Novel ETFs: New Strategies Push Boundaries

Novel ETFs: New Strategies Push Boundaries

As ETF strategies continue to expand into new asset classes and structures, the SEC has been taking a closer look at how some of these products fit within existing regulations. Prediction market ETFs have drawn much of the attention, but single-stock ETFs, crypto ETFs, private company exposure, and higher levels of leverage are also part of the broader discussion around “novel ETFs.” As the comment period for novel ETFs has now ended, this research note reviews some of the relevant ETFs (and potential ETFs) in this category.

Key Takeaways:

  • Novel ETFs are testing how far the ETF wrapper can expand across leveraged, private market, crypto, and event contracts.
  • Voluntary delays for 4x, 5x, and prediction-market ETFs suggest the regulatory environment is cautious around the most complex structures.
  • The SEC’s review could reshape how novel ETFs launch, which strategies qualify, and what investor protections accompany them.

What Are Novel ETFs?

Earlier this summer, the SEC requested comments on “Novel ETFs,” broadly referring to funds offering exposure to innovative asset classes or novel investment strategies. These specifically included: crypto assets, commodity-focused instruments, single-stock strategies, heightened leverage, blockchain-enabled opportunities, private assets, and event contracts.

For investors, these newer types of ETFs could provide more accessible and liquid ways to gain exposure to strategies that were previously difficult to reach, while for issuers they represent an important area of product innovation and differentiation.

The formal comment period ended recently on August 31. During this time, issuers have voluntarily delayed effectiveness of filings under rule 485, while some have continued to file new ones. At its core, the Commission is evaluating whether the Investment Company Act of 1940 — and specifically Rule 6c-11 (which permits certain ETFs to operate without obtaining an exemptive order) — remain adequate for products holding non-traditional assets.

Among the questions are whether the current 60 and 75 day automatic effectiveness periods provide enough time for review, whether the SEC should be able to delay effectiveness, and whether early engagement could help sponsors and regulators address potential issues earlier.

01 Roxanna 09 17 - 01 crypto