Bitcoin Magazine

After A Snake-Like 2025, Is The Bitcoin Price Ready to Break Out In 2026?

We had high hopes for the bitcoin price in 2025. It was supposed to be the crescendo of the four-year cycle, the most bullish setup in recent memory. It was the year after the halving, the ETFs had just been approved, a new president was elected, with the promise of the money printer roaring back to life. Everything looked primed for a Q4 blow-off top, and instead of a new life in Monaco, all you got was this lousy article.

What follows is my interpretation of the events of 2025 and my outlook for 2026. I’m not a trader, not an analyst, and like you, I’ve been outperforming professional funds for years, by simply stacking Sats, of course. I’m more of a “fix the money, fix the world” kinda guy, but like everyone else, it’s hard to ignore Bitcoin’s price movements, which I think of as the game of “Snakes and Ladders”.

In the game of Snakes and Ladders, momentum drives us forward, but it can also provide a false sense of confidence. You can be one roll away from victory, only to land on a snake that sends you sliding back ten places. As much as hopium dictates that we pray for the price to go ‘up and to the right’, markets rarely oblige. Switching from the board to the chart, price action is played on a board of global liquidity and market sentiment. When sentiment is low or liquidity dries up, no amount of good news can sustain momentum. We simply crab sideways or find a snake that slides us down into further despair.

On the other hand, when liquidity floods the system, we often find the ladders that shoot us through resistance levels. For most of 2025, we were stuck playing the former, while dreaming of the “ladder”. So let’s take this time to review 2025 from the perspective of hindsight, as foresight proved to be of little benefit.

What Happened To Our 2025 Bull Run?

If there is a phrase that defines the Bitcoin market of 2025, it is exactly that: a Year of Snakes and precious few ladders. Interestingly, and unbeknownst to me, 2025 was indeed the year of the snake according to the 12-year Chinese zodiac cycle, starting January 29, 2025, and ending February 16, 2026.

We began the year with the kind of euphoria that usually marks a cycle top. The halving was behind us, and the political stars had aligned perfectly. Google trends showed search queries were soaring. In fact, the year kicked off with a quiet but massive victory before the political fireworks even started: FASB fair value accounting rules took effect on January 1st, finally allowing companies to report bitcoin profits rather than just losses.

Then came the main event. We witnessed the inauguration of a “Bitcoin President.” Gary Gensler departed, leaving behind a legacy that, in hindsight, was perhaps less villainous than we assumed, and Ross Ulbricht walked free within 48 hours. With the new administration came a few allies: Paul Atkins took over the SEC and Mike Selig the CFTC, securing a pro-crypto cabinet.

The financial plumbing was finally completed. The ETFs were fully operational, options trading on IBIT were unleashed, and it quickly became clear that Michael Saylor was not about to let Larry Fink steal his thunder. MicroStrategy went on a $25 billion buying spree, 100x what they bought in 2020, and the corporate treasury list exploded from 60 companies to nearly 200.

By October, the engines were well and truly revving. We hit the All-Time High on October 6th, ready to punch the accelerator for the glorious Q4 end-of-cycle run. Instead, we shifted the gear into reverse and slid all the way down to $80,000.

First, we got our knickers in a twist over the “Knots vs. Core” drama. Then came the Binance incident, where the snake manifested itself as a “technical issue” at precisely the wrong time, and right as Gold broke out. We essentially got rug-pulled by a glitch. The issue of October 10th likely created added sell pressure through forced liquidations, whilst also triggering the 4-year cycle sellers who have been trained to sell Q4 of the 4th year. Few understood the gravity of it at the time, though I tip my hat to Jesse Olson for calling it early.

Then the FUD machine was turned on. First, it targeted MicroStrategy with threats of MSCI exclusion; it didn’t help sentiment that its mNAV has been dropping all year. Then it pivoted back to Bitcoin with the return of the “quantum attack” narrative.

