# SEC Custody Proposal May Expand XRP Access for Investment Advisors

New regulatory framework could simplify direct digital asset custody for SEC-registered investment advisory firms.

- **Source:** [DailyCoin](https://brifing.si/source/3e9b0f85-cb2f-40ee-ba61-db9410cf0937)
- **Published:** 2026-10-19
- **Topic:** [Finance](https://brifing.si/c/finance)
- **Original article:** <https://dailycoin.com/sec-custody-proposal-can-give-advisors-more-room-to-hold-xrp/>
- **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/954a4157-27ee-4b88-8156-5eea66d97696

## Proposed Regulatory Shift

A recent SEC custody proposal aims to clarify how investment advisors manage digital assets like XRP for individual clients. The framework addresses long-standing compliance hurdles that have previously deterred firms from holding crypto directly. By refining custody arrangements, the SEC seeks to provide a clearer path for institutional involvement in digital markets.

## Expanding Custodian Options

The proposal explicitly suggests that state trust companies could serve as qualified crypto custodians for advisory firms. It also introduces provisions for limited advisor self-custody in scenarios where no qualified third-party custodian is available. Additionally, the framework would permit regulated funds to utilize brokerage firms for holding digital assets, updating existing audit requirements.

## Compliance and Operational Hurdles

Many advisory firms have historically avoided direct crypto holdings due to strict internal compliance mandates rather than simple skepticism. While the SEC-registered advisor industry manages over $100 trillion in total assets, this proposal specifically targets the operational barriers preventing direct ownership. Firms must still conduct independent investment approvals and rigorous operational reviews.

## Direct Ownership Versus ETFs

A critical distinction exists between holding an XRP-based ETF and owning the underlying digital asset directly. ETFs provide price exposure, whereas direct custody allows for specific strategies within separately managed accounts. This proposal could enable advisors to offer these direct ownership strategies, provided they meet the new, clarified regulatory standards for custody.

## Ripple Custody Business Impact

The proposed changes could indirectly benefit Ripple’s custody software business by creating a more favorable environment for financial institutions. Providers already serving these institutions may see increased demand if the rules clarify the path for digital asset management. However, this represents a potential business opportunity rather than guaranteed immediate demand for XRP.

## Legal Context and Nuance

Discussions regarding this proposal often reference the July 2023 court ruling concerning Ripple. The court notably distinguished between different categories of XRP sales rather than granting an unconditional exemption from securities law. Understanding this legal history is essential for advisors evaluating the risks associated with direct digital asset custody and client portfolios.

## Public Comment and Timeline

The SEC has initiated a 60-day public comment period to gather feedback on these proposed custody requirements. Final rules may differ significantly from the current draft based on industry input and regulatory adjustments. Consequently, firms should not expect immediate changes to their operational capabilities until the SEC publishes a final, binding regulatory framework.

## Strategic Market Implications

While clearer custody routes could expand access to XRP, the proposal does not guarantee adoption or immediate buying pressure. The shift represents a structural evolution in how advisors integrate digital assets into traditional wealth management. Professionals should monitor the final rule-making process to determine if these changes align with their specific client investment strategies.

## Sources covering this story

- https://dailycoin.com/sec-custody-proposal-can-give-advisors-more-room-to-hold-xrp/ — 

---

_Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._
