The approval of spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on January 10, 2024 was arguably the single most impactful event in Bitcoin’s institutional adoption history — more significant than the Lightning Network, Taproot upgrade, or even El Salvador’s Bitcoin legal tender law. For the first time, US investors with standard brokerage accounts (Fidelity, Schwab, Vanguard, Merrill Lynch) could buy Bitcoin exposure through a regulated product without dealing with crypto exchanges, private keys, or custody. Within the first year, spot Bitcoin ETFs accumulated over $50 billion in assets under management, with BlackRock’s IBIT becoming the fastest ETF to reach $10 billion in AUM in history. The Ethereum spot ETF followed in May 2024. Together, these products have permanently changed the institutional landscape for digital assets.
The Road to Approval: A Decade of Rejections
The following sections cover this in detail.
Why It Took So Long
The first US Bitcoin ETF application was filed by the Winklevoss twins’ Gemini in 2013. The SEC rejected it in 2017, then rejected every subsequent application for six years. The stated reasons evolved but consistently cited:
- Potential for market manipulation in underlying spot Bitcoin markets
- Lack of a surveillance-sharing agreement with a regulated Bitcoin spot exchange
- Inability to ensure adequate investor protection given Bitcoin’s market structure
The Grayscale Lawsuit: Grayscale Investments had operated the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) since 2013 as a closed-end fund converting to an ETF. The SEC rejected Grayscale’s ETF conversion application in June 2022. Grayscale sued the SEC. In August 2023, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the SEC’s rejection was “arbitrary and capricious” — specifically finding the SEC had applied inconsistent standards by approving futures-based Bitcoin ETFs (ProShares’ BITO) while blocking spot ETFs, without reasonable differentiation.
The court ruling effectively forced the SEC’s hand.
Spot Bitcoin ETF Approvals: January 2024
The following sections cover this in detail.
The 11 Approved Issuers
On January 10, 2024, the SEC approved 11 spot Bitcoin ETFs simultaneously. The simultaneous approval was intentional — to prevent any single issuer from gaining first-mover advantage.
| ETF | Issuer | Spot Fee | Notable |
|---|---|---|---|
| IBIT | BlackRock | 0.25% | Largest; fastest to $10B AUM in history |
| FBTC | Fidelity | 0.25% | Manages own custody in-house |
| BTCO | Invesco/Galaxy | 0.25% → 0% intro | Galaxy Digital as sub-advisor |
| BITB | Bitwise | 0.20% | Pledged 10% of profits to open-source Bitcoin dev |
| ARKB | ARK/21Shares | 0.21% | Cathie Wood’s ARK Invest; 21Shares as ETF partner |
| HODL | VanEck | 0.20% | Pledged 5% of profits to Bitcoin Core developers |
| BTCW | WisdomTree | 0.25% | |
| EZBC | Franklin Templeton | 0.19% | Lowest fee at launch |
| BRRR | Valkyrie | 0.25% | |
| DEFI | Hashdex | 0.90% | Unique CME futures-to-spot conversion structure |
| GBTC | Grayscale | 1.50% | Convert from 10yr-old trust; highest fee; massive outflows |
GBTC’s Peculiar Trajectory
Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) converted to an ETF but retained its 1.5% management fee (vs. competitors at 0.20–0.25%). Result: GBTC experienced massive outflows as investors redeemed expensive GBTC exposure and purchased cheaper alternatives. GBTC outflows were so large they temporarily offset the inflows into other Bitcoin ETFs. Grayscale later launched a separate “Bitcoin Mini Trust” with lower fees to compete.
Bitcoin ETF Flows: 2024 Performance
Net inflows in 2024: Approximately $35–40 billion net new capital into spot Bitcoin ETFs.
IBIT’s records:
- 0 to $10 billion AUM: 49 days (fastest ever)
- 0 to $20 billion: less than 2 months
- Year 1 AUM: ~$50+ billion
Who bought Bitcoin ETFs:
- Retail investors via 401(k) brokers (Schwab, Fidelity)
- Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs) adding 1–5% Bitcoin allocation to client portfolios
- Hedge funds (primarily arbitrage between spot ETF and futures premium)
- Sovereign wealth funds and pension funds (small allocations)
- Corporate treasuries following Michael Saylor’s model via ETF vs. direct buy
The ETF wrapper solved the institutional compliance problem: pension funds/endowments with custodian rules prohibiting direct crypto holdings could hold Bitcoin through an ETF without violating their mandates.
