largest banks delivered strong first quarter results, with all six exceeding analyst expectations and showing broad based strength across core businesses. Revenue growth remained steady, profitability improved through cost discipline and restructuring efforts, and several institutions advanced share buybacks and strategic investments to support long term returns. Credit quality remained stable overall, with provisions for credit losses modestly higher or largely unchanged as banks maintained a cautious outlook.

Royal Bank of Canada (RY)

Royal Bank of Canada reported strong first-quarter results, with profit rising 13% year over year to $5.8 billion, or $4.03 per share, driven by gains in personal banking and wealth management. Adjusted earnings were $4.08 per share, exceeding analyst expectations of $3.84. Revenue increased 7% year over year to $17.96 billion, while expenses rose 2% to $9.46 billion, reflecting higher compensation and staff-related costs. Provisions for credit losses totalled $1.09 billion, including $1.07 billion tied to performing loans based on forward-looking economic models, compared with $1.05 billion in the same quarter last year. Overall, the results highlighted solid operating momentum and disciplined expense growth, reinforcing RBC’s position as a consistent earnings leader among Canadian banks.

Toronto-Dominion Bank/The (TD)

Toronto-Dominion Bank reported first-quarter results that exceeded expectations, supported by stronger performance across its businesses despite ongoing restructuring tied to anti-money-laundering remediation efforts. Net income rose 45% year over year to $4.04 billion, or $2.34 per share, while adjusted earnings reached $2.44 per share, ahead of analyst estimates of $2.26. Revenue increased 18% year over year to $16.56 billion, with expenses rising 8% to $8.75 billion, reflecting restructuring charges, continued investments in compliance remediation, and higher employee-related costs. TD recorded a final $200 million pre-tax restructuring charge as it winds down certain businesses, reduces real estate exposure, and implements a 3% workforce reduction. Provisions for credit losses totalled $1.04 billion, compared with $1.21 billion a year earlier, signalling improving credit conditions despite a cautious economic outlook.

Bank of Montreal (BMO)

Bank of Montreal reported first-quarter results that exceeded expectations, supported by stronger earnings across its businesses as the bank works to improve profitability. Net income rose to $2.49 billion, or $3.39 per share, compared with $2.14 billion, or $2.83 per share, a year earlier, while adjusted earnings of $3.48 per share surpassed analyst estimates of $3.21. Revenue increased 6% year over year to $9.82 billion, with expenses also rising 6% to $5.75 billion, partly driven by higher performance-based compensation and severance costs. Provisions for credit losses declined to $746 million from $1.01 billion in the prior year, pointing to improved credit conditions.

Bank of Nova Scotia/The (BNS)

Bank of Nova Scotia reported stronger-than-expected first-quarter results, with earnings improving across business lines despite ongoing concerns around slower loan growth and tariffs. Net income reached $2.29 billion, or $1.73 per share, compared with $993 million, or $0.66 per share, a year earlier when results were impacted by a $1.36 billion impairment tied to the sale of certain Latin American operations. Adjusted earnings came in at $2.05 per share, exceeding analyst expectations of $1.95. Revenue increased 3% year over year to $9.65 billion, while expenses declined sharply by 18% to $5.29 billion, supporting profitability. Provisions for credit losses totalled $1.18 billion, including $73 million tied to performing loans based on forward-looking economic models. Management pointed to stabilization in Mexico, a key growth market, noting recent cartel-related violence has not disrupted operations, providing reassurance around the bank’s international exposure and broader operating outlook.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM)

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce delivered first-quarter results that exceeded expectations, supported by broad-based strength across its core businesses. Net income totalled $3.1 billion, or $3.21 per share, while adjusted earnings came in at $2.7 billion, or $2.76 per share, ahead of analyst estimates of $2.40, after excluding one-time items including a $422 million income tax gain. Canadian personal and business banking, the bank’s largest earnings contributor, saw profit rise 25% year over year to $960 million, while capital markets earnings increased 42% to $877 million. Canadian commercial banking and wealth management profit grew 9%, and U.S. commercial banking and wealth management rose 19%. The quarter marked the first full reporting period under new chief executive officer Harry Culham, highlighting strong early momentum across divisions.

National Bank of Canada (NA)

National Bank of Canada reported a strong first quarter, with profit rising sharply and exceeding expectations, supported by its acquisition of Canadian Western Bank. Net income reached $1.25 billion, or $3.08 per share, up from $997 million, or $2.78 per share, a year earlier. Adjusted earnings were $3.25 per share, ahead of analyst estimates of $2.99. Revenue increased 22% year over year to $3.89 billion, while expenses also rose 22% to $2.01 billion, reflecting the impact of the CWB acquisition along with higher variable compensation and benefits. Provisions for credit losses totalled $244 million, including $215 million tied to loans expected to face repayment challenges, compared with $254 million in the prior year. The bank also expanded its share buyback program to 14.5 million shares from 8 million, having repurchased 6.4 million shares to date.

Source:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-canada-banks-first-quarter-results-earnings-2026/ (February 26, 2026)

DISCLAIMER

Published March 5, 2026.

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. The Evolve Big Six Canadian Banks UltraYield Index ETF (“SIXY”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

Leverage increases risk.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

The surprising news of U.S. intervention in Venezuela led to a not-so-surprising market overreaction: a sharp selloff of Canadian oil and gas stocks over fears that Venezuelan oil will soon flood the market and replace Canadian oil.¹

But there is a difference between a shocking headline and a workable supply chain. The good news for investors in Canadian energy stocks is that while the idea that Venezuelan heavy crude will supplant Canadian oil sounds plausible in the abstract, it runs into practical limits in the real world.

Let’s look at why concerns that the United States will stop buying Canadian oil are overblown and why there is still opportunity to be had in Canadian energy.

