Grayscale, top venture capital firm a16z, and the industry association CCI, representing more than 100 crypto companies, jointly urged the SEC to oppose classifying “new-type crypto ETFs” that have not yet been approved—such as staked ETH ETFs, leveraged BTC ETFs, and crypto-linked bond ETFs—into a single category with uniform restrictions. The most easily overlooked reverse fact is that this request does not ask the SEC to loosen approval authority for all new products; it only seeks to clarify the standards for classification and review, to prevent indefinite delays caused by vague rules. In the past, the SEC’s approval of crypto ETFs has always followed the principle of prioritizing the compliance of the underlying assets. Even already launched spot BTC and ETH ETFs underwent nearly two years of review for each item. This latest petition does not challenge the SEC’s core review authority.
If the SEC adopts the recommendations for a categorization-based review, approval efficiency for new crypto ETFs would improve significantly. If the staking-type ETH ETF—currently the market’s highest focus—were approved, it is expected to bring more than $10 billion in incremental capital. The time to bring such products to market could be reduced from the current 18 months or more down to 6–12 months. The verification condition is that, in the ETF review new rules published by the SEC in Q4 2026 or Q1 2027, it explicitly adds a subcategory for “new crypto ETFs,” and publishes a separate checklist for investor protection and custody compliance reviews—rather than continuing to apply the existing spot ETF standards to block every new product.
If the SEC rejects the relevant requests, it will continue to apply the existing logic of “case-by-case review with no clear categorization.” Approvals of new ETFs will therefore keep getting stuck in disputes over “product attribute definition.” For example, an ETH ETF involving staking yields could be postponed indefinitely due to “unclear compliance regarding the source of returns.” The verification condition is that, in subsequent public statements, the SEC clearly refuses to modify the existing ETF categorization rules, or continues to reject applications for new ETFs on the grounds of “insufficient investor protection.”
Another constraint to note is that the current SEC Chair, Gary Gensler, will have his term end in January 2027. During his tenure, the tone for crypto regulation has been “refine the rules first, then approve products.” Even if categorization recommendations are adopted, it is unlikely that, within his term, leveraged or staking-type high-risk new crypto ETFs will be approved. At most, the SEC may clarify a review framework to leave ample operational space for the next regulatory leadership. The real-world impact of this request is therefore highly tied to who is appointed as SEC Chair after the U.S. election by the end of 2026.