This month the European Securities and Markets Authority (Esma) is due to release its response to a consultation process that has been underway since it released a discussion paper on Ucits ETFs in July last year.
The final report will suggest specific rules for European regulators on ETF transparency, and while they are not compulsory the organisation will expect the guidelines to be taken on board by respective national watchdogs.
Lytle said once Esma has made its mark, the rest of the regulators would "amble along" and announce their initiatives and responses as the year progresses.
Last year the debate surrounding ETFs stepped up a gear as synthetic ETFS came under the spotlight.
But Steve Maijoor, chairman of Esma, was reported last week as saying providers of all ETFs, not just swap-based funds, would be required to disclose whether they take part in stock-lending of the underlying securities of their products.
Lytle said commentators who attempt to compare ETFs to CDOs are completely off-piste, with the only similarity being the acronyms have three letters.
"ETFs are heavily regulated and are not heavily leveraged, two of the main failings of CDOs. There are just so many differences," he said.
In response to the "alphabet soup" accusations that have been thrown at providers about the number of acronyms related to Exchange-Traded Products (ETPs), Lytle said he would welcome a clarification of labels.
But he said this would have to be an industry-wide initiative, since no single provider would want to go out on a limb and risk creating even more confusion with a new naming convention.
Thankfully he does not think a collective move towards clearer labelling of products is that far away: "It would not be controversial, fundamentally we all agree with each other. But you won’t see one of us blaze a trail and then see others head off in another direction."