Why the Venezuela Shock Got Ahead of the Reality

Reaction to the news from Venezuela was swift because of concerns the United States could replace Canadian heavy crude with heavy crude from untapped Venezuelan deposits. According to Canada Energy Regulator, 95.7% of our crude is exported to the United States, hence such a shift would have serious consequences for the Canadian energy sector.²

However, in the near term, the percentage of Canadian oil that could realistically be displaced is limited, pegged at just 10% by Charles St-Arnaud, chief economist at Service Credit Union and former Bank of Canada economist. The reasoning being only certain U.S. regions are positioned to take meaningful volumes of Venezuelan imports without a major re-plumbing of the existing refinement system. The refineries best suited to heavy crude tend to be tied into existing North American flows and are already supplied by Canadian pipelines.

Time is also a constraint. Venezuela has immense untapped oil reserves, but reserves are not the same thing as reliable production and exports. Years of underinvestment, operational challenges, and international sanctions mean that even optimistic scenarios involve multi-year rebuilding and billions of dollars investment in equipment, upgraded facilities, and sustained maintenance.³

While analysts debate how quickly Venezuela’s output could rise and prove a rival to Canadian heavy crude, it’s clear that the broader rebuild of Venezuela’s oil infrastructure is a multi-year, multi-billion-dollar project and not a quick fix. Canada remains the United States’ largest foreign supplier of crude, with a relationship built on proximity, scale, and decades of integration. These facts suggest that short-term panic in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. action in Venezuela may have outpaced the near-term realities.

How Active Covered Calls Can Benefit from Volatility

For average investors, one takeaway from recent events in Venezuela is that in the oil and gas sector, uncertainty tends to show up first in volatility.

When markets are jumpy, the pricing of risk changes, and that can ripple through to strategies designed around volatility, such as covered calls. The basic concept is straightforward: a portfolio holds equities and sells call options on those holdings, collecting premiums that can contribute to cash flow. The trade-off is equally straightforward: if the underlying stocks rally sharply, upside participation may be reduced because the calls can be exercised above a certain level, and if stocks fall, the option premium may not fully offset the decline. In other words, it is not a shield against losses, and it is not a promise of smoother returns. Rather, it is a different way of viewing risk and return, and one heavily dependent on market conditions.

In a market where energy prices can swing on policy shifts and geopolitical surprises, covered call products are positioned around the idea that volatility itself can be a source of premium income, while also acknowledging the trade-offs that come with capping some upside. The structure is designed to be systematic in its equity exposure while using active decision-making in how calls are written, rather than applying a rigid, one-size-fits-all approach regardless of conditions.

OILY: Canadian Energy ETF

Want to fuel your portfolio with Canadian energy? The Evolve Canadian Energy Enhanced Yield Index Fund (OILY ETF) offers investors exposure to the Solactive Canada Energy Top 10 Index, aiming for a 1.25 multiple of the index’s performance through a covered call option writing program at the discretion of the Manager.

Learn more about the OILY ETF—visit the fund page today.

ENDNOTES

1. Khan, A., “Canadian oil stocks slip is a ‘massive overreaction’ to Venezuela: Eric Nuttall” BNN Bloomberg, January 05, 2026; https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2026/01/05/canadian-oil-stocks-slip-is-a-massive-overreaction-to-venezuela/

2. “Market Snapshot: Overview of 2024 Canada-U.S. Energy Trade,” Canada Energy Regulator, July 9, 2025; https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/market-snapshots/2025/market-snapshot-overview-of-2024-canada-us-energy-trade.html
3. Khan, A., “Only 10% of Canadian oil likely to be replaced by Venezuela in short term, says analyst,” BNN Bloomberg, January 07, 2026; https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2026/01/07/only-10-of-canadian-oil-could-be-replaced-by-venezuela-in-short-term-says-analyst/

Source: GettyImages Credit: Evgeny Gromov

Disclaimers:

Published February 27, 2026

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. Evolve Canadian Energy Enhanced Yield Index Fund (“OILY”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

Leverage increases risk.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs) and mutual funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs and mutual funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

Commodities—particularly metals and mining—took centre stage in a big way in 2025.

Prices for gold, copper, silver, and a range of industrial metals have surged over the last year, driven by macroeconomic, geopolitical, and structural forces. What at first looked like a cyclical rally now appears to be a broader reset in how markets value hard assets.¹

To understand this shift, let’s explore why commodities are having a moment, which assets have seen success, and how metals and mining can contribute to portfolio diversification.

Why Commodity Prices Are Rallying

The current rally has less to do with speculation than with a fundamental shift in global priorities.

To begin with, central banks have become major buyers of precious metals, according to the World Bank. As inflation cooled and interest rates peaked, policymakers began preparing for a lower-rate environment, which reduces the drawbacks of holding non-yielding assets like gold and silver. At the same time, questions about the long-term dominance of the U.S. dollar have encouraged reserve diversification, reinforcing demand for precious metals.²

Geopolitical concerns also factor in. Tariffs, export controls, and sanctions have disrupted long-standing supply chains, particularly for critical minerals. Both the United States and China have tightened controls on strategic resources, reshaping global supply-demand dynamics and embedding a risk premium into commodity pricing.¹

Then there is reindustrialization. Reuters has reported extensively on how governments are actively encouraging the reshoring of manufacturing after COVID-era disruptions exposed supply chain vulnerabilities.³ Tariffs, incentives, and industrial policy are moving production closer to home, a process that is inherently materials-intensive.⁴

Finally, defence spending is rising sharply. NATO members have committed to meaningfully higher defence outlays over the coming decade.⁵ Modern militaries require not just steel and aluminum, but copper, rare earths, and specialty metals for electronics, vehicles, and advanced weapons systems. That demand is structural, not cyclical.

How Individual Metals Are Performing

The performance of individual commodities highlights the breadth of the rally.

Gold has led the way, driven by central bank buying, geopolitical tensions, and shifts in monetary policy, according to The Motley Fool. After an exceptional surge in 2025, prices appear poised for more measured—but still positive—gains as official sector demand remains elevated.

