SpaceX’s IPO is already spilling into crypto markets, where one whale has opened a $22.3 million leveraged long on SPCX, a synthetic pre-IPO perpetual contract tied to Elon Musk’s aerospace company.

Key takeaways:

• The whale is already sitting on more than $1.15 million in unrealized profit.
• Synthetic SPCX is trading near $175, roughly 30% above SpaceX’s $135 IPO price.

Whale’s paper profits are over $1.15 million already

The whale’s position, visible on data resource Hypurrscan, shows the trader holding a 2x isolated long on “xyz:SPCX” worth about $22.29 million.

Address 0x9cc1… open perpetual positions as of Friday. Source: Hypurrscan

The whale entered near $168, while SPCX recently traded around $175, leaving the position with roughly $1.15 million in unrealized profit. It had spent just over $500 in funding fees.

Synthetic SPCX trades at 30% premium ahead of IPO

SpaceX has priced its IPO at $135 per share to raise $75 billion by selling about 555.6 million shares, bringing the company’s valuation to around $1.77 trillion. The stock is expected to trade under the ticker SPCX on Nasdaq.

At around $175, the synthetic SPCX market is trading about 30% above the IPO price. In other words, crypto traders are already pricing in a strong first-day rally before regular equity markets fully absorb the listing.

SPCX/USDC hourly chart. Source: Hyperliquid

Other secondary markets are pointing in the same direction. For instance, IG International derivatives implied a SpaceX valuation of about $2.4 trillion, more than 35% above the valuation set by the IPO price.

Polymarket traders put 56% odds on SpaceX closing its first trading day in the $2 trillion–2.5 trillion market cap range.

SpaceX IPO closing market cap. Source: Polymarket

History of IPOs warns of a strong SPCX correction after debut

The 30% SPCX premium points to strong opening demand, but IPO history argues against chasing the first trade.

US IPOs from 2020 to 2025 averaged roughly 30% first-day gains, according to Jay Ritter’s IPO database. However, that upside mostly benefits investors who receive shares at the offer price.

US IPO average first-day returns. Source: Jay Ritter/IPO Statistics

Buyers who enter after the opening print often face a weaker setup, particularly after the initial euphoria fades.

Ritter’s long-run IPO data show that companies with positive first-day returns averaged a 29.6% debut gain from 2001 to 2024, but then underperformed the market by 8.5 percentage points over the next three years.

Related: SpaceX IPO nears 4 times oversubscribed, squeezing crypto and tech

High-valuation IPOs have performed even worse. Among IPOs with trailing sales above $100 million and price-to-sales ratios above 40, buyers at the first close saw an average three-year return of -44.8%.

Long-run IPO returns by price-to-sales ratio. Source: Jay Ritter

SpaceX is going public at nearly 94 times the trailing sales, making it one of the most oversubscribed IPOs ever.

Recent listings showed the same risk. Nasdaq-listed Cerebras (CBRS), a semiconductor company, priced its IPO at $185, opened at $350 and closed its first day near $311, but later fell to around $197, a roughly 50% drop from its first-day peak.

CBRS daily chart. Source: TradingView

Rivian (RIVN) and Uber (UBER) also struggled after strong early attention, with lockup expirations adding pressure as insiders and early investors became free to sell.

SpaceX is overvalued

Several prominent voices have warned that SPCX could fall after the debut.

Morningstar’s Nicholas Owens valued the company at just $780 billion, roughly 55% below the IPO price, calling it significantly overvalued and advising investors to wait for the stock to settle.

NYU professor Aswath Damodaran put the fair value around $1.25–1.3 trillion and described the $135 offer price as “rich.”

In a Wednesday post, analyst The Fundamental Investor said the stock is very likely to drop below the IPO price, potentially leaving early retail buyers underwater for years.

