The cryptocurrency market continues to evolve as regulatory developments and expert insights reshape industry discussions. The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has acknowledged a request to list 21Shares’ XRP exchange-traded fund (ETF), marking a potential step toward broader acceptance of XRP-based investment products. Meanwhile, Ripple CTO David Schwartz has weighed in on a longstanding debate, clarifying key differences between XRP and Bitcoin’s supply dynamics.
SEC Acknowledges 21Shares’ XRP ETF Listing Request Amid Changing Regulatory Climate
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has acknowledged Cboe BZX’s request to list asset manager 21Shares’ XRP exchange-traded fund (ETF), according to a Feb. 14 regulatory filing. This marks a significant step forward for US exchanges attempting to list ETFs that contain spot XRP, the native digital asset of Ripple’s XRP Ledger blockchain network.
The acknowledgment does not signify approval but serves as an early-stage milestone in the regulatory process, which has become a key focus for the cryptocurrency industry following recent shifts in the SEC’s stance toward digital assets.
The SEC’s response is particularly notable given its historical legal battle with Ripple, the blockchain company associated with XRP. In 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple, alleging that the firm sold XRP as an unregistered security. The case, which has had longstanding implications for crypto regulation, saw partial resolution in August 2023 when a US judge ruled that XRP itself is not inherently a security, though some institutional sales could fall under that classification.
The decision paved the way for XRP to be considered a commodity in some contexts, opening the door for the type of ETF classification that 21Shares and other issuers are now seeking.
If approved, the 21Shares Core XRP Trust ETF would be classified as a commodity trust, putting XRP in the same category as spot Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) ETFs, which received their green light from US regulators last year.
The timing of the latest XRP ETF filings coincides with a notable shift in the US political landscape. On Nov. 5, 2024, Donald Trump won re-election, marking the return of a president who has publicly embraced cryptocurrency. Trump has pledged to make the US “the world’s crypto capital” and has appointed pro-industry figures to key regulatory positions.
This political shift has already spurred a wave of ETF filings, reflecting industry optimism that the Trump administration will ease regulatory barriers for cryptocurrency products. On Feb. 6, Cboe BZX requested permission to list four spot XRP ETFs, including 21Shares’ application.
The XRP ETF is not the only fund seeking regulatory approval. A flurry of new filings has emerged as issuers attempt to capitalize on the expected regulatory easing under the new administration.
Among the most eye-catching proposals are ETFs for meme coins, including Dogecoin (DOGE), Official Trump (TRUMP), and Bonk (BONK).
Additionally, asset managers have proposed ETFs focused on altcoins such as Solana (SOL) and Litecoin (LTC), further diversifying the range of potential crypto investment vehicles.
Meanwhile, existing Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs are evolving their structures to integrate features like staking and in-kind redemptions, an approach that could further blur the lines between traditional financial products and decentralized finance (DeFi).
The First Spot Crypto Index Fund Hits Nasdaq
Even as new crypto ETFs await approval, the first spot crypto index fund has already hit the market. On Feb. 14, the Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF began trading on Nasdaq, offering investors exposure to a diversified basket of digital assets.
While the acknowledgment of 21Shares’ XRP ETF application represents progress, approval is far from guaranteed. The SEC will review and evaluate the proposal over the coming months, a process that could include public comments, amendments, and potential legal challenges.
With the Trump administration advocating for a pro-crypto stance, industry observers expect that more ETF approvals could follow. However, the SEC’s ultimate decisions on XRP and other crypto ETFs will be a key indicator of whether regulatory resistance will soften or if crypto firms will continue to face hurdles despite shifting political winds.
As the crypto ETF race intensifies, all eyes remain on the SEC and how its evolving stance on digital assets will shape the next phase of mainstream adoption.