While the headlines swirled, the bitcoin price became stuck in purgatory, range-bound between $84,000 and $95,000 and trapped by options traders, even though the handcuffs had theoretically been taken off IBIT options earlier in the year. Bitcoin was having an Austin Powers moment, while Peter Schiff enjoyed his first day out in the sun since high school. Bless him.

Is The Tide About to Turn?

While some fear 2026 will bring the hangover of a post-cycle bear market, I, like countless other optimists believe otherwise. If 2025 was the year of snakes, 2026 is the year we finally climb a few ladders.

The setup is favourable. We have a Bitcoin-ish president, who’s hungry to fire up the printing press, we’ve a developing multipolar world, where the process of game theory should be heating up, there’s a $7 trillion debt wall to be paid, the old guard are positioned, the regulation stranglehold has been loosened, the cowboys (FTX, Terra-Luna, etc.) are gone, gold and silver have both had their runs, and Bitcoin’s supposed to follow next, or so we hope. 

Source: Sminston With

Not to mention, the tax year is done, and new budgets have been allocated to fund managers and businesses alike. FASB fair value accounting is now live, smoothing the runway for corporate balance sheets. Michael Saylor is still buying with the relentless intensity of a man who understands math better than Archimedes. Even the “MSCI FUD” was defeated early, so credit to George and the Bitcoin for Corporations team for that victory.

At the point in time as the price is beginning to climb higher, the bears are finally showing signs of exhaustion, that’s according to James Check and countless others. By far the most significant headwind Bitcoin faced in 2025 was the relentless onslaught of coins sold by long-term holders. That pressure looks to finally be ending. On November 1st, approximately 67% of the Realised Cap was invested above $95k. The last two months have seen a massive supply redistribution occur, with that metric declining to 47%.

Over the last 30 days, around 80% of the coins which have transacted came from higher prices. This is the definition of capitulation. The weak hands who bought the top have flushed out, and new buyers have stepped in with a lower and stronger cost basis.

Incidentally, the Year of the Snake officially ends on February 16, 2026, to be followed by a horse, which as we all know has the ability to outrun any bull. This coincides almost perfectly with the monthly CME Futures expiry on February 27th. The shedding of a snake’s skin happens right before the growth returns. 

Is the 4-Year Cycle Dead?

Really, who can truly say they know? What we do know is that the four-year cycle is no longer connected to the halvings or the presidential cycles in the way we once thought, and the halvings are less likely to have an effect going forward, as the new coins distributed are a lower percentage of supply, and the miners are supported by huge funds which can help them weather any potential death spiral.

We have not seen a Pi Cycle top signal, the 200 week moving average has not crossed the prior cycle top, the MVRV score is just 1.3, the Puell multiple is just .99, we’ve not had a considerable drawdown, and we’re still at the bottom of the range of almost every metric imaginable. For those of you who are old enough to remember the KitKat ad from the 90’s, “the 4 year cycle is not dead, it was just takin’ a break.”

As the 4-year cycle is a purely Liquidity Based Cycle, it can be measured by proxy using the ISM Manufacturing PMI, a qualitative index sourced from purchasing managers in the manufacturing industry. I give credit to Raoul Pal for highlighting this metric; he was the first I observed to point out that bitcoin is a “Liquidity” asset rather than a “Halving” asset. Bitcoin, as the highest-beta risk asset in existence, responds to shifts in global risk appetite with greater force and speed than any other asset class. The PMI tracks the business cycle, and it has been in contraction for nearly two years. The current PMI at 47.9 signals ongoing contraction, but ISM projections indicate a 4.4% revenue growth for manufacturing in 2026, crossing 50 in Q2 as Trump’s policies kick in. The bitcoin price should follow. When the ISM PMI is below 50, we’re generally in a bear market, and we’ve been that way for over two years now. The bull markets have historically topped out between 55 and 65. The question remains, when is the business cycle going to see an upturn? TechDev is of the view that it’s happening very soon, as the bullish divergence reversal momentum is decidedly building.