Source: X

The whale’s liquidation level sits near $93.27. The position could incur an estimated loss of about $9.4 million if SPCX falls to that level.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed to rescind two longstanding National Market System (NMS) provisions that govern how trading venues protect displayed prices and prevent “trade-throughs.” If finalized, the changes could materially alter the regulatory constraints facing tokenized-stock platforms, particularly systems that use automated market makers (AMMs) or other decentralized trading mechanisms.

In a notice of proposed rulemaking issued on Thursday, the SEC said it would remove Rule 611, which generally prohibits trading on one exchange at a worse price when a better price is available on another, and Rule 610(e), which restricts exchanges from displaying certain bids that are not synchronized with better-priced quotations elsewhere. The proposal has 60 days for public comment, setting up a new compliance question for market participants exploring tokenized equities.

Key takeaways

• The SEC proposes rescinding NMS Rules 611 (trade-through protections) and 610(e) (limits on certain displayed bids), changing the baseline for cross-venue price protection.
• Automated market makers and similar pooling-based execution models may face fewer structural constraints if the trade-through framework is removed.
• The SEC indicates it could replace the removed provisions with a broader “best execution” approach, shifting compliance from price-protection rules to execution-quality standards.
• Tokenized-stock trading plans may need to be reassessed for regulatory alignment, especially where execution logic cannot reliably mirror centralized quote-by-quote comparisons.

What the SEC is proposing to change in NMS rules

At the core of the proposal are two rules designed to enforce pricing competition across U.S. equity markets. Rule 611 is intended to prevent “trade-throughs,” a condition where an order executed on one trading venue would occur at a price inferior to a better price displayed on another venue. Rule 610(e) further restricts how exchanges present bids, aiming to avoid scenarios where an exchange displays a bid price that could be inconsistent with more favorable available quotations elsewhere.

By proposing to rescind both provisions, the SEC is effectively questioning whether these specific mechanisms remain appropriate as market infrastructure evolves—particularly as digital-asset technologies are increasingly considered for securities trading use cases. The proposal also lands in an environment where the SEC has signaled interest in updating how U.S. capital markets can accommodate blockchain-enabled settlement and trading.

The compliance significance is immediate: trade-through and quotation-display regimes are not merely technical rules. They define what constitutes acceptable routing, quoting, and execution across venues and therefore shape how exchanges, ATS operators, broker-dealers, and any tokenized-stock venue architecture must behave to avoid violations.

Why tokenized equities face structural constraints

Commentary from industry research has pointed to a central problem with applying the existing NMS framework to tokenized equities that rely on AMMs. According to Galaxy head of research Alex Thorn, AMMs execute trades against whatever pool price is available at the time of execution, which can conflict with trade-through protections that are based on the existence of a better quote elsewhere.

Thorn’s concern is that an AMM model may not be able to “stop a trade” simply because a superior price exists at another venue. In that scenario, a pool could execute at a price that is worse than the best available displayed quotation elsewhere, triggering trade-through concerns under the current rules. He also argued that continuously fluctuating AMM pricing makes compliance difficult under a framework intended to ensure investors receive the best available price across platforms.

Institutionally, the key point is not whether tokenized-stock execution can be engineered to meet every rule, but whether the rules’ structural assumptions match the execution process. Trade-through standards are tightly linked to quote comparison across venues; AMM execution is tied to liquidity mechanisms inside a trading function. That mismatch can create persistent legal and operational risk—even where the end goal is price improvement or efficient execution.

If the SEC rescinds Rule 611 and Rule 610(e), market operators and compliance teams would likely revisit whether the remaining NMS and securities-market regulation still imposes constraints that functionally replicate trade-through protections through other requirements.

From trade-through rules to “best execution” compliance

The SEC has not yet finalized the replacement approach, but Thorn suggested the agency may substitute the rescinded framework with a “best execution” model. In practice, a best-execution standard focuses on whether an order is handled in a manner reasonably designed to achieve the most favorable terms for the customer under the circumstances, which can be implemented through policies, procedures, routing decisions, and execution monitoring.

