Bitcoin ETF this time?

[metallica101]

The SEC is out of time, and it needs to decide what to do with Bitwise's BTC ETF proposal by October 13th. Now, Bitcoin has seen a significant price improvement this year, and in the last few years, we have got custodians, Bakkt, and similar things. Are ETFs going to be next? And if the decision does end up being positive, is it going to have an impact on the price?

[1714126733]

1714126733

[1714126733]

1714126733

[1714126733]

1714126733

[CryptoBry]

On the 13th of this month, the SEC has to finally decide on what to do with the ETF application of Bitwise Investments but my guess is that it will not be approved for many reasons which the body can expound more. Anyway, though many can be excited with the ETF, my own analysis is that just like the Bakkt it will not have positive impact on Bitcoin and can even drag the price down. We all dream of institutional involvement with Bitcoin but many of the money coming from these investors are so called "hot money" they are not holders actually but also more of speculators for the asset.

Per se actually there is nothing wrong with that and when we talk about adoption this should part of the whole pie but with the market size of Bitcoin as it is now I don't think ETF can really be helping a lot. Now, I am not an expert on this matter actually I am just here presenting what I feel so don't get me wrong because definitely if there can be an approved ETF and it is directly pulling Bitcoin up then I would be so happy to be wrong with my humble analysis.

[NeuroticFish]

Indeed, now there are some ETFs to be used, there's Bakkt to be used, new ETFs won't really add anything new.
We may need more ETFs financial devices physically back-ed with Bitcoin, like Bakkt does (I hope I didn't say anything stupid, it's something I just start to try to understand), but basically that's all.
Their real (non-speculative) effect on the price now is near to nothing.

Edit: correction

[funchiestz]

I think we need to let go of the ETF business now. We waited with great hopes for BAKKT. What was the result? Frustration! I don't think we should hope too much to end up not having the same thing. We don't know what the ETF will bring. But we know that decentralization can have negative effects.

Also Bitcoin is something very new yet. Even for gold, we know that the ETF was approved too late. I think the Bitcoin ETF will also take some time.

The first gold-backed ETF was developed by ETF securities and launched back on March 28th, 2003

[mk4]

And if the decision does end up being positive, is it going to have an impact on the price?

Of course. The question is just, what will the impact be? Positive or negative? While prices could rise, remember that people will also be able to short bitcoin through ETFs. One thing's for sure though, bitcoin's trading volume will increase along with market liquidity, which is what matters in my opinion. A positive impact on the markets doesn't necessarily mean a positive(upward) price movement.

[gentlemand]

My expectation of an ETF arrival is somewhere around... never.

The SEC only rubber stamps products it can police. That's the only reason it exists more or less. Since they can't police the Bitcoin market and will never be able to then they can never approve it. End of.

[oleg681010]

Yes, I think the decision will affect the price, like all significant events

[franky1]

bakkt is not an ETF, its in a different category. its also available not on the NYSE/LSE instad its on a smaller market(ICE) meaning large multi continent institutions are not putting their employee pension funds into it.

as for ETF that will go on things like NYSE/LSE i feel the SEC is dragging its feet waiting for one of its pals in wall street to apply to be the first. once that occurs it will set a precedence and others will use the first one as a template to get approved real quick, creating a snowball effect.

that said i know people will think and hope that the day a ETF is launched the price wil rise. it wont rise that day. for an ETF to function the ETF would have already bought the coins needed to put into the trust. and those trading on the ETF on launch day are not putting dollars into bitcoin exchangs buy buying shares of the ETF thus no impact on the price.
what could happen though is secondary institutions suddenly become interested in bitcoin ETF and start buying up real btc, to then form one. and at later dates once all ETF shares of the first launcher have been bought, the ETF could grab more real btc to expand on their supply of shares

but one thing is for sure an ETF launch announcement will NOT cause a price increase due to institutions buying real btc that day. the only effect that could occur on launch day is those already trading real btc, emotionally orgasm some fake hype 'coz mdia said btc 5 times today'
which as everyone knows when a price moves purely due to speculative hype, cant last and then when the bubble bursts, a correction occurs.

so dont get too excited an ETF does not add 'value' to btc. it just add emotional trading drama from people that react to media announcements rather than trading logic

[franky1]

The SEC only rubber stamps products it can police. That's the only reason it exists more or less. Since they can't police the Bitcoin market and will never be able to then they can never approve it. End of.

