Cboe filed four spot-bitcoin proposals as SEC scrutiny reset the race

Cboe BZX Exchange filed four proposed rule changes with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on June 30, 2023, seeking permission to list products designed to hold bitcoin directly. The filings covered the Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust associated with Fidelity, the VanEck Bitcoin Trust, the WisdomTree Bitcoin Trust and the Invesco Galaxy Bitcoin ETF.

The exchange’s dated filing ledger identifies the proposals as SR-CboeBZX-2023-044, SR-CboeBZX-2023-040, SR-CboeBZX-2023-042 and SR-CboeBZX-2023-038, respectively. Each invoked BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), which governs Commodity-Based Trust Shares. Filing a proposed rule change opened a regulatory process; it did not authorize any fund, make a registration statement effective or permit shares to begin trading.

Four proposals and an amendment

June 30 also brought Amendment No. 2 to Cboe’s previously filed proposal for the ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF. That ARK proposal originated on April 25, 2023, so Coinburn does not count it among the four new June 30 filings.

The distinction matters because the record included several different procedural acts clustered around one product category. Sponsors prepared or revived trust structures, while exchanges such as Cboe had to request the SEC rule changes needed to list their shares. A sponsor’s registration statement and an exchange’s Rule 19b-4 proposal were related components, not interchangeable approvals.

SEC notices issued on July 13, 2023, subsequently confirmed that the four original Cboe proposals were filed on June 30. Those notices also recorded that Cboe filed Amendment No. 1 for the Invesco Galaxy, VanEck and WisdomTree proposals on July 11. The Wise Origin record shows amendments on July 11 and July 13. Those July actions must not be collapsed backward into the June 30 event.

Surveillance sharing became the immediate test

Contemporaneous Reuters reporting on June 30 said the SEC had told Cboe that its Fidelity-related filing was unclear and incomplete, according to an unnamed person familiar with the matter. Reuters reported that the agency’s concern centered on identifying the spot-bitcoin venue involved in a proposed surveillance-sharing arrangement. The SEC, Cboe, Fidelity and other named parties declined to comment for that report.

That account was important market context, but it was not a public SEC order or a final agency determination. The authoritative claim Coinburn can make for June 30 is narrower: Cboe placed four proposed spot-bitcoin listings into the SEC process and amended the existing ARK proposal. The reported private feedback explains why surveillance language became the focus, but its anonymous sourcing prevents treating every detail as an independently verified agency statement.

The filing materials described surveillance sharing as a way for the listing exchange to obtain information relevant to detecting and investigating manipulation. Updated records identified Coinbase as the intended spot-market partner. On June 30, however, an expected agreement and a plan to incorporate it before trading were not proof that the SEC regarded the arrangement as sufficient.

Why the filing wave mattered

The four proposals showed that the renewed push for a U.S. spot-bitcoin exchange-traded product extended beyond a single asset manager. It joined established fund sponsors, a major securities exchange, custody providers and a cryptocurrency trading venue in one regulatory contest over market surveillance and investor protection.

For investors, the proposed structure promised brokerage-account exposure to bitcoin without requiring direct possession of private keys. That convenience did not eliminate bitcoin-price volatility, custody risk, tracking differences, fees or the possibility of regulatory rejection. Nor did the filing wave establish demand for products that were not yet permitted to trade.

Limits of the June 30 record

No bitcoin price or percentage move is asserted here because continuous crypto trading lacks a single official daily close, and the reviewed sources did not provide a common venue, currency pair and observation window adequate for a reproducible event-study claim. Price reaction therefore cannot establish that the filings or reported SEC feedback caused a particular market move.

As of June 30, the defensible conclusion was procedural but consequential: four competing spot-bitcoin proposals had entered Cboe’s SEC rulemaking track, while the adequacy of their surveillance arrangements remained unresolved.