That shift could matter for tokenized equities because best-execution duties may be more adaptable to different execution designs than rigid cross-venue trade-through prohibitions. However, a best-execution approach would still require detailed documentation and controls to demonstrate that execution quality objectives are met.

For compliance and legal teams, this implies a re-framing of risk. Under trade-through rules, the compliance question can become a binary comparison of displayed quotations versus execution prices. Under best execution, the focus can move toward a reasonableness inquiry supported by surveillance, metrics, and audit trails—areas where institutional expectations around governance are typically higher.

There is also an unresolved policy question: even if the SEC eliminates specific quotation-display and trade-through constraints, broader exchange and broker-dealer obligations—including those related to order handling, market integrity, and customer protections—may still constrain how tokenized equities can be offered and executed in the U.S. market structure.

Regulatory context and the comment process

The proposal is open for public comment for 60 days. After that period, the SEC will review submissions and may modify the proposal in response to the record developed through industry, investor, and market-structure feedback.

The timing is notable given broader SEC efforts toward clearer rules for digital assets in U.S. markets. The agency has framed parts of its work under “Project Crypto,” launched in August 2025, aimed at clarifying how digital-asset technologies could be integrated into existing regulatory frameworks.

Separately, Cointelegraph previously reported that the SEC was set to release a plan intended to allow an innovation exemption for tokenized stock trading, but that the plan was postponed after exchange officials raised concerns about execution. While the rescission of NMS trade-through rules is a different regulatory lever than an innovation-exemption pathway, both developments reinforce the same theme: the SEC is actively adjusting regulatory scaffolding to address how modern execution models may fit into established market rules.

For institutions and regulated firms, these developments also intersect with compliance frameworks beyond NMS rules. Tokenized equities proposals and implementations typically implicate licensing and supervisory responsibilities, disclosure requirements, AML/KYC considerations where applicable to counterparties and intermediaries, and cross-border questions if digital asset infrastructure or counterparties involve foreign components. Although the SEC’s rescission proposal centers on market-structure rules, implementation decisions by regulated entities can still trigger downstream compliance requirements.

Closing perspective

Whether rescinding Rules 611 and 610(e) becomes final, the SEC’s proposal signals a willingness to revisit how price-protection rules should apply as securities trading infrastructure evolves. Market participants should monitor the comment record for how the SEC intends to operationalize any “best execution” substitution, and how regulators expect tokenized-stock execution models to demonstrate compliance in practice.

Metaplanet, the Tokyo-listed company known for holding Bitcoin on its balance sheet, has agreed to acquire Siiibo Securities in a 2.1 billion yen (about $13.1 million) deal. The acquisition is designed to give the firm a formal securities arm that can offer Bitcoin-linked products to investors in Japan.

In a share transfer agreement reported by Metaplanet, the company will purchase 100% of Siiibo Securities, a licensed financial instruments business operator. After the transaction closes—expected in July—Siiibo Securities will become a wholly owned Metaplanet subsidiary and be renamed Metaplanet Securities.

Key takeaways

• Metaplanet will acquire Siiibo Securities for 2.1 billion yen to build a dedicated securities business in Japan.
• The renamed entity, Metaplanet Securities, is expected to be in place after a July closing.
• Metaplanet links the move to “Project Nova,” aiming to distribute Bitcoin-related yield products to Japanese investors.
• Metaplanet says its BTC holdings will underpin product development, citing 40,177 BTC on its balance sheet.
• The deal reflects a broader shift as Japanese lawmakers and market infrastructure firms explore integrating crypto into traditional finance.

From Bitcoin treasury to regulated securities

The strategic rationale behind the deal is closely tied to Metaplanet’s existing positioning in Bitcoin. According to CEO Simon Gerovich, the acquisition is the “first step” in “Project Nova,” the company’s plan to construct a Bitcoin-centric financial ecosystem in Japan.