the SEC do not police institutions. the SEC set the rules and ask the institutions to make their own policies based on those rules so that institutions can police their customers.
the SEC sit back and wait for complaints and reports, so if they were to rubber stamp anyone it would be those that do not cause the SEC to do any work.
if they see a business is going to cause them headaches then they prefer to not allow the company anywhere near a market rather than accept it and then be chasing it eachday. again SEC dont monitor/surveille businesses, they only react when they get reports from outsiders.
think of them as lawyers/judges, waiting for cases to come to them. not police walking the streets looking for trouble

take the 2007 events. if SEC were corporate police they would have found iffy stuff happening as early as the 1990's

[funchiestz]

bakkt is not an ETF, its in a different category. its also available not on the NYSE/LSE instad its on a smaller market(ICE) meaning large multi continent institutions are not putting their employee pension funds into it.

[snip]

so dont get too excited an ETF does not add 'value' to btc. it just add emotional trading drama from people that react to media announcements rather than trading logic

I know there is no relation between BAKKT and ETF. But I mean expectation from these may create disappointment. BTC price won't rise because of ETF approval just like BAKKT release.

Just, it may affect other countries and create FOMO.

[Lucius]

NeuroticFish, you have already read that there are differences between Bakkt which is offers futures contracts, and possible BTC ETF where investor can buy shares in fund, and that shares are backed with (in case of physically supported ETF) real BTC.

A future is a contract between two parties to exchange something (a commodity, foreign currency, stock, you just name it) now for delivery and settlement at a pre-determined future date.

It is pointless to make the trite textbook example you may find in every primer (Mr X, who produces corn at his farm, wishes to ensure a certain price for harvest and therefore enters into a futures sale ….): in a future you fix a price now for a specific day in the future, thus eliminating the risk of fluctuations in price.

Clearly, the two parties to the futures contract have opposed views of how the market will move, or - for physical delivery futures only - they just have matching schedules when it comes to sale/purchase and delivery.

Due to its deferred settlement, a future does not request cash - apart from the guarantee margin - to be paid up front.

An ETF is an Exchange Traded Fund, a jumbo portfolio that replicates some asset (index ETF have been first comers, followed by gold, et cetera). The purchaser of shares in an ETF just adds its money to the existing pool with a view to purchase that asset albeit in a mediated form.

Usually ETFs have catered for people wishing to purchase assets whose minimum unit was above their wallets or above their diversification capabilities. That was the case for SPDR S&P ETFs, for instance, the S&P 500 being quite a costly one to replicate on your own.

Due to their standardised nature, ETFs may be bought by retail-retail investors with even a few hundred Dollars/equivalents.

The difference, then, is merely technical: with both you get exposure to the same risk (be it bitcoin or whatever).

Most people agree that ETF will increase the price of BTC, but also that it all depends on the investors. It is only an opportunity that will be offered to them, the question is whether they will accept it. Although some say the SEC will never approve such ETF, it will probably still happen in the next few years, of course, if interest continues to exist as it exists today.

You can read what theymos&Andreas Antonopolous thinks about this topic :

Agreed, an ETF will almost certainly turn into a disaster at some point. The coins will be stolen, forks will be handled controversially, there will be issues with fungibility (eg. someone will "trace stolen coins" to the ETF's stash), the world will freak out when a bunch of retirees lose their life savings after doing the equivalent of buying BTC at $20k, etc. etc. It'll also get the sort of people who love regulation more into BTC, which is never good.

But investors want it, so it'll probably happen eventually. In particular, I totally condemn trying to get regulators to interfere in the free market more than they already do by blocking any ETF. (When the SEC was last looking into this, I had actually written a long document that I was going to send to them in order to comment on many technical issues with their proposed Bitcoin ETF regulation, but I decided not to send it because I don't want to have even the slightest hand in regulations.)

An ETF probably will increase the price a lot (until the ETF suffers its near-inevitable catastrophe), which has some pros and cons.

Note that an ETF can't affect Bitcoin itself, just the ETF investors and the market. There is no voting of any sort in Bitcoin, so it's not as if holding a lot of BTC gives you any power over Bitcoin, for example. I do agree with Andreas that the creation of a "corpo-Bitcoin" seems probable, perhaps after the ETF loses a ton of BTC and wants to undo it.