Silver has benefitted from its dual role as both monetary metal and industrial input. Solar panels, electric vehicles, and data centres all rely on silver as a component metal, layering structural demand on top of investor flows.¹

Copper has emerged as a bellwether for the energy transition, as highlighted by the World Bank. Electrification requires far more copper than fossil-fuel systems, from grid upgrades to charging infrastructure.² Prices have climbed accordingly, reflecting not only current demand but concern over future supply constraints.

Steel and iron ore tell a more nuanced story. Weakness in traditional construction—particularly in China’s property sector—has weighed on iron ore prices. Yet specialty steels and downstream metal products tied to defence and infrastructure have proven more resilient.⁵

Battery and critical minerals, including lithium and rare earths, have staged sharp recoveries after prolonged downturns. As electric vehicle production and grid-scale storage reach inflection points, markets have moved quickly to price in tightening supply.⁶

Why Investors Are Turning to Commodities

For investors, commodities now offer something increasingly scarce: diversification with tangible drivers.

Equities and bonds have grown more correlated in recent years, particularly during periods of inflation. Commodities, on the other hand, respond more to monetary policy, physical scarcity, and geopolitical risk. Amidst policy uncertainty and fiscal strain, many investors view hard assets as insurance rather than speculation. ⁷

There is also a growing recognition that supply cannot respond quickly. Mining projects take years—sometimes decades—to permit, finance, and build. When demand accelerates suddenly, so do prices. Strategic stockpiling by governments around the world has amplified this effect, particularly for minerals deemed essential to energy security and national defence.⁶

As a result, traditional valuations focused on near-term supply and demand could be underestimating prices.

The Role of Covered Call Strategies in Mining and Minerals

If commodity prices increasingly reflect structural scarcity and risk premiums over short-term fundamentals, the way investors gain exposure becomes more crucial.

Futures contracts, for example, track price and price alone, and produce returns solely through price movement. Mining equities, on the other hand, have the ability to generate cash flow that can be actively managed, distributed, or enhanced through options strategies such as covered calls. ⁸

As operating businesses, miners generate revenue and cash flow, especially when commodity prices are high. That cash flow can create an opportunity for income-oriented strategies. Covered call writing, which involves selling call options on existing equities, lets investors potentially generate option premiums while retaining exposure to the underlying shares.

In markets where commodity prices are volatile, covered calls can help monetize volatility by generating option premium income. Mining stocks, which often exhibit higher volatility than the underlying commodity, often command richer option premiums, enhancing the potential attractiveness of the strategy.

Covered call income can partially offset losses in mining equities if prices decline or stay flat. However, investors give up some potential profits if mining stocks rally sharply beyond the strike price of the sold calls. The strategy thus provides some downside cushioning while limiting gains to the covered call’s strike price plus premium.

Futures offer purity and precision. Mining equities paired with a covered call strategy offer income potential and a degree of downside mitigation—but with equity risk and limits to upside participation. For investors focused on total return rather than price tracking alone, that distinction can be meaningful.

Investing in Global Materials & Mining with BASE ETF

Looking for better yields in the materials and mining sector with less risk? The opportunity may be one (covered) call away.

With the Evolve Global Materials & Mining Enhanced Yield Index Fund (BASE ETF), investors benefit from global exposure to materials and mining stocks, with the added value of a covered call strategy applied on up to 33% of the portfolio. Covered call options have the potential to provide extra income and help hedge long stock positions. Access this sector and give your portfolio a solid BASE.

For more blogs like this, as well as insight on investing and investment products, sign up for our weekly newsletter here.

ENDNOTES

1. Allen, B., “Why are commodity prices going crazy?,” The Motley Fool, January 13, 2026; https://www.fool.com.au/2026/01/13/why-are-commodity-prices-going-crazy
2. Baffes, J. & Temaj, K., “The Commodity Markets Outlook in eight charts,” World Bank Blogs, October 30, 2025; https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/developmenttalk/the-commodity-markets-outlook-in-eight-charts2
3. Sneha, S K & Rajan, G., “Thermo Fisher wins contracts as pharma shifts production to US, CEO says,” Reuters, January 13, 2026; https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/thermo-fisher-wins-contracts-pharma-shifts-production-us-ceo-says-2026-01-13/
4. Sophia, D.M. & Varghese, A., “Global companies hit by more than $35 billion in US tariffs, but outlook stabilizing,” Reuters, October 20, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/global-companies-hit-by-more-than-35-billion-us-tariffs-outlook-stabilizing-2025-10-20/
5. Jean, J. & Dumont, M-A., “Commodity Prices Are Expected to Increase Slightly,” Desjardins, November 12, 2025; https://coop.desjardins.com/oc/en/savings-investment/economic-studies/commodity-trends-november-2025.html
6. Hidayat, M., “Economic Forces Behind Soaring Commodity Prices in 2025,” Discovery Alert, January 2, 2026; https://discoveryalert.com.au/economic-forces-drive-commodity-price-surges-2026/
7. “Why commodities still attract investors despite their volatility,” Reuters, December 19, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idRW055216122025RP1/
8. “Introduction to Commodities and Commodity Derivatives,” CFA Institute, 2026; https://www.cfainstitute.org/insights/professional-learning/refresher-readings/2026/introduction-commodities-commodity-derivatives

SOURCE: GettyImages CREDIT: e-crow

Disclaimers:

Published February 25, 2026

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. The Evolve Global Materials & Mining Enhanced Yield Index ETF (“BASE”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs) and mutual funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs and mutual funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

European banks wrapped up 2025 with a headline that’s easy to overuse: “another great year.” But when it’s backed by numbers like those from 2025, it’s hard to describe the performance of European banks any other way.

For years after the financial crisis and Great Recession, a lot of investors treated European banks as a value trap: cheap for reasons that never really went away. In 2025, however, that attitude shifted. Banks didn’t just participate in Europe’s market rally, they helped lead it, drawing attention back to the sector.