In an announcement through his public post, Gerovich said Metaplanet intends to develop and distribute Bitcoin-related yield products directly to Japanese investors, supported by the firm’s Bitcoin holdings. The company’s stated goal is to translate its treasury exposure into regulated income-oriented offerings.

Metaplanet also argued that Siiibo’s existing capabilities—its licensing, corporate bond platform, and established customer base—could help the company create products such as BTC-linked bonds. The mechanism would allow Metaplanet to reach investors seeking yield within Japan’s mainstream financial channels, rather than relying solely on crypto-native distribution.

Why the July closing matters for product rollout

While the agreement is a significant step, Metaplanet’s plan depends on regulatory and operational completion after the transaction closes. The company expects July to be the turning point when Siiibo Securities becomes fully integrated and renamed as Metaplanet Securities.

For investors and market participants, that timeline is important because the ability to issue or distribute particular yield products typically depends on corporate structure, licensing scope, and readiness to serve customers within the relevant regulatory framework. By securing an operating securities entity before expanding its product slate, Metaplanet is effectively reducing the friction of moving from a treasury-first model to a finance-distribution model.

Metaplanet also emphasized the investor access angle—its access to a customer base that is already engaged with Japanese securities services. That could be critical for any effort to launch Bitcoin-linked structured income products in a way that fits local investor preferences and compliance requirements.

Metaplanet’s Bitcoin holdings fuel the pitch

Metaplanet’s acquisition strategy is tightly linked to the scale of its Bitcoin stash. Bitcoin Treasuries, a data tracker, attributes a net asset value of 457.6 billion yen (about $2.8 billion) to Metaplanet’s Bitcoin holdings. Bitcoin Treasuries also characterizes Metaplanet as the largest publicly listed Bitcoin holder in Japan and the third-largest globally.

That matters because Metaplanet’s executives are framing the securities expansion as a way to “support” Bitcoin-related yield products with on-balance-sheet exposure. Although the company has not detailed specific product structures in the announcement, the premise is that it can potentially align treasury holdings with products designed to deliver yield-oriented outcomes to Japanese customers.

The real watch item going forward is how Metaplanet translates treasury-backed positioning into actual offerings: what the product terms look like, how they’re distributed through Metaplanet Securities, and how they comply with Japan’s evolving treatment of digital assets in the financial instruments framework.

Japan’s regulatory shift is pulling crypto closer to capital markets

Metaplanet’s move lands as Japan’s broader legal and market infrastructure is moving toward a more formal integration of crypto within traditional finance. Earlier coverage noted that Japan’s Lower House reportedly passed a bill on Thursday that would bring crypto assets under Japan’s financial instruments framework. If implemented as described, it could open the door to structures such as crypto exchange-traded funds and potentially improve tax treatment for digital assets.

In parallel, market infrastructure providers are testing how digital assets might function alongside existing capital market instruments. In April, the Japan Securities Clearing Corporation—part of Japan Exchange Group—said it would launch a proof of concept with Mizuho, Nomura, and Digital Asset. The project is aimed at testing Japanese government bonds as digital collateral using the Canton Network.

Banking groups are also reported to be exploring reward-based crypto access. SBI Shinsei Bank, for example, was reported to be preparing a deposit-linked crypto rewards service that would let customers receive vouchers redeemable for Bitcoin, Ether, or XRP through SBI VC Trade. The wider SBI group has also been expanding across crypto exchange-related services, stablecoin lending, and planned securities offerings including investment trusts and ETFs tied to crypto assets.

Taken together, the acquisition of Siiibo Securities appears aligned with a broader trend: crypto firms in Japan are positioning themselves to operate more directly within regulated financial pathways as the country’s rules evolve. For Metaplanet, building a securities subsidiary could be a practical bridge between holding Bitcoin and serving investors through Japan’s conventional financial distribution channels.

