The largest players in the crypto market — Grayscale, 21Shares, and venture giant a16z — have joined forces to pressure the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Their message is clear: the regulatory machine must work faster, and the process of approving exchange-traded products (ETFs) must become more flexible and technology-driven.
Confidentiality as a weapon against copying
Grayscale's key initiative is the introduction of confidential draft application filings. Currently, when documents are published at an early stage, competitors gain an unfair advantage by being able to copy and duplicate successful structures. Grayscale insists that a closed discussion phase will reduce incentives for plagiarism and allow issuers to refine products without looking over their shoulders at others' templates. Additionally, the company demands strict timeframes from the SEC: responses to requests — no later than 45 days.
21Shares puts forward nearly mirror-image demands. Notably, the regulator itself previously asked the market a question: is artificial intelligence contributing to a stream of identical applications for "innovative" ETFs? The industry's answer is obvious — the problem is not AI, but an outdated procedure that encourages a race of copies instead of healthy competition.
Speed without sacrificing quality
a16z takes a more balanced stance: reducing review timelines is a logical step given electronic document management and the template-based nature of most disclosures. However, the venture fund emphasizes a critically important nuance — acceleration must not turn into a license for weak scrutiny. This is the very balance the SEC will need to strike.
Voices against
The market is not unanimous. Jane Street warns of the opposite effect: haste in registration will reduce time for critical feedback from market makers on fund structure and liquidity. Their prescription is a mandatory minimum of two authorized participants (APs) for each product. Charles Schwab is categorically against full confidentiality, insisting on publishing documents at least 75 days before they take effect, even if discussions with the sponsor were conducted privately.
Expanding horizons: staking and predictability
In parallel, more ambitious proposals are being voiced. Multicoin Capital, together with Jito Labs and the Solana Policy Institute, is lobbying for permission to include liquid staking tokens in spot crypto ETPs — up to allowing these assets to dominate the product structure. This would pave the way for fundamentally new yield-generating instruments.
NYSE, for its part, complains about unpredictability: the regulator may ask an exchange to delay a listing indefinitely without clear explanations, while a competing venue continues a similar process. The exchange demands formalized timelines.
Comments were accepted until August 31, but the SEC continues to publish materials even after that date. The regulator has not yet outlined a plan for next steps, but the August draft Regulation Crypto Assets with its "safe harbor" for tokens makes it clear: the winds of change in American regulation are inevitable.
My analysis: The industry's demands are a symptom of market maturity. When issuers begin arguing not about whether ETFs will be approved, but about the procedural details of their launch, it signals a fundamental shift in the perception of crypto assets as a legitimate institutional class. However, the SEC will find itself in a difficult position: acceleration without loss of quality is an almost impossible task, and a compromise will likely be found in targeted procedural concessions rather than revolutionary changes.