Source: Sminston With

The $9 Trillion Debt Question

The US government has to address the $9 trillion debt wall that’s due to mature this year. But the nuance is in how they do it. President Trump has made it clear he intends to build a “Dream Military” for 2027 and is pushing for a budget increase to $1.5 trillion. When you combine that with the $4.1 trillion of debt maturing in 2026 and the standard annual deficit, the US Treasury faces a $9 trillion liquidity gap, and a further $7.4 trillion before 2028. 

Does the US have to print all $9 trillion? No. And through this lens, the recent geopolitical moves make sense. Trump didn’t only capture Maduro for a photo-op; he has likely taken control over 303B barrels of reserves and is enforcing USD oil sales, creating artificial dollar demand and easing the liquidity gap by $2-3T annually. 

Can he cover the gap via a mix of tariffs (that Americans actually pay for!), Petro-Dollar demand, and the inevitable monetization of the rest by the Federal Reserve? I guess he’ll have to. With Jerome Powell expected to leave his chair in May, the path will be cleared to give the printer engines a whir. 

There’s another $5 – $10 tr due globally in 2026, and the same again in 2027. So the fed chair won’t be without company. 

My View: 2026–2027

The four-year cycle OGs may be stepping aside, but the Liquidity Cycle is just gearing up, and Bitcoin, as Raoul Pal has long argued, remains the ultimate liquidity barometer.

Samuel Benner’s famous 19th-century forecasting chart (first published in 1875), maps long-term cycles of panics (“A” years), booms/high prices (“B” years), and depressions/low prices (“C” years). Interestingly, 2026 falls squarely in one of Benner’s “B” years, which is a period of “Good Times, High Prices and the time to sell Stocks and values of all kinds.” The chart places 2026 right alongside previous boom years like 2016, 2007, 1999, and 1989, suggesting we are entering a structurally favorable window for risk assets.

How Long Will The Next Money Printing Last?

Prediction: 18–24 months

Why: History shows that once the dam gates open, it takes roughly two years to stabilize and reflate. If the official aggressive printing phase begins in late 2025 (as the liquidity uptick and Benner timeline imply, and as M2 shows), it will likely run strong through mid-2027.

How Much LIquidity Will Be Added?

Prediction: ~$9–$10 trillion in the U.S. Treasury debt is maturing in 2026 alone (about one-third of outstanding marketable debt) and a further $5 – $10 tr globally.

Why: As discussed above, the maturity walls for 2026 are nearly double what we faced during the COVID crisis. Yellen extended the pain by leaning on short-term issuance back then, but come hell or high water, that debt has to be paid or refinanced—the money will arrive from somewhere. Because of this, we can expect a new wave of inflation, the 70’s and 80’s have a story to tell about that!

How High Will The Bitcoin Price Go?

Prediction: $250,000

Why: During that $5 trillion COVID expansion, BTC rallied roughly 20x from the $3k–$4k lows to $69k. With the potential for double that liquidity entering the system this cycle, the upside is significant even if diminishing returns apply. From our $16k effective low, a conservative 10x to 12x multiple lands us in the $160k to $200k range as a base case. However, models suggest we could push higher. PlanC’s quantile model points toward $300k+ by the end of 2026, and Giovanni Santostasi’s Power Law projects a peak potentially around $210k early on, with room to stretch as high as $600k in outlier scenarios. But hey, I was expecting +$200k last cycle too.

Oh, if the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act moves out of the committee, and if the U.S. Treasury officially starts side-stacking alongside MicroStrategy, all bets are off the table.

When Will The Price Top Out?

Prediction: Late 2026 to mid-2027

The Logic: Bitcoin historically tops out 12–18 months after the liquidity expansion enters its “mania” phase. If the ISM Manufacturing PMI crosses back above 50 in early 2026, the perfect storm should unfold throughout 2026, setting up a blow-off top, potentially in the first half of 2027.

