Here’s the actual statement publicized by the SEC:
This order disapproves the proposed rule change. The Commission concludes that BZX
has not met its burden under the Exchange Act and the Commission’s Rules of Practice to
demonstrate that its proposal is consistent with the requirements of Exchange Act Section
6(b)(5), in particular, the requirement that the rules of a national securities exchange be
“designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices” and “to protect investors
and the public interest.”
The primary reason appears to be the lack of a surveillance-sharing agreement between the SEC and the CBOE.
"has emphazied that it is essential for an exchange listing a derivative securities product to enter into a surveillancesharing agreement with markets trading the underlying assets for the listing exchange to have the
ability to obtain information necessary to detect, investigate, and deter fraud and market
manipulation, as well as violations of exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws and
rules.14 The hallmarks of a surveillance-sharing agreement are that the agreement provides for
the sharing of information about market trading activity, clearing activity, and customer identity;
that the parties to the agreement have reasonable ability to obtain access to and produce
requested information; and that no existing rules, laws, or practices would impede one party to
the agreement from obtaining this information from, or producing it to, the other party.
Also, the SEC has stated this ruling is not against bitcoin as a tradeable asset or whether it lacks utility or value.
Rather, the Commission is disapproving this proposed rule change because, as discussed below, BZX has not met its burden to demonstrate that its proposal is consistent with the requirements of Exchange Act Section 6(b)(5).
More work to be done.