Investors should watch next for two developments: whether the transaction closes smoothly in July, and how Metaplanet Securities plans to structure and launch the Bitcoin-linked yield products it says it intends to distribute to Japanese investors. The details of those products will likely determine how effectively Metaplanet can convert its BTC treasury advantage into durable, regulated income offerings.

SpaceX shares have drawn a fair value estimate of $63 from Morningstar even as bullish forecasts have pushed price targets as high as $190 following the company’s public market debut.

According to a Wall Street Journal report, analysts at Morningstar believe SpaceX stock is trading well above its underlying value despite the intense demand surrounding the offering.

The research firm estimated a fair value of $63 per share, far below the indicative IPO pricing of $135, suggesting the stock may be worth less than half of where investors are currently valuing it.

Discussion around valuation has intensified as SpaceX becomes one of the most closely followed listings in recent years. While Morningstar’s estimate points to a potential correction if investor enthusiasm fades, other market analysts have maintained a far more optimistic outlook and projected the stock could climb to $190.

Demand remains strong despite valuation concerns

Wall Street Journal reporting noted that Morningstar does not expect an immediate selloff despite its valuation warning. The firm’s analysts argued that heavy interest from institutional and retail investors could keep shares elevated for an extended period after the listing.

Adding to that narrative, market commentator Walter Bloomberg said the offering attracted more than $350 billion in total demand, underscoring the strong appetite for SpaceX shares ahead of the listing. Bloomberg later reported that the stock opened at $150, above its $135 IPO price, before climbing to around $161.68, giving the company an implied market value of roughly $1.96 trillion during its Nasdaq debut.

Evidence of that demand has also appeared across crypto markets. Earlier reporting by crypto.news noted that Backpack Securities and Sunrise launched SPCX, a tokenized asset on Solana backed by underlying SpaceX shares. Eligible holders can convert the tokens into actual shares, creating a blockchain-based route to SpaceX exposure.

Meanwhile, Binance Wallet’s SpaceX IPO campaign reportedly drew approximately $557 million in subscription funds. Binance listed 135 USDC as the indicative token price before fees, while the offering included a 5% underwriting charge and accepted subscriptions through USDC.

Crypto markets have amplified SpaceX speculation

Outside traditional markets, SpaceX enthusiasm has spilled into several crypto trading venues.

According to a report by crypto.news, Velvet’s native token surged more than 1,400% over the past week after the platform promoted synthetic SpaceX exposure through its SPCX pre-IPO market.

Derivatives traders have also gravitated toward SpaceX-linked products. Hyperliquid’s synthetic SPCX perpetual market has attracted significant activity as investors seek exposure before regular stock trading begins.

Hyperliquid showed implied valuations trading well above the IPO pricing, helping fuel higher trading volumes and pushing HYPE futures open interest to $2.56 billion.

Morningstar, nevertheless, argued that investor excitement alone will not determine SpaceX’s long-term value. The firm expects future performance to depend on revenue growth, profitability, and the company’s ability to justify expectations built into its valuation.

Limited share availability may continue supporting prices in the early stages of trading, according to the firm’s assessment. Over time, however, additional shares entering the market could increase selling pressure and force investors to focus more closely on business fundamentals.

Should those fundamentals fail to support current expectations, Morningstar believes SpaceX stock could gradually move closer to its estimated fair value of $63.

• Official Trump coin price surges 18%, outperforming the broader crypto market.
• The rally is driven by Donald Trump’s upcoming birthday on June 14.
• Key levels to watch include the resistance at $2.20 and the support at $1.80.

The Official Trump coin price has seen a sharp move to the upside, climbing about 18% in 24 hours to $2.02.

The rally has stood out because the broader crypto market gained only about 1.02%, meaning the token significantly outpaced overall market momentum.

Trading activity also picked up significantly, with 24-hour volume surging to roughly $455 million, while futures positioning showed rising interest.