By mid-November, the Stoxx Europe 600 banking sub-index was up 57% year-over-year, according to the Wall Street Journal, helping push the broader European market to record highs.¹ By year-end, Reuters reported that European shares had posted their strongest year since 2021, with banks doing much of the heavy lifting.²

STOXX, which runs several widely followed European indices, said the EURO STOXX Banks and STOXX Europe 600 Banks indices rose 80.3% and 67% respectively in 2025—its best year for the sector since 1987.³ While European banking sector remains below its pre-crisis levels, their performance in 2025 shows how quickly investors can change their minds when they sense there is value to be had, even in developed markets.

So why did European financials have such a good year? And how can North American investors take advantage of that to complement their exposure on this side of the Atlantic and to help diversify their portfolios?

What fuelled European bank stocks in 2025?

So what actually powered European banks’ performance in 2025? It came down to overall profitability, buybacks and dividends, and modernized cost controls, especially thanks to the use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”).

To begin with, European banks looked healthier than many people assumed. In its Financial Stability Review from November 2025, the European Central Bank described euro-area banks as profitable and well-capitalised, with return on equity of 9.8% in the in the second quarter of 2025 and capital and liquidity buffers above requirements.⁴ This shows that despite headwinds from U.S. trade and tariff uncertainty, this rally was built on solid balance sheets and durable profits.

Likewise, investors benefitted from how much cash banks were willing and able to hand back to shareholders in 2025. In November, for example, Reuters reported that French bank BNP Paribas received regulatory approval for a €1.15 billion share buyback and raised its core capital buffer (CET1) capital target to 13% by 2027, signalling that it wants to keep a strong buffer while still returning capital.⁵ Similarly, Spanish bank Banco Santander announced in a press release a combination of cash dividends and share buybacks of roughly €3.4 billion, which is approximately 50% of Banco Santander’s profits from the first half of 2025.⁶

And finally, investors benefitted from the growing use of AI as a practical way for European banks to cut costs and improve processes. Analysts such as Helen Jewell, chief investment officer for fundamental equities at BlackRock, increasingly see banks as potential “cost winners” from AI because the technology can streamline routine operations, improving fraud detection, and lower staffing and processing costs.⁷ This sentiment is echoed more broadly by McKinsey, who in its latest report on the value of GenAI to the banking sector suggested that AI could add $200 billion to $340 billion in value annually to global banking, primarily through gains in productivity.⁸

Why Consider European Financials Alongside North American Banks

For investors, holding European financials alongside North American banks is about broadening exposure to different economic, regulatory, and earnings cycles. European banks operate in a distinct policy environment shaped by the European Central Bank and under different capital rules than financial institutions in the U.S. or Canada. That means their profitability and balance-sheet dynamics do not always move in lockstep with North American banks.

There is also cycle-diversification to consider. In 2025, European banks benefited from improving profitability and capital returns at a time when North American banks were dealing with more mature credit cycles and tighter regulatory scrutiny.⁹ Holding exposure to institutions influenced by different macro pressures—rates, loan growth, fiscal policy, and regulation—can help reduce reliance on any single regional outcome.

Valuation and capital-return profiles can differ as well. Even after a strong year, many European banks continue to trade at lower multiples than large North American banks, according to Bloomberg, reflecting lingering investor caution.¹⁰ At the same time, the return of sizeable dividends and buybacks has made the sector more visible to global investors who previously overlooked it. For some investors, that combination of lower starting valuations and renewed capital discipline is part of the appeal.

Finally, European financials add structural diversification. The region’s banks tend to have different business mixes, with greater exposure to cross-border lending, trade finance, and bank-based business models.¹¹ As European institutions adopt new technologies and cost controls—mirroring trends already underway in North America—the gap between how investors perceive European and North American banks has begun to narrow. For portfolios already heavily weighted toward U.S. or Canadian financials, European banks represent a way to spread regional risk rather than concentrate it.

Give Your Portfolio Some European Flair with EBNK ETF

 Are you looking to diversify your banking holdings beyond North America?

The Evolve European Banks Enhanced Yield ETF (EBNK) is an index-based ETF that invests in equity securities of the largest European banks on an equally-weighted basis, with the added value of a covered call strategy applied on up to 33% of the portfolio. Covered call options have the potential to provide extra income and help hedge long stock positions.

For more information on EBNK ETF, visit our website at https://evolveetfs.com/ebnk/.

ENDNOTES

1. Wallace, J., “Banks Power European Stocks to Record Highs,” The Wall Street Journal, November 12, 2025; https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-11-12-2025/card/banks-power-european-stocks-to-record-highs-ybRc3ITDKYE3WcQXfZTM
2. Mathur, R. & Kashyap, P., “European stocks end near record levels, cap strongest annual run since 2021,” Reuters, December 31, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/european-shares-set-best-year-since-2021-2025-12-31/
3. “European bank stocks have record year, lifting sector STOXX ETF assets above EUR 13bn,” STOXX, January 14, 2026; https://stoxx.com/european-bank-stocks-have-record-year-lifting-sector-stoxx-etf-assets-above-eur-13bn
4. “Financial Stability Review, November 2025”, European Central Bank, November 2025; https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/financial-stability-publications/fsr/pdf/ecb.fsr202511~263b5810d4.en.pdf
5. Rhodes, D. & Rosemain, M., “BNP Paribas lifts core capital goal amid investor concerns,” Reuters, November 20, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/bnp-paribas-raises-cet1-ratio-target-13-by-2027-2025-11-20/
6. “Santander increases 2025 interim cash dividend by 15% to 11.5 euro cents per share,” Santander, September 30, 2025; https://www.santander.com/en/press-room/press-releases/2025/09/santander-increases-2025-interim-cash-dividend-by-15-to-11-5-euro-cents-per-share
7. Alves, J., “Old meets new economy: AI boom to supercharge European banks’ rally,” Reuters, December 15, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/old-meets-new-economy-ai-boom-supercharge-european-banks-rally-2025-12-15/
8. Kamalnath, V., Lerner, L., Moon, J., Sari, G., Sohoni, V. & Zhang, S., “Capturing the full value of generative AI in banking,” McKinsey & Company, December 5, 2023; https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/capturing-the-full-value-of-generative-ai-in-banking
9. Mathur, R. & Kashyap, P., “European stocks end near record levels, cap strongest annual run since 2021,” Reuters, December 31, 2025; https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/european-shares-set-best-year-since-2021-2025-12-31/
10. Msika, M. & Munoz Montijano, M., “European Bank Stocks Still Hold Appeal After Record Winning Run,” Bloomberg, October 1, 2025; https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-10-01/european-bank-stocks-still-hold-appeal-after-record-winning-run
11. Beck, T., Bruno, B. & Carletti, E., “How have European banks developed along different dimensions of international competitiveness?,” Economic Governance and EMU Scrutiny Unit, European Parliament, May 2, 2025; https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2025/764383/ECTI_IDA(2025)764383_EN.pdf

