Feb. 6, 2022
RE: SR-NYSEArca-2021-90 I will leave the more detailed comments to others, but as an individual investor and attorney, my big-picture comment on the Trust’s request is that the SEC should have approved one or more spot Bitcoin ETF applications last year, and that the approval of a futures ETF prior to a spot ETF was misguided and counterproductive. The average investor that the SEC seeks to protect does not understand futures, whereas they do have a basic grasp on a spot ETF with Bitcoin as the underlying asset. While the Bitcoin market is no doubt susceptible to some manipulation, so are individual stocks and ETFs traded on the public stock markets, and a futures ETF is likely just as subject to manipulation, probably more so as it is the larger investors, not the individual investors that have the ability to manipulate prices, and they are more likely to be interested in and utilize a futures ETF than an individual investor. So I believe the SEC has approved a more dangerous ETF product while refusing to approve less dangerous ETF products such as the Trust. The SEC should also consider the alternatives to investing in or trading a spot Bitcoin ETF that individual investors are likely to employ – investing in the futures ETF, investing in Bitcoin directly through marketplaces and exchanges that are less regulated than a Bitcoin ETF would be, investing in foreign based/regulated ETFs, or investing in publicly traded stocks that loosely track Bitcoin such as MicroStrategy, Overstock, bitcoin miners, and Grayscale Bitcoin Trust OTC (GBTC). GBTC has experienced wild swings in its discount or premium to the underlying Bitcoin assets precisely because the SEC has not approved the Trust as an ETF. An ETF would make the market more efficient and therefore less susceptible to manipulation and protect the investors who are going to invest in this asset regardless of the existence of an ETF, but could do so more safely, securely, and confidently with the approval by the SEC of the Trust’s application. And the approval of other spot ETFs’ applications so that there is competition between more than one ETF provider and more options for investors to choose form. Finally, because Bitcoin the underlying assets trades around the clock including during days and hours when the U.S. markets and most of its traders are not active in the market, the spot Bitcoin market is more suspectable to manipulation during these thinly traded hours and days, whereas spot Bitcoin ETFs would only or primarily trade during active U.S. market hours when trade volumes are higher and market manipulation is more difficult for bad actors to achieve. For the foregoing reasons, I support the Trust’s application, and believe the SEC, while well advised to be deliberate in its decision making is at this point endangering investors through its delay and inaction in failing to approve multiple spot Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrency) ETFs. Jonas M. Grant Nevada, USA