Spot Ether exchange-traded funds (ETF) are anticipated to enter the United States market by July 2, as indicated by Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas. In a post on X on June 15, Balchunas mentioned that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had provided minimal comments on the spot Ether (ETH) ETF S-1 applications and requested them to be returned within the week.
There is a possibility that the SEC might work to declare the applications effective the following week to clear them before the upcoming holiday weekend, according to Balchunas. This turnaround in confidence contrasts with the previous day, when Balchunas expressed concerns about Ether ETF applicants waiting for feedback from the Division of Corporation Finance at the SEC.
On May 23, the SEC approved eight 19b-4 filings to list spot Ether ETFs on various U.S. exchanges, but trading cannot commence until the required S-1 registration statement approvals are obtained.
SEC Chair Gary Gensler has provided a broader timeframe for the potential approval date of spot Ether ETFs, suggesting that trading may commence within the next three months, by the end of September. However, Gensler had previously stated that the speed of approvals would depend on how quickly issuers address comments from the SEC.
Following the approval of spot Bitcoin (BTC) ETF on January 11, which saw record highs by March 13, some traders are hopeful that Ether’s price could follow a similar trajectory. However, not everyone shares the same sentiment. Stephen Richardson, managing director of financial markets at Fireblocks, argued that spot Ether ETFs may not see the same immediate inflow as spot Bitcoin ETFs due to the complexities in valuing the asset’s use cases.
Richardson highlighted the lack of widespread consensus on evaluating the utility of the Ethereum blockchain as a key factor in this difference. In a recent interview with Cointelegraph, he emphasized the challenges in accurately assessing the utilization rate of the Ethereum blockchain.
In a related development, a recent magazine article delved into the topic of ‘Bitcoin Layer 2s,’ pointing out that these may not truly be Layer 2 solutions and discussed the implications of this distinction.