Source: GettyImages Credit: nevarpp

Disclaimers:

Published February 23, 2026

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. Evolve European Banks Enhanced Yield ETF (“EBNK”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs) and mutual funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs and mutual funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

Tech giants delivered a standout earnings season, with all six companies beating expectations on both revenue and profit. A clear theme was the continued AI push, as firms deepened their long-running investments in artificial intelligence to drive growth, efficiency, and product innovation. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, and Amazon all highlighted growing AI infrastructure spend and cloud momentum, while Apple and Netflix focused on integrating AI across user-facing services. Revenue growth was strong across the board—with advertising, cloud, and subscription businesses all contributing. Capital expenditures surged, free cash flow jumped, and margins expanded at several firms, even as some (like Amazon) offered more cautious near-term guidance. Management commentary struck a confident tone, with most CEOs emphasizing AI’s role as a transformative force across industries. Despite some mixed stock reactions, Big Tech is showing no signs of slowing down—doubling down on AI to fuel the next wave of scale and profitability.

TECH Portfolio Holdings

Meta Platforms (META)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 17.89%

• EPS: $7.140 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $5.887
• Revenue: $47.516B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $44.832B

“We’ve had a strong quarter both in terms of our business and community, I’m excited to build personal superintelligence for everyone in the world.” – Mark Zuckerberg, CEO¹

Meta crushed expectations in Q2, with earnings of $7.14 per share on $47.52 billion in revenue, both well above estimates, sending shares soaring over 10%. Ad revenue hit $46.56 billion, driven by AI-enhanced efficiency, while daily active users across its apps climbed to 3.48 billion. The company raised its Q3 revenue forecast and bumped up 2025 expense guidance, now topping out at $118 billion. Meta is doubling down on AI, investing $15.1 billion—including a major stake in Scale AI—and unveiling plans for “personal superintelligence” to empower users beyond just automation. Reality Labs remained a drag with a $4.53 billion loss, but Meta’s broader vision and strong top-line growth have investors excited for what’s next.²

Alphabet Inc (GOOGL)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 16.90%

• EPS: $2.310 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $2.177
• Revenue: $81.723B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $79.599B

“We had a standout quarter, with robust growth across the company. We are leading at the frontier of AI and shipping at an incredible pace. AI is positively impacting every part of the business, driving strong momentum. Search delivered double-digit revenue growth, and our new features, like AI Overviews and AI Mode, are performing well…” – Sundar Pichai, CEO³

Alphabet topped expectations in Q2 with impressive revenue and earnings, boosted by strong performances in search, YouTube, and cloud. Cloud revenue jumped 32% to $13.62 billion, aided by a new partnership with OpenAI to support ChatGPT on Google’s infrastructure. YouTube pulled in $9.8 billion, while overall ad revenue rose to $71.34 billion. Net income climbed nearly 20% to $28.2 billion, but the big headline was Alphabet’s AI-fueled capex plans—now expected to hit $85 billion in 2025, up $10B from previous guidance, with even more coming in 2026. The Gemini chatbot hit 450 million users, and AI Overviews now reaches 2 billion monthly users. Alphabet’s Other Bets lost $1.25 billion, but its moonshots are overshadowed by surging AI momentum. Despite a $1.4 billion legal charge, investors liked what they saw—shares rose 3% after hours as Alphabet doubled down on AI dominance.⁴

Microsoft Corporation (MSFT)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 16.90%

• EPS: $3.650 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $3.373
• Revenue: $76.441B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $73.893B

“Cloud and AI is the driving force of business transformation across every industry and sector…We’re innovating across the tech stack to help customers adapt and grow in this new era, and this year, Azure surpassed $75 billion in revenue, up 34 percent, driven by growth across all workloads.” – Satya Nadella, Microsoft CEO⁵

Microsoft blew past expectations, posting $3.65 EPS on $76.44 billion in revenue—its fastest growth in over three years—and sending shares soaring 9% after hours. Azure stole the show with 39% growth and, for the first time, Microsoft disclosed its full-year Azure revenue: $75 billion, up 34% from last year. Capital expenditures surged to $24.2 billion in Q4 and are expected to top $120 billion in fiscal 2026, highlighting Microsoft’s aggressive AI infrastructure push. Copilot products continue gaining traction, now reaching 100 million monthly users and boosting Office revenue per user. The cloud and productivity divisions led the charge, while More Personal Computing also outperformed, driven by a rebound in PC shipments. Despite data center bottlenecks and $1.71 billion in other expenses—including OpenAI-related losses—Microsoft’s cloud dominance and AI monetization strategy remain in full swing as it enters the new fiscal year with confidence and scale.⁶

Amazon.com Inc (AMZN)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 16.80%

• EPS: $1.680 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $1.320
• Revenue: $167.702B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $162.146B

“…Our AI progress across the board continues to improve our customer experiences, speed of innovation, operational efficiency, and business growth, and I’m excited for what lies ahead.” – Andy Jassy, CEO⁷