This combination of price expansion and elevated participation has placed the Official Trump memecoin back into active focus among short-term traders.

Why is the Official Trump coin price rising?

The latest surge in the Official Trump coin price is largely being driven by event-based speculation tied to former US President Donald Trump’s upcoming birthday on June 14.

Traders have been accumulating positions in anticipation of possible social media activity or announcements around the date, creating a strong narrative-driven rally.

This type of trading behaviour has historically been common in meme-driven tokens, where sentiment and timing often outweigh fundamentals.

In this case, expectations of increased attention surrounding the birthday event have acted as a short-term catalyst, pushing demand higher across both spot and derivatives markets.

Data from recent trading activity supports this view, with spot trading volume increasing by around 149% within 24 hours, while futures open interest also rose by approximately 18%, showing that leveraged positions are actively being added rather than closed.

This suggests traders are not only buying the asset outright but are also using derivatives to amplify exposure to the ongoing momentum.

Another factor supporting the move is broader speculative sentiment across the cryptocurrency market. Some traders are interpreting strength in meme coins such as the Official Trump coin as an early signal of improving risk appetite.

This has led to additional inflows, particularly into high-volatility assets where short-term gains can be more pronounced.

Official Trump coin price forecast

The near-term outlook for the Official Trump coin price will likely depend on how it reacts around key technical levels and the upcoming June 14 event window.

At present, traders should closely watch $2.20 as the immediate resistance level.

This price zone has acted as a ceiling during recent trading sessions, and a clean break above it could open the path toward the next upside target near $2.50.

If buying pressure continues and volume remains elevated above the current daily average of roughly $400 million, momentum could extend further as short-term traders follow the breakout structure.

In this scenario, price action would likely remain driven by sentiment and event expectations rather than longer-term fundamentals.

On the downside, the most important support level sits near $1.574. This level has been identified as the threshold that keeps the current bullish structure intact.

A failure to hold above this zone could trigger rapid profit-taking, especially if leveraged long positions begin to unwind.

Exodus Movement has partnered with Ondo Finance to launch trading for more than 200 tokenized stocks, ETFs, and real-world assets through its wallet app.

According to a June 12 announcement, Exodus Movement has introduced Exodus Markets in partnership with Ondo Finance, giving eligible users in select jurisdictions access to more than 200 tokenized stocks, ETFs, and real-world assets on the Solana blockchain.

Available through the company’s self-custodial wallet, the service expands Exodus beyond crypto storage and transfers by adding tokenized equity and ETF trading to a platform that also supports payments, rewards, and other financial services.

“For the first time, our customers can trade and hold tokenized equities with the same direct control and global access they expect from crypto,” said JP Richardson, CEO and co-founder of Exodus.

Richardson added that “Exodus is becoming the front door to every asset you hold, without compromising on trust and control.”

Founded in 2015 and listed on the NYSE American under the ticker EXOD, Exodus was the first publicly traded company to tokenize its own stock in 2021. Customers in supported markets can now trade tokenized EXOD shares alongside other tokenized assets through the wallet application.

The rollout follows Ondo Finance’s appointment of former Invesco executive John Hoffman as managing director and head of product portfolios. Announced a day earlier, the move places Hoffman in charge of building tokenized investment products and portfolio baskets as Ondo expands its tokenized asset business.

Speaking about the partnership, Ondo Finance CEO Ian De Bode said Exodus had built a sizable self-custody user base over several years and argued that adoption would grow through products people already use to manage their finances.

“This is how tokenized markets scale, by integrating with the products people already use to manage their money,” De Bode said.

Regulators turn attention to tokenized equities

According to RWA.xyz, tokenized equities reached $5.5 billion in market capitalization as of June 8, up about 147% from $2.23 billion at the start of the year, making the segment one of the largest categories within the real-world asset market.

RWA market cap by asset class. Source: RWA.xyz

As such, regulators across the globe are also paying closer attention to the sector. 