Ethereum Spot ETF Approval: May 2024
The following sections cover this in detail.
Unexpected Approval
The Ethereum ETF approval in May 2024 was less anticipated than the Bitcoin approval:
- The SEC had been aggressively questioning Ethereum’s regulatory status (Gensler refused to confirm it wasn’t a security)
- Industry observers gave ~25–30% probability to Ethereum ETF approval before May
What changed: The SEC approved the 19b-4 rule change filings from multiple issuers on May 23, 2024 — weeks earlier than anticipated. Trading began July 23, 2024.
Approved Ethereum ETF issuers: BlackRock ETHA, Fidelity FETH, Bitwise ETHW, 21Shares ETHW, Invesco/Galaxy QETH, Franklin EZET, VanEck ETHV, Grayscale ETHE (conversion + mini trust).
Ethereum ETF Performance vs. Bitcoin ETF
Ethereum ETF inflows were significantly lower than Bitcoin’s:
- First year: ~$5–7B net inflows vs. Bitcoin’s $35–40B
- Reasons: Ethereum is a harder concept to explain to retail ($15B crypto currency vs. “world computer fuel”); Ethereum ETFs do NOT include staking yield (SEC required exclusion); Bitcoin has stronger brand recognition as “digital gold”
No Staking in Ethereum ETFs
Critically, the SEC required Ethereum ETFs to NOT include staking — meaning:
- ETF holders don’t earn the ~4–5% ETH staking APY
- ETF holders only get price exposure
- This is a significant disadvantage vs. direct ETH ownership or liquid staking tokens (stETH, rETH)
- Future approval of Ethereum staking ETFs is under discussion by 2025 regulators
Bitcoin Futures ETF: ProShares BITO
Before the spot ETF approvals, ProShares launched the BITO Bitcoin Strategy ETF in October 2021 — tracking Bitcoin price through CME Bitcoin futures contracts.
Why futures ETF is inferior to spot ETF:
- Contango drag: When futures are in contango (futures price > spot price), rolling from expiring contracts to next-month contracts costs money. In normal Bitcoin markets, this creates a 5–15% annual performance drag vs. spot Bitcoin.
- Not actual Bitcoin: BITO doesn’t hold Bitcoin — it holds CME futures contracts and US T-Bills as collateral
- SEC accepted this first: The SEC’s bizarre decision to approve futures ETFs but not spot ETFs (until forced by court) was the core of Grayscale’s lawsuit
Why Bitcoin ETF Approval Mattered
The following sections cover this in detail.
Institutional Access
Before ETFs: Institutional investors had to use:
- Direct custody through Coinbase Prime / BitGo (operational overhead, compliance challenges)
- Grayscale GBTC (large premium/discount swings, 1.5% fee, no redemption mechanism)
- CME Bitcoin futures (contango drag, not direct exposure)
After ETFs: Standard equity brokerage account, standard expense ratio, regulated product, instant redemption at NAV.
Demand Signal
The magnitude of ETF inflows ($35B+ net in 2024) represented genuinely new demand:
- Not simply existing crypto holders moving Bitcoin into ETF format
- New capital from institutions that previously couldn’t/wouldn’t hold crypto
- ETF adoption as digital gold narrative validation
Price Impact
Bitcoin’s price went from ~$43,000 at ETF approval (January 10, 2024) to an all-time high of ~$108,000 by December 2024. While direct causation is impossible to prove, the ETF inflows absorbed approximately 5× the amount of new Bitcoin supply created through mining during the same period. The institutional demand thesis appeared to play out.
Related Terms
Sources
Ben-David, I., Franzoni, F., & Moussawi, R. (2012). ETFs, Arbitrage, and Contagion. Journal of Finance, 67(6), pp. 2073–2092.
Poterba, J.M., & Shoven, J.B. (2002). Exchange-Traded Funds: A New Investment Option for Taxable Investors. American Economic Review, 92(2), pp. 422–427.
Hasbrouck, J. (2003). Intraday Price Formation in US Equity and Equity Options Markets. Journal of Finance, 58(6), pp. 2375–2399.
Bhattacharya, U., & Daouk, H. (2002). The World Price of Insider Trading. Journal of Finance, 57(1), pp. 75–108.
Lettau, M., & Madhavan, A. (2018). Exchange-Traded Funds 101 for Economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(1), pp. 135–154.