Home
/
Market insights
/
Market analysis
/

Sandeep nailwal of polygon dismisses etf plans, targets institutions

Polygon Co-founder Expresses No Interest in ETF | Institutions Welcomed Instead

By

Fatima Al-Mansoori

Jun 8, 2025, 05:35 AM

Edited By

Fatima Zahra

2 minutes to read

Sandeep Nailwal speaking at a Polygon event, emphasizing the focus on institutional investors, with a backdrop of the Polygon logo.

A recent statement from Sandeep Nailwal, co-founder of Polygon, stirred heated discussions in crypto forums. He explicitly stated there are no plans for launching an ETF, aiming to attract institutional interest to Polygon instead.

Controversy Brews in Comment Sections

Comments on the announcement reveal significant skepticism among community members. One user asserted, "An ETF for POL makes 0 sense at this point", signaling doubts about the timing and feasibility of such a financial product. Others echoed similar sentiments, questioning the reliability of the platform.

Analysts suggest Nailwal's focus on institutional investment may stem from a broader trend in the crypto sector, where companies seek more legitimacy amid ongoing regulatory scrutiny. However, the absence of an ETF option has not quelled the fears.

User Sentiment and Skepticism

The comments section highlights three main themes:

  • Distrust in the platform: Many commenters expressed concerns about potential scams, with one stating, "Like VictoryOk said, be gone, scammers" This reflects deep-seated anxieties within the crypto community regarding project reliability.

  • Questioning intent: Users questioned whether the push for institutional interest is merely a tactic to gain legitimacy, with remarks suggesting a "chatGPT-assisted answer" approach undermines credibility.

  • Potential backlash: There are growing fears about associating with projects that may not live up to their claims, citing a negative perception of Indian projects among some. This sentiment could have ramifications for Polygon's acceptance in global markets.

"Your army of scammers downvoting posts only confirms that everything I point out is true," claimed one user, showcasing the critical environment surrounding this discussion.

Key Points to Note

  • πŸ›‘ No ETF plans currently in place, as confirmed by Polygon’s co-founder.

  • 🚫 Skepticism about the platform’s reliability remains prevalent among observers.

  • πŸ”„ Institutional interest is a primary focus, amid calls for credibility in the crypto space.

Final Thoughts

Nailwal’s approach could signal a shift in strategy for Polygon amid rising scrutiny in the crypto world. As 2025 continues to evolve, ongoing discussions around institutional investment versus retail trust will be crucial in shaping Polygon's future.

Future Outlook on Institutional Focus

Looking ahead, there's a strong chance Polygon's strategy will shift toward courting institutional investors, as Sandeep Nailwal emphasizes the need for credibility in an increasingly scrutinized market. Experts estimate that about 60% of investors now prioritize regulated platforms, which could mean Polygon seeks partnerships or transparency measures to build trust. Given the ongoing regulatory landscape, it’s likely that those institutions will demand robust security measures and compliance protocols. This shift could either bolster Polygon’s standing among serious investors or deepen skepticism among retail participants if the platform fails to provide enough reassurance about its operations.

Drawing Parallels to the Dot-Com Era

An unexpected parallel to consider is the early 2000s dot-com bubble, where many tech firms rapidly shifted focus from retail to institutional investors during times of uncertainty. Just as some companies rearranged their business models to mask underlying weaknesses, Polygon could face similar pressures as it seeks legitimacy. Investors should remember that while some firms thrived by prioritizing institutional relations, others faltered when their credibility didn't align with performance. This historical episode serves as a cautionary tale, illustrating how quick pivots, intended to capture market favor, can sometimes backfire if transparency and reliable delivery aren’t prioritized.