For instance, South Korea’s Ministry of Economy and Finance recently said tokenized stocks should be treated as securities if regulators determine they carry the characteristics of traditional securities, potentially bringing them under existing taxation rules.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed removing two Regulation NMS rules that some analysts believe could affect the future structure of tokenized stock trading. 

Even as tokenized equities gain traction, questions around investor rights remain unresolved. Exodus noted that the tokenized assets available through Exodus Markets are not the same as owning the underlying securities and do not provide shareholder rights. 

The issue has become increasingly important as regulators in the U.S. and other jurisdictions examine whether future tokenized stock products should provide the same rights and protections as conventional shares.

Latest developments: Crypto markets are under pressure as Bitcoin sits around $60,000 and ETF outflows continue.

• Bitcoin ETFs have recorded four consecutive weeks with more than $1 billion in net outflows.
• James Seyffart of Bloomberg Intelligence joined Public Keys and said roughly $9 billion has exited Bitcoin ETFs since their recent peak.
• Despite the pullback, Seyffart noted Bitcoin ETFs still hold roughly $50 billion-plus in cumulative net inflows since launch.
• Crypto prices were also weighed down by concerns surrounding a recently disclosed Zcash privacy bug and broader risk-off sentiment.

What this means: Seyffart argues investors may be overreacting to ETF redemptions.

• He compared the current period to previous ETF cycles, where strong inflows were followed by periods of consolidation and withdrawals.
• ETF products are designed to provide liquid exposure, making periods of buying and selling a normal part of market behavior.
• Most investors have remained invested despite significant volatility in underlying crypto assets.
• “A few steps forward and a few steps back” is a healthy pattern for an emerging asset class, Seyffart said.

The contrast: Not all crypto ETFs are seeing the same investor behavior.

Latest developments: Kalshi’s launch of CFTC-regulated crypto perpetuals has reignited a long-running debate over financial market definitions.

• John Lothian and Kalshi’s Udesh Jha joined The Policy Protocol to debate this topic.
• John Lothian, publisher of John Lothian News, argued that perpetual contracts resemble swaps because they involve recurring bilateral cash-flow payments through funding-rate mechanisms.
• Udesh Jha, Kalshi’s head of exchange analytics, countered that perpetuals function like futures because they are exchange-traded, centrally cleared and designed to track underlying spot markets.
• The debate follows the recent approval and launch of crypto perpetuals on Kalshi under CFTC oversight.

The disagreement: Both sides view the same product through different regulatory lenses.

• Lothian said perpetuals differ from traditional futures because funding-rate payments create ongoing cash flows between market participants, a feature he associates with swaps.
• Jha argued that funding rates merely make financing costs explicit rather than embedding them in futures prices, making perpetuals a more efficient version of existing futures markets.
• According to Jha, perpetuals also eliminate the need for traders to roll positions into new contract months, reducing friction and costs.

Why it matters: The classification could determine who can access the products and under what rules.

Americans have more money invested for retirement in passive S&P 500 Index funds than any other investment. The Vanguard and BlackRock S&P 500 ETFs alone manage nearly $2 trillion in assets, with the Vanguard ETF (VOO) recently passing the $1 trillion mark.

But unlike other mutual funds and ETFs, they won’t be managing SpaceX shares any time soon for retail investors who want to get a piece of the action in the stock after Friday’s mega-cap IPO, the biggest in the history of the market.

The index committee that oversees the rules for new stock inclusion in the S&P 500 Index said no to the biggest IPO in history, at least for the first year of its public market trading history.

Faced with a new era of mega-cap stocks — with OpenAI and Anthropic expected to follow the SpaceX IPO on Friday with huge offerings pushing them into the territory of the largest publicly traded companies in the U.S. on day one — the index manager was forced to make a call on whether to move up its standard 12-month waiting period for new stocks.

