How sensitive is your entry price to the premium?
Same fund, same spot price, only the share's trading price changes. This sweeps the market price from 15% below NAV to 15% above it so you can see exactly how much a "small-looking" percentage premium or discount actually costs — or saves — per coin.
| Share price | Premium / discount | Effective price paid | vs spot |
|---|
GBTC's premium and discount, roughly
Approximate, illustrative ranges from the fund's history as a closed-end trust — before its January 2024 conversion into a spot ETF removed the persistent gap.
| Period | Approx. gap to NAV | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 2017–2020 | +20% to +40% | One of the only brokerage/IRA-eligible BTC wrappers; no redemptions |
| Early 2021 | Premium → 0% | Competing products and direct exchange access eroded scarcity value |
| Late 2022 – early 2023 | −40% to −50% | FTX/Genesis/DCG contagion; forced sellers with no redemption route |
| Jan 2024 onward | ≈0% | Converted to a spot ETF; daily creation/redemption arbitrages the gap shut |
Entry price, not carrying cost
This page and the ETF vs self-custody calculator price two different things entirely. That one prices the recurring expense ratio you pay for as long as you hold the fund; this one prices the one-time gap between what you pay on the day you buy and what the coin underneath is actually worth. A cheap expense ratio does not save you from buying an expensive share, and a rich discount does not protect you from a mediocre expense ratio afterward — run both together. If the fund you are looking at is a corporate treasury vehicle rather than a pure custodial trust, the discount/premium math looks structurally similar but the drivers differ; see the treasury mNAV calculator, the DAT premium payback calculator and the fully-diluted mNAV calculator for that side of the comparison. A large, persistent discount or premium is mostly a symptom of a fund structure without an active creation/redemption valve — treat it as a warning to check the mechanism, not just the number.