Amazon posted a strong Q2, with earnings of $1.68 per share on $167.7 billion in revenue—both above expectations—but shares tumbled over 7% after the company issued soft guidance for Q3 operating income. While sales rose 13% year over year, investors were rattled by projected operating income of $15.5B–$20.5B, falling short of the $19.5B consensus midpoint. CEO Andy Jassy tried to calm concerns over intensifying cloud and AI competition, reaffirming AWS’s leadership and optimism in its $100B AI investment push. AWS grew 18% year over year, but lagged Microsoft and Google’s faster-growing cloud units. Bright spots included a booming ad business, up 23% to $15.7B, and stronger-than-expected results in online stores and seller services. Still, Amazon’s cautious tone on macro risks, tariffs, and cloud growth left investors wary. Despite robust top-line momentum and expanding AI ambitions, the market clearly wanted more near-term confidence on profitability.⁸

Apple Inc (AAPL)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 16.01%

• EPS: $1.570 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $1.433
• Revenue: $94.036B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $89.303B

“Today Apple is proud to report a June quarter revenue record with double-digit growth in iPhone, Mac and Services and growth around the world, in every geographic segment…” – Tim Cook, Apple CEO⁹

Apple delivered its strongest quarter in years, beating expectations with $1.57 EPS on $94.04 billion in revenue—its fastest growth since 2021. iPhone sales soared 13% to $44.58 billion, driven by strong demand for the new iPhone 16, while Mac sales surged nearly 15% on the back of updated MacBook Airs. Services revenue grew 13% to $27.42 billion, powered by iCloud and App Store gains. Despite softness in iPads and wearables, investors cheered Apple’s guidance for continued revenue and margin strength in the September quarter. Tariff costs remained manageable, and Cook attributed 1% of revenue growth to early buying ahead of trade risks. Apple also saw a rebound in China, with 4% sales growth. CEO Tim Cook emphasized growing AI investment, saying Apple is embedding AI across its ecosystem and has already acquired around seven companies this year. With $133 billion in cash and strong product momentum, Apple’s still firing on all cylinders.¹⁰

Netflix Inc (NFLX)

Portfolio weight in TECH*: 15.50%

• EPS: $7.190 reported vs Bloomberg estimate of $7.071
• Revenue: $11.079B reported vs Bloomberg estimate of 11.062B

Netflix delivered another strong quarter, with earnings of $7.19 per share and $11.08 billion in revenue, both slightly topping expectations. Revenue surged 16% year over year, fueled by subscriber growth, price hikes, and a boost in ad sales. The company raised its full-year revenue outlook to as high as $45.2 billion and bumped up free cash flow guidance to $8–8.5 billion. Operating margin improved to 34.1%, though Netflix warned it will dip in the second half due to higher content and marketing costs tied to a packed release slate. While shares dipped 1% after hours, investor sentiment remains upbeat as cash generation soars—operating cash flow doubled and free cash flow jumped 91% year over year. With major releases like Stranger Things and Wednesday returning soon, Netflix is leaning into its content machine while keeping profitability front and center—even if subscriber updates are now a thing of the past.¹¹

Sources:

1. https://investor.atmeta.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2025/Meta-Reports-Second-Quarter-2025-Results/default.aspx (July 30, 2025)
2. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/30/meta-q2-earnings-report-2025.html (July 30, 2025)
3. https://abc.xyz/assets/cc/27/3ada14014efbadd7a58472f1f3f4/2025q2-alphabet-earnings-release.pdf (July 23, 2025)
4. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/alphabet-google-q2-earnings.html (July 23, 2025)
5. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/investor/earnings/fy-2025-q4/press-release-webcast (July 30, 2025)
6. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/30/microsoft-msft-q4-earnings-report-2025.html (July 30, 2025)
7. https://ir.aboutamazon.com/news-release/news-release-details/2025/Amazon-com-Announces-Second-Quarter-Results/ (July 31, 2025)
8. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/31/amazon-amzn-q2-earnings-report-2025.html (July 31, 2025)
9. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/07/apple-reports-third-quarter-results/ (July 31, 2025)
10. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/31/apple-aapl-q3-earnings-report-2025.html (July 31, 2025)
11. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/17/netflix-nflx-earnings-q2-2025.html (July 17, 2025)

*Portfolio weights as at July 31, 2025.

Source for estimated and reported EPS and Revenue data: Bloomberg, as at August 5, 2025. Figures in USD.

Source: Getty Images Credit: Blue Planet Studio

DISCLAIMER

Published August 07, 2025.

Evolve Funds Group Inc. is the investment fund manager and portfolio manager. The Evolve FANGMA Index ETF (“TECH”) is offered by Evolve Funds Group Inc., and distributed through authorized dealers.

The information contained herein is a general description and is not intended to be specific investment advice to any particular investor nor intended to be investment or tax advice. You should not act or rely on the information contained herein without seeking the advice of an appropriate professional advisor. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes as a summary only, does not constitute an offer to sell any securities or a legally binding obligation, it is qualified entirely by, and should be read in conjunction with, the more detailed information appearing in the prospectuses found on the Evolve Funds Group Inc website at https://evolveetfs.com/

Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Certain statements contained herein are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” or “estimate,” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained herein are based upon what Evolve Funds Group Inc. and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, neither Evolve Funds Group Inc. nor the portfolio manager can assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Certain information contained in this document is obtained from third parties. Evolve Funds Group Inc. believes such information to be accurate and reliable as of the date hereof, however, we cannot guarantee that it is accurate or complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

President Joe Biden’s proposal to expand Medicare and Medicaid coverage for anti-obesity drugs could reshape the American healthcare landscape while addressing a growing public health challenge.¹

If approved, the proposed policy would take effect in 2026 and provide coverage for GLP-1 receptor agonist medications that target obesity as a primary condition, rather than as a complication of other health issues. This policy shift would allow an estimated 7.4 million Americans to access these treatments at significantly reduced costs, with out-of-pocket expenses potentially dropping by as much as 95%. ²³

For pharmaceutical companies, the proposed change represents a major opportunity. Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, which produce GLP-1 drugs Wegovy, Ozempic, and Mounjaro, stand to gain as demand for these drugs is expected to grow tremendously under the plan. With federal programs poised to make these treatments more affordable and accessible, the policy could significantly boost revenues while solidifying the role of GLP-1 medications in obesity management.

