According to @CNBC, an analyst said many ETFs compete on price, but fees should not always drive the investment decision for traders and investors; source: CNBC social post dated Jan 2, 2026. Traders should evaluate total cost of ownership including expense ratio, bid-ask spread, any premium or discount to NAV, and brokerage commissions because these costs can outweigh a low fee during execution; source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Investor Bulletin on Exchange-Traded Funds. This framework is directly relevant to crypto-related ETFs such as Bitcoin BTC and Ethereum ETH funds where spreads and NAV premiums or discounts can widen in volatile markets, increasing slippage relative to fee savings; source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Investor Bulletin on Exchange-Traded Funds discussing spreads and market stress. Actionable takeaway for ETF selection: compare expense ratio alongside average daily volume, historical tracking difference versus the index, and disclosures in the fund prospectus to minimize trading costs; source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Investor Education guidance on ETF due diligence.

According to @EricBalchunas, Canary filed Amendment #6 for its spot Solana (SOL) ETF with a 0.50% expense ratio and no cut of SOL staking rewards, according to @EricBalchunas. According to @EricBalchunas, Bitwise’s proposal carries a 0.20% expense ratio but takes 6% of staking rewards, which he estimates equates to roughly 45–50 basis points in additional effective fees, according to @EricBalchunas. According to @EricBalchunas, staking revenue sharing sits outside the stated expense ratio and will make headline fee comparisons misleading, according to @EricBalchunas. According to @EricBalchunas, the real cost will show up in each fund’s tracking difference versus SOL, which he describes as the true fee metric, according to @EricBalchunas. According to @EricBalchunas, this dynamic is similar to securities lending in broad and small-cap ETFs where some issuers return revenue to NAV while others keep a portion, according to @EricBalchunas. According to @EricBalchunas, traders comparing SOL exposure should prioritize realized tracking difference versus SOL over stated expense ratios when assessing net holding costs and fund selection, according to @EricBalchunas.

According to @StockMKTNewz, an X broadcast is discussing a new ETF with ticker ACKY and invites viewers to learn more via the live session link, signaling early-stage public interest. Source: Evan (@StockMKTNewz) on X, Sep 15, 2025. The post does not disclose the issuer, strategy, holdings, expense ratio, or launch date, leaving core trading inputs unconfirmed at this time. Source: Evan (@StockMKTNewz) on X, Sep 15, 2025. Traders should verify the preliminary prospectus and registration statement on the U.S. SEC EDGAR system to confirm the fund sponsor, investment objective, fees, and risk factors before placing orders. Source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, EDGAR. Exchange listing details and symbol activation, along with lead market maker support, should be confirmed via official NYSE or Nasdaq listing notices to assess expected liquidity and spread conditions. Source: NYSE and Nasdaq official listings. Until an official prospectus and listing notice are available, creation-redemption capacity, indicative NAV behavior, and secondary-market depth for ACKY cannot be reliably assessed. Source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ETF guidance. The post contains no mention of crypto exposure, indicating no direct linkage to BTC or ETH is suggested by the source at this time for cross-asset positioning. Source: Evan (@StockMKTNewz) on X, Sep 15, 2025.