Unlike the S&P, index committees for the Nasdaq and Russell market benchmarks said they would update their rules. In the simplest terms, here’s what that means for core U.S. market index fund investors.

“If you want SpaceX, you’re not buying the S&P 500. You’re going to buy the NASDAQ 100 or the Russell 1000,” said Strategas Securities chief ETF strategist Todd Sohn on this week’s “ETF Edge.”

SpaceX is set to begin trading on the Nasdaq Friday, but if you hold an ETF like VOO, or BlackRock’s IVV, or the State Street SPDR S&P 500 Trust (SPY), you will be waiting for your SpaceX exposure until mid-2027.

The decision to leave in place the long window before SpaceX ever becomes part of the S&P 500 is not one that sat well with Peter Haynes, TD Securities’ head of index and market structure research, supported. “Personally, I didn’t agree with the decision,” he told “ETF Edge.”

Haynes said in the podcast portion of “ETF Edge” that it is “a controversial discussion,” but he added, “In my mind, it’s a natural extension of what exists already in global benchmarks.”

He pointed to the example of Saudi Aramco, which when it went public in 2019 was the largest IPO in history. At that time, both FTSE and MSCI created fast-track models for global benchmarks to add the stock to indexes after 5 to 10 days. “U.S. benchmarks were geared to follow the lead of global benchmarks,” he said. “They have a ‘Made in the USA’ stock that is sizable and belongs in benchmarks,” Haynes said.

“What this is doing is setting a precedent that [the] S&P will not add OpenAI and Anthropic when those IPOs happen,” Sohn said.

Sohn said the dueling decisions from the index providers could create an “index war” — specifically, performance dispersions between the S&P 500, Nasdaq, and other indexes.

Haynes added it could be longer than a year, “much longer,’ he said, before S&P 500 investors get exposure to SpaceX because the index committee also maintained its “profitability test” for stocks, which could exacerbate any performance issues between the S&P 500 and other popular U.S. benchmarks.

SpaceX will have a $1.77 trillion valuation when it begins trading, but it remains a high-risk investment with a net loss in the latest quarter of $4.28 billion. OpenAI and Anthropic are burning through cash at a significant rate and racking up losses while generating a substantial amount of revenue. They can be expected to face the same scrutiny from the S&P 500 that SpaceX just did.

For fund investors, there are other ways to get exposure to SpaceX as a complement to a core portfolio position like an S&P 500 fund. A handful of ETFs, mostly thematic space and tech innovation funds, have already been holding SpaceX through pre-IPO direct stakes. There has been a rush by investors into space stocks and space ETFs in the past few weeks. For example, Tema ETFs’ Space Innovators ETF (NASA) launched May 30 and has reached $2.6 billion in assets. It is one of the funds that offered direct access to SpaceX before the IPO.

Risk-oriented investors will also be able to get in on a new wave of leveraged ETFs just launching to offer up to 2x daily performance of SpaceX shares, bullish and bearish bets. ProShares will launch the Ultra SpaceX ETF (SPCF), seeking to get 2x the daily performance of the stock, next Monday. GraniteShares will launch two similar funds: GraniteShares 2x Long SpaceX Daily ETF (SPAL) and GraniteShares 2x Short SpaceX Daily ETF (SNK).

Sohn cautioned that these levered investments come with big boom-and bust cycles and are typically intended for day traders rather than long-term investors seeking diversification. Losses compound rapidly in these investments and expense ratios are relatively high since they are intended as trading vehicles rather than core holdings.

For most investors, the biggest takeaway is that the index they have long relied on to capture the biggest names in the U.S. market is sitting this one out. But expect ETF managers to stay creative with new ideas to meet investors where they aren’t — yet. “I would think some of the smaller independent [ETF] issuers will go to another index provider and they will create an ‘S&P+SpaceX … ‘large-cap+SpaceX’ … ‘+Anthropic.’ … There is nothing the ETF industry can’t do in terms of creativity,” Sohn said.

Disclaimer