The proposed expansion underscores a broader trend of integrating weight-loss drugs into the healthcare system, a development that could drive long-term growth for manufacturers.

Why This Policy Is a Game-Changer for Drugmakers

The Biden administration’s proposal to expand Medicare and Medicaid coverage for anti-obesity drugs addresses a significant unmet need in the U.S. healthcare system. Under current rules, GLP-1 receptor agonists—originally developed to treat diabetes—are only covered for patients with diabetes or related complications. This leaves millions of obese Americans without access to these medications, even though the drugs have demonstrated effectiveness in managing weight.⁴

With nearly 40% of U.S. adults classified as obese according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and with that number expected to rise to as high as 50% by 2030, the market potential for these treatments is vast.⁵ Expanding coverage to include obesity as a standalone condition could unlock a substantial and underserved patient population, giving drugmakers access to millions of new customers.

One of the most critical barriers to broader adoption of GLP-1 medications is their cost. Drugs like Wegovy, Ozempic, and Mounjaro can carry list prices of up to $1,350 per month, putting them out of reach for many Americans. Biden’s plan to reduce out-of-pocket costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries by as much as 95% would make these treatments far more accessible.⁶

By lowering the financial burden, the policy is likely to spur greater adoption of GLP-1 drugs, particularly among lower-income populations that have, to date, found these drugs difficult to afford. Increased affordability could also lead to more patients staying on these medications for extended periods, creating opportunities for repeat prescriptions.

Obesity is also a chronic condition that requires ongoing management, which could generate long-term revenue streams for drug manufacturers. Unlike short-term treatments, GLP-1 medications are designed for continuous use, potentially keeping patients on the drugs for years.⁷ The recurring nature of obesity care presents a unique opportunity for pharmaceutical companies to build steady, predictable revenue flows.

Winners in the Weight-Loss Drug Market

Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly are poised to be the primary beneficiaries of expanding coverage for anti-obesity drugs. Novo Nordisk’s GLP-1 treatments, Wegovy and Ozempic, have already secured a commanding position in the weight-loss market, buoyed by strong demand and clinical trial data demonstrating cardiovascular and other health benefits. Eli Lilly, which markets Mounjaro for diabetes, was recently granted FDA approval for its Zepbound for treatment of obesity and chronic weight management, further bolstering its position.^⁸ Together, these companies dominate the sector, and the proposed policy could solidify their lead by opening the doors to millions of new patients.

Both firms are investing heavily in scaling up production to meet anticipated demand. Novo Nordisk has announced multi-billion-dollar plans to expand its manufacturing capacity, while Eli Lilly is similarly ramping up facilities for its GLP-1 production. These investments come as the Food and Drug Administration reports improvements in the supply chain for active ingredients like semaglutide and tirzepatide, easing previous shortages that had constrained growth.^⁹

With these bottlenecks resolved and policy changes on the horizon, Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly are well-positioned to capitalize on an increasingly accessible weight-loss drug market. Their early leadership and manufacturing scale provide a competitive edge against new players, like Amgen, whose efforts to establish themselves in the field have so far fallen short.¹⁰

If implemented, this policy would address a significant unmet medical need amongst nearly half of all Americans and represent a transformative opportunity for drugmakers to accelerate demand for GLP-1 medications. By allowing coverage for non-diabetes-related weight loss management and by reducing out-of-pocket costs for treatments like Wegovy, Ozempic, and Mounjaro, the plan could make these therapies accessible to millions of Americans and allow Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly to solidify their market leadership and define the future of obesity treatment in the United States.

LIFE ETF: Investing in Global Healthcare

Investing in ETFs can be one way to add cutting-edge healthcare to your portfolio.

Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund (LIFE ETF) provides investors with exposure to twenty global blue-chip companies in the healthcare industry, with a covered call strategy that is actively managed to provide increased yield potential while helping mitigate risk. For more information about the Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund or any of Evolve ETF’s lineup of exchange-traded funds, please visit our website or contact us.

ENDNOTES

1. “Drugs like Wegovy, Ozempic would be covered by Medicare, Medicaid under Biden proposal,” CBS News, November 27, 2024; https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wegovy-ozempic-medicare-medicaid-biden-proposal/
2. Lovelace Jr., B. & Bush, E., “Biden proposes weight loss drug coverage for people on Medicare and Medicaid,” NBC News, November 26, 2024; https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/biden-proposes-requiring-medicare-medicaid-cover-weight-loss-drugs-rcna181756
3. Muller, M., “Biden Proposal to Cover Obesity Drugs Sets Up Quandary for Trump,” BNN Bloomberg, November 26, 2024; https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/company-news/2024/11/26/biden-proposes-medicare-medicaid-coverage-of-obesity-drugs/
4. “FACT SHEET: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Takes Latest Step to Lower Prescription Drug Costs by Proposing Expanded Coverage of Anti-Obesity Medications for Americans with Medicare and Medicaid,” The White House, November 26, 2024; https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/11/26/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-takes-latest-step-to-lower-prescription-drug-costs-by-proposing-expanded-coverage-of-anti-obesity-medications-for-americans-with-medicare-and-medicaid/
5. Pifer, R., “Biden administration proposes Medicare, Medicaid coverage of pricey weight loss drugs,” Biopharma Dive, November 26, 2024; https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/medicare-medicaid-obesity-drug-coverage-rule-biden/734060/
6. Luhby, T., “7.4 million Americans could gain Medicare or Medicaid coverage for anti-obesity drugs under Biden proposal,” CNN, November 26, 2024; https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/26/politics/anti-obesity-drugs-medicare-medicaid-biden/index.html
7. Lovelace Jr., B. & Bush, E., “Biden proposes weight loss drug coverage for people on Medicare and Medicaid,” NBC News, November 26, 2024; https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/biden-proposes-requiring-medicare-medicaid-cover-weight-loss-drugs-rcna181756
8. “FDA Approves Lilly’s Zepbound™ (tirzepatide) for Chronic Weight Management, a Powerful New Option for the Treatment of Obesity or Overweight with Weight-Related Medical Problems,” Eli Lilly and Company, November 8, 2023; https://investor.lilly.com/news-releases/news-release-details/fda-approves-lillys-zepboundtm-tirzepatide-chronic-weight
9. Stadig, D., “The winners and losers of Biden’s plans to expand coverage of weight-loss drugs,” ING, November 28, 2024; https://think.ing.com/articles/winners-losers-bidens-plans-to-expand-coverage-weight-loss-drugs/
10. Burger, L. & Jacobsen, S., “Novo, Lilly shares rise as Biden proposes obesity care coverage,” Reuters, November 26, 2024; https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/novo-nordisk-shares-rise-biden-proposes-obesity-care-coverage-2024-11-26/

