The path cleared for Solana to list a spot ETF in the US on Tuesday, while XRP remains on the sidelines, and the decisive factor was not market cap or politics but mechanics. In a late-night breakdown, Multicoin Capital’s general counsel Greg Xethalis mapped the five boxes an issuer must tick to launch during an […]The path cleared for Solana to list a spot ETF in the US on Tuesday, while XRP remains on the sidelines, and the decisive factor was not market cap or politics but mechanics. In a late-night breakdown, Multicoin Capital’s general counsel Greg Xethalis mapped the five boxes an issuer must tick to launch during an […]

Why Solana, Not XRP, Just Won The Spot ETF Race, Multicoin’s Counsel Explains

The path cleared for Solana to list a spot ETF in the US on Tuesday, while XRP remains on the sidelines, and the decisive factor was not market cap or politics but mechanics. In a late-night breakdown, Multicoin Capital’s general counsel Greg Xethalis mapped the five boxes an issuer must tick to launch during an SEC shutdown—and why Bitwise and Canary were in position to move while (by extension) XRP issuers were not.

“To launch, you need: ‘33 Act — Effective Registration Statement on Form S-1. ‘34 Act — 19b-4 Approval (obviated by CBTS Generic Listing Standards), Trading Rules Letter (obviated by GLS), Filed Registration Statement on Form 8-A. The 5th is an Exchange has to be willing to certify your 8-A and actually let you launch,” he wrote, adding, “as a 15-year exotic ETP lawyer, I can tell you this is a little uncharted waters.”

Here’s Why Solana Is Listing Today And XRP Isn’t

The uncharted part is the interplay between Section 8(a) of the 1933 Act—which allows an S-1 to become effective automatically 20 days after filing if the issuer does not include a delaying amendment—and the willingness of exchanges to rely on that auto-effectiveness during a period when the SEC staff is not accelerating registrations.

He underscored the normal practice: “To keep an S-1 from going auto-effective, issuers file what’s called a delaying amendment that prevents the S-1 from going auto-effective and allows the SEC to decide when to accelerate effectiveness.” In ’40 Act ETF land, he added, “this is the frustrating BXT amendment filing, but in 1933 Act land, you just say ‘don’t take this effective’.”

The strategic break came when Bitwise flipped that convention. “On Oct 8, Bitwise was the first to file SOL without a delaying amendment,” Xethalis wrote. “Their filing was complete with comments all done & an auto-effective date of Oct 27 5PM.” With the statutory timer running, the final uncertainty shifted from law to market practice. “But then came the waiting game. Would the exchanges list products that were not taken effective through SEC acceleration. This is not a legal question — these products are fully legally processed — it’s a question of practice and norms.”

Exchanges answered with action. “The NYSE has determined that they are pleased to list Bitwise Staking Solana ETF, and the NASDAQ is doing the same for Canary Litecoin and Canary HBAR,” Xethalis reported. “As a result, BSOL will trade on NYSE tomorrow and LTCC and HBR will trade on NASDAQ.”

That single paragraph collapses months of speculation about whether generic listing standards truly obviate individualized rule filings for commodity-based digital asset trusts and whether an auto-effective S-1, paired with a Form 8-A, is sufficient to list in the absence of staff acceleration. In Xethalis’s telling, the answer is yes, so long as an exchange is willing to “certify your 8-A and actually let you launch.”

The same logic explains why Solana is first across the line while XRP remains in the queue. Xethalis does not cast this as a merits determination on either asset. It is sequencing and completeness. Bitwise’s Solana trust had cleared comments and deliberately avoided a delaying amendment, starting the 20-day clock, then met the ’34 Act requirements and secured an exchange willing to certify and list.

Parallel efforts tied to XRP have not hit the same alignment. He notes that “Grayscale Solana Trust filed an S-1 that will go effective tomorrow night, but they haven’t yet filed an 8-A and may not be ready to go on Wednesday as they don’t have the 8-A related checks.”

The point generalizes to XRP: without the Form 8-A and an exchange prepared to certify and post a listing notice, an otherwise effective S-1 remains a necessary but insufficient condition for trading, and without removing the delaying amendment and letting the 20-day clock run on a final, comment-cleared document, there is no auto-effectiveness to begin with.

Xethalis also clarifies the backdrop that made any of this feasible. In his earlier breakdown he reminded readers that for a host of spot products—he lists Litecoin, Solana, XRP, BCH, AVAX and others—“19b-4 [deadlines] were obviated by [the] CBTS Generic Listing Standards (GLS).”

That change removes the bespoke rule-change bottleneck that historically governed whether an exchange could list a new commodity-based ETP. It does not negate the rest of the process; it simply moves the gating items to the issuer’s S-1 posture, the 8-A registration of the class, and the exchange’s listing certification under its now-generic standard. In short, once GLS exists, execution becomes a choreography problem. Bitwise and Canary hit their marks first; their products go live first.

The upshot is that Solana, not XRP, “won the race” this week because its issuer embraced auto-effectiveness at the right moment, finished the SEC dialogue in time to make the 20-day window meaningful, and had an exchange ready to certify and list. XRP’s status is not foreclosed by policy or politics in Xethalis’s account; it is a matter of the fifth checkmark being in place alongside the others.

At press time, XRP traded at $2.62.

XRP price
Market Opportunity
Notcoin Logo
Notcoin Price(NOT)
$0.0005408
$0.0005408$0.0005408
+0.65%
USD
Notcoin (NOT) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
What Is Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP)? Inside The Blockchain Network Built for Private Computation & Secure Data Sharing

What Is Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP)? Inside The Blockchain Network Built for Private Computation & Secure Data Sharing

Dive into Zero Knowledge Proof’s privacy-first blockchain, infrastructure, and presale auction system. Plus, see why analysts are calling it the best crypto to
Share
CoinLive2026/01/28 01:00
UNI Technical Analysis Jan 27

UNI Technical Analysis Jan 27

The post UNI Technical Analysis Jan 27 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. UNI is stabilizing around 4.69$ amid intraday fluctuations, with a short-term downtrend
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/28 01:26