[teosanru]

I personally think BTC is still not mature enough of an investment that one would like to invest in it's ETF. Even if the ETF manages to get approved most the crypto enthusiasts would like to buy BTC directly rather than going for an ETF. Because the ETF would still be regulated and large investors would be shy to disclose their earnings to regulators. As coming to the effect of this decision on  price it could affect pricing in both ways. On one side some would say it's a welcome for BTC in the regulated markets while some could be disheartened by BTC coming to regulated market.

[GreatArkansas]

Then if can't be postponed again, my thought it will be denied for sure.
ETF is not good for Bitcoin for me and also on other people, but there are also some positive effects of ETF to Bitcoin like it will help the Bitcoin to be more known and the price of Bitcoin too? Hmmm, not sure.
If this ETF will get approval then for sure there are still more ETF to be filed soon or once this will get rejection, I don't think so if there are still some ETF will be filed.

[pooya87]

we have got custodians, Bakkt, and similar things. Are ETFs going to be next?

the real question is whether SEC cares about any of them! i don't think so. and so far they have not changed their stance against all these bitcoin ETFs and have been consistent in their denial of each of the proposals without any exceptions. this time i don't see anything different that could suggest a different decision from SEC!

[bittraffic]

ETF shouldn't be a thing anymore, there were several attempts about it but all were denied. It will be rejected. Bitcoin should just stay as is as the price will grow without ETF. This time as its going to be denied again, and every time its rejected the price drops down. This ETF attempt is becoming sort of a tool to manipulate already.

[BitHodler]

I don't see why people still care about it after Bakkt being such a fail. Vaneck has launched a trust not that long ago, and it is a fail as well. Based on these institutions not generating volume, how well do you think an ETF would do?

Coinbase had a Bitcoin backed fund for institutions and wealthy investors, but they ended up pulling it back due to the lack of demand. It should have been the first major sign that there is no latent demand for these products.

The only successful institution so far is CME with tens of thousands worth of BTC traded every day.... downside is that these are cash settled contracts and not actual BTC, so there is no positive impact on the market.

[ChrisPop]

Even if the SEC approves the ETF or not it the BTC price won't be affected by this too much on short term. But on long term is great to see the infrastracture being built. ETFs being listed will bring more trust and of course an additional financial instrument for people to invest in. Believe it or not there are people who simply don't understand or don't want to go through the learning curve of purchasing "physical" bitcoin so an ETF would be a better choice as they just say their broker to buy it.

[gentlemand]

I don't see why people still care about it after Bakkt being such a fail.

CME has had a couple of years to get going. It was also a long established platform with a ton of customers already signed up. It also works in dollars which is what the vast majority in the space are only interested in.

It's daffy to declare anything that came after a failure. The entire crypto market has basically been a failure since 2017. We'll know whether any of these new services count when there's bullishness in the air. They certainly won't create it themselves.

What amazes me is how stupid some of these companies are in not recognising how cyclical it still is. They throw in the towel before the real volume shows up. Circle are particularly good at shit timing. They gave up on retail sales of BTC in 2016 just before it took off for real and bought Poloniex for $400 million just as it all fell apart.

[dothebeats]

Another hype train for nothing in the making, I guess? ETFs have proven to be the most hyped thing in the bitcoin ecosystem yet literally adds in no weight or positive impact whatsoever in the whole scene. It will not get approved no matter how huge the public interest is, nor how hard the lobbyists work in order to get it done. IMO we don't need ETFs in the ecosystem. We already have established platforms that does the normal trading and other spicy stuff ETFs could offer (though in a somewhat different approach).

[avikz]

Another hype train for nothing in the making, I guess? ETFs have proven to be the most hyped thing in the bitcoin ecosystem yet literally adds in no weight or positive impact whatsoever in the whole scene. It will not get approved no matter how huge the public interest is, nor how hard the lobbyists work in order to get it done. IMO we don't need ETFs in the ecosystem. We already have established platforms that does the normal trading and other spicy stuff ETFs could offer (though in a somewhat different approach).

I have a similar opinion about ETFs! It's just a hype and won't add any real value to the crypto ecosystem, unless the ETF is settled physically. Investing on the price of an asset without actually buying/selling the actual asset, won't really add any value to the asset ecosystem. What I know, that majority of the ETFs that are waiting for the SEC approval, are not physically settled ETFs. The only physically settled ETF was the Winklevoss one which is also stuck in the line of approval. If we really want to see the volume driving up in the market, we need to see that physically settled ETFs are approved! otherwise, it won't make any sense!