Getty Images Credit: Biggie Productions

The contents of this blog are not to be used or construed as investment advice or as an endorsement or recommendation of any entity or security discussed. These contents are not an offer or solicitation of an offer or a recommendation to buy or sell any securities or financial instrument, nor shall it be deemed to provide investment, tax or accounting advice. The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only.

Commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded funds (ETFs). Please read the prospectus before investing. The indicated rates of return are the historical annual compound total returns net of fees (except for figures of one year or less, which are simple total returns) including changes in unit value and reinvestment of all distributions and do not take into account sales, redemption, distribution or optional charges or income taxes payable by any securityholder that would have reduced returns. ETFs are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated..

Certain statements contained in this blog may constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking information may relate to a future outlook and anticipated distributions, events or results and may include statements regarding future financial performance. In some cases, forward-looking information can be identified by terms such as “may”, “will”, “should”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “intend” or other similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. Actual results may vary from such forward-looking information. Evolve Funds undertakes no obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statement whether as a result of new information, future events or other such factors which affect this information, except as required by law.

Welcome to the beginning of Q4, Bitcoiners. With September behind us, a lot of chart watchers are getting increasingly excited about where Bitcoin could go in the remainder of the year.

The month of September was characterized by classic volatility. Bitcoin was up 8% for the month, but along the way we saw a 10% drop in the first week, followed by a 26% rally over the next three weeks. Volatilty like this is either something you love or something you hate, and it really depends on how you construct your portfolio, your timeline, and long term outlook.

Since the sharp run up in January and February, Bitcoin has been chopping sideways, making a “Bull Flag” as we mentioned last month. Some are calling this “chopsolidation” a term we like because the price is both consolidating the early gains, but also exhibiting typically high volatility that has the knock on effect of shaking out weak hands. It’s hard to hold your position in a market like this unless you have a long term time horizon and understand the dynamics of the price movements year-to-date.

It is our view that the January launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs in the US pulled forward price appreciation into Q1, and the resulting sideways grind has been investors digesting this gain to end Q3 where it was likely to have been anyway.

One of our favourite ways to think about the price is in terms of where we are in the cycle. Some charts start this at the halving, but we prefer starting it at the cycle low, because it aligns more with investors sentiment since there is often a run up into the halving which can distort the start position. We’re not arguing that the halving isn’t functionally responsible for Bitcoin’s four year cycle, just that it’s best to use the cycle low as the starting point for looking at price action and determining where we are in the process.

As you can see below, the current cycle (black line) is entirely consistent with the previous two cycles. Genesis to 2011, and 2011 – 2015, are shown for completeness but we warn clients against expecting moves like those going forward. Back then the nascent network had virtually none of the large players we have today, and also the impact of the halving was far greater. We expect Bitcoin vol to drop in the years ahead as there will be more market participants, more individual decision makers determining the marginal price, and also because the impact of the halving also drops every cycle.

The take away from this chart is that price is exactly where it should be at this stage in the cycle and the next 12 months is often characterized by a higher move in price. There are no guarantees in life, but there is good reason to be bullish based on cycle theory alone.

Back to the subject of volatility, we include the following two charts for your consideration. Bitcoin’s one year 30 day volatility compare to the S&P 500. The 100 day moving average is overlaid in blue to give you the long run number. We chose the past year because it’s most recent and indicates where the market is for now.

Now here are the returns over the past two full years, and 2024-to-date.

Simply put, as of this writing, Bitcoin is a 40-vol asset with an average annual return of call-it 45%. The S&P 500 is a 13-vol asset with an average annual return of 10%.

Size your positions accordingly. But don’t ignore the opportunity! It’s not every day that a high vol, high returning asset class is invented (hint: never happens). This makes Bitcoin a great diversifier in for portfolios looking to add growth to their strategic asset allocation.

On the subject of adoption, there are various metrics to track including active addresses or nodes on the lightning network. But perhaps for those of us old enough to remember the first cell phones, this graphic is a good indication of where we are

We’ll leave you with one final point on price action seasonality. As we look ahead to October, often nicknamed Uptober, this tweet caught our attention. Will history repeat?

Looking to invest in Bitcoin? Explore the Evolve ETFs Bitcoin ETF (TSX: EBIT).

Good luck and see you next month.

– Elliot Johnson CIO, COO Evolve ETFs

Source: Shutterstock Credit: Godlikeart

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with exchange traded mutual funds (ETFs) and mutual funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. ETFs and mutual funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated. There are risks involved with investing in ETFs and mutual funds. Please read the prospectus for a complete description of risks relevant to the ETF and mutual fund. Investors may incur customary brokerage commissions in buying or selling ETF and mutual fund units. This communication is intended for informational purposes only and is not, and should not be construed as, investment and/or tax advice to any individual.

Certain statements contained in this documentation constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking information may relate to a future outlook and anticipated distributions, events or results and may include statements regarding future financial performance. In some cases, forward-looking information can be identified by terms such as “may”, “will”, “should”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “intend” or other similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. Actual results may vary from such forward-looking information. Evolve undertakes no obligation to update publicly or otherwise revise any forward-looking statement whether as a result of new information, future events or other such factors which affect this information, except as required by law.