SEC Commissioner Mark Uyeda has voiced significant reservations about the process used by the EC in approving several spot Bitcoin ETFs. Despite voting in favor of these landmark approvals, Uyeda criticized the commission's analytical approach and its potential long-term implications.

Uyeda highlighted that the SEC did not treat Bitcoin like other commodities, instead applying a unique "significant size" test to Bitcoin ETFs. He argued that under a standard approach, spot Bitcoin ETPs (exchange-traded products) should have been approved much earlier. Additionally, Uyeda noted the lack of clarity in differentiating the treatment of spot Bitcoin ETPs from Bitcoin futures ETPs under the "significant market" test.

The commissioner pointed out that while none of the Bitcoin ETF applicants met the SEC's significant market test, the approval was based on "other means" that satisfied the requirements. He criticized this as a new standard, suggesting that the SEC should have been more transparent about its expectations.

Uyeda also raised concerns about the SEC's motives behind quickly approving these ETFs. He questioned the lack of analysis on how cash-only creation and redemption features might prevent fraud. Uyeda emphasized the need for transparency in the approval process's analysis and reasoning.

Despite these concerns, Uyeda ultimately supported the approval order, citing independent reasons for believing that the applications met the Exchange Act's standards.

Cointelegraph