Ripple CTO David Schwartz Explains Key Differences Between XRP and Bitcoin Supply Dynamics
In related news, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, recently took to X to clarify one of the fundamental differences between XRP and Bitcoin (BTC)—specifically, their supply and scarcity dynamics. In response to a post comparing the two cryptocurrencies, Schwartz emphasized that Bitcoin’s total supply, when measured in common units of value, is actually greater than XRP in dollar terms.
Bitcoin and XRP are two of the most widely recognized cryptocurrencies, yet they operate on vastly different monetary models and supply mechanisms. Schwartz highlighted that while Bitcoin’s maximum supply is capped at 21 million BTC, XRP’s total supply was set at 100 billion XRP when the XRP Ledger (XRPL) was created. However, comparing these figures directly can lead to misconceptions.
At the time of his post, Bitcoin was trading at $95,643, while XRP’s price stood at $2.59. This significant difference in per-unit valuation means that Bitcoin’s total supply in dollar terms is far higher than XRP’s.
The notion of scarcity is a crucial element in the value proposition of cryptocurrencies, particularly Bitcoin, which is often referred to as ”digital gold” due to its fixed supply and halving events that reduce its mining rewards over time. The idea is that Bitcoin’s finite nature drives demand, especially as institutional adoption increases.
XRP, on the other hand, was designed to facilitate efficient and scalable transactions, primarily for payments and cross-border remittances. Unlike Bitcoin, which relies on mining, XRP’s total supply was pre-mined at the inception of the XRP Ledger.
Schwartz went on to clarify, “Measuring in dollars, the supply of Bitcoin is greater than XRP. There is no meaningful sense in which Bitcoin is scarcer than XRP.”
This statement challenges the widely held belief that Bitcoin’s 21 million cap inherently makes it more scarce than XRP. Instead, Schwartz argues that Bitcoin’s value and supply should be measured in financial terms, where its market capitalization and total supply in dollar value exceed that of XRP.
The contrast between XRP and Bitcoin is not just in supply dynamics but also in their origins and purpose.
Bitcoin was conceptualized by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto, who published the Bitcoin whitepaper in 2008. The network went live on Jan. 3, 2009, when Nakamoto mined the genesis block (block 0), which included a reward of 50 BTC. The revolutionary aspect of Bitcoin was its decentralization—eliminating the need for third-party intermediaries in financial transactions through its proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism.
Bitcoin miners validate transactions and secure the network by expending computational power, a process that requires significant energy consumption. This design choice has been both praised for its security and criticized for its environmental impact.
In 2011, three developers—David Schwartz, Jed McCaleb, and Arthur Britto—were drawn to Bitcoin’s innovation but saw inefficiencies in its mining process. They envisioned an alternative that would eliminate the need for mining, be more energy-efficient, and cater specifically to payment processing.
By June 2012, the XRP Ledger (XRPL) was launched as an improved blockchain alternative, designed for fast, low-cost transactions. Unlike Bitcoin, which relies on a decentralized network of miners, the XRPL uses a unique consensus mechanism that relies on validator nodes to confirm transactions.
XRP’s primary use case remains cross-border payments and financial settlement, particularly with Ripple’s enterprise blockchain solutions.
Why This Debate Matters
The comparison between Bitcoin and XRP is more than just a supply debate—it highlights the different philosophies behind cryptocurrency adoption.
Bitcoin’s scarcity model is built on trustless security, decentralization, and predictable inflation, making it attractive to long-term investors and institutions looking for a hedge against fiat currency devaluation.
XRP, on the other hand, focuses on efficiency, serving as a bridge currency for financial institutions and payment providers seeking faster transactions with minimal fees.
Schwartz’s clarification challenges the common misconception that Bitcoin’s limited supply automatically makes it more scarce than XRP. Instead, he suggests that a proper economic comparison must account for market value rather than raw supply figures.
As the cryptocurrency landscape continues to evolve, debates over supply, scarcity, and utility will remain central to investor and developer discussions. Bitcoin will likely retain its dominance as digital gold, while XRP will continue its role as a payment-oriented digital asset.
This article was originally Posted on Coinpaper.com
