XRP and Solana ETFs: Validation of Wall Street or Decentralization Doodszin?

Wages the fast ETF inspections of Wall Street reward the operating vessels and no decentralized networks of the base?

Wall Street’s Push to approve Altcoin Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) in October, called “Cointober” by some analysts, draws renewed attention to the growing institutional appetite for cryptocurrency.

This has also raised questions about decentralization versus institutional validation.

Cointober Frenzy

According to Alphractal, 59% of the institutional investors plan to control more than 5% of their assets in Crypto in 2025 in Crypto, an increase of less than 2% in 2023. This could represent a potential $ 2.4 trillion in capital in digital assets.

The Data -Analysis Platform warns That these ETFs possible identify with companies regulated tokens instead of democratize access to decentralized networks. Analysis of large altcoins reveals a significant concentration of control. The platform showed, for example, that Ripple Labs control 45-51% of the total XRP food, including 40-45% in Escrow and 5-6% in Treasury Holdings.

In the meantime, the Solana board remains strongly influenced by Solana Labs and the Solana Foundation, whereby the foundation retains approximately 40% of non-circulating tokens and risk capital companies and insiders that check around 50%. Ethereum, although more distributed, remains led by the Ethereum Foundation in terms of protocol development. In contrast to Bitcoin, who works without a central control entity, maintain these Altcoins Corporate Governance structures with which large holders can form policy and influence network activities.

The data from Alphractal, which is derived from more than 1,000 chain, derivatives and sentiment statistics, indicates institutional acceptance closely matches these centralized control patterns. Their network stress index and actual market average price indicators show that these Altcoin networks remain operational, despite concentrated board, stable.

ETF approval periods are also shortened from 240 to 75 days. This is potentially fast institutional validation for these centralized tokens. Alphractal argues that this process effectively access to business-driven blockchain assets in a regulated investment vehicle, instead of offering real decentralized exposure. The macro -economic and derivatives analyzes show that settings prefer regulated exposure over direct ownership of indigenous tokens.

Maybe you also like it:

The wider debate, alfractally observed, should be whether ETF lists form a legitimate step in the direction of the mainstream acceptance or the erosion of decentralized principles.

Control and profit

These concerns reflect criticism of Vandell Aljarrah, co-founder of Black Swan Capitalist, who had previously offered a sharp criticism of XRP ETFs. Earlier this year, Aljarrah warned Investors against confusing them for real access to crypto. He had emphasized that such ETFs were not designed to democratize ownership or to unlock practical use for investors. Instead, he imposed them as instruments aimed at checking and profit. Although keeping native XRP participation in transfers, deployment, liquidity provision and other network functions makes it possible, ETFs only offer price -bblowing, which investors explode about the possibility of moving, exchanging or making their tokens confident.

Aljarrah’s argument emphasized a fundamental assessment in which investors in Wall Street can win regulated exposure to XRP without ever being really busy with the functional usefulness of token.