Bitcoin is unlikely to go straight up, nothing ever does. We’ll almost certainly encounter a few snakes along the way: sharp corrections, regulatory noise, profit-taking, or some form of shenanigans. But the ladders are built, ready and waiting. The Year of the Snake is coming to an end, just ahead of the February 27 CME futures expiry, our potential ignition point, right before the anticipated PMI uptick in Q2.

2025 was a year of snakes and sideways pain, with long-term holders finally capitulated and weak hands flushed out. Now, with a wall of liquidity heading our way, 2026 looks like the ladder we’ve been waiting for. The horse year is coming, so stack and secure accordingly.

Good luck. 

This post After A Snake-Like 2025, Is The Bitcoin Price Ready to Break Out In 2026? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Conor Mulcahy.

Bitcoin Magazine

Breaking the Blackout: Iranian Protestors Use Freedom Tech to Bypass Regime Crackdown

Iran has been experiencing intense protests against the Islamic Republic regime in recent weeks. Authorities have responded with severe measures, including a nationwide telecoms blackout and jamming satellite services like Starlink, aimed at preventing coordination among demonstrators.

Iranians are embracing freedom tech tools; Bitchat, Noghteha, and Delta Chat for offline communication. Two of these apps trace their origins directly to Bitcoin, highlighting how technologies from this community provide practical solutions in high-stakes environments. Bitchat, built by Bitcoin pioneers Jack Dorsey and open-source developer Calle, operates over Bluetooth mesh networks and the Nostr protocol without needing an internet connection. Noghteha on the otherhand, is a closed-source fork of Bitchat, adapted for the Iranian context with full Persian/Farsi support, an enhanced user interface, and features tailored to local needs.

How Did Bitchat and Noghteha Gain Popularity?

Bitchat first gained widespread attention when Jack Dorsey announced it on X on July 6, 2025, describing it as a weekend project to explore Bluetooth mesh networks. The announcement generated immediate interest, reflected in surges on Google Trends for related searches. In September, Frank Corva wrote about Bitchat’s role in supporting Nepalese protestors during social media restrictions and unrest, where nearly 50,000 downloads occurred in a single day.

Noghteha, on the other hand, saw rapid adoption in the first week of January 2026. Before the full internet shutdown, Google Play recorded more than 70,000 downloads of Noghteha in the space of three days, with numbers likely increasing through peer-to-peer sharing, sideloading, and Bluetooth transfers afterward.

Promotion of Noghteha reached a broad audience through Iran International, an opposition satellite TV channel based outside Iran. The station, a major source of information and coordination guidance from figures like opposition leader Reza Pahlavi, broadcast details about the app.

در شرایط بحران، وقتی اینترنت قطع می‌شود و تماس‌ها دیگر پاسخگو نیستند
یک راه ارتباطی هنوز باقی است.
«نقطه‌ها» اپلیکیشنی برای ارتباط بدون اینترنت. pic.twitter.com/0QiDLPbRNq

— ايران اينترنشنال (@IranIntl) January 7, 2026

The developer Nariman Gharib, a digital-political activist, released the app independently, without government or private funding, as a response to the regime’s tactics.

But Why Fork Bitchat?

The Iranian regime employs highly sophisticated information warfare tactics. As Ziya Sadr, a prominent Bitcoin researcher and former political prisoner, explains: “The regime sets up phishing attacks, creates fake download links, and uses influencers on social media to misguide people into installing malicious versions of the same app.”

This persistent threat is likely the main reason the Noghteha developer chose not to release the app as fully open-source, and perhaps it also explains the app’s release timing, just before the internet shutdown. By releasing so close to the expected blackout, there was an opportunity to distribute a new, closed-source version into as many hands as possible before the regime could interfere with downloads or seed malicious alternatives.

Noghteha remains compliant with Bitchat’s MIT license, which allows modifications and redistribution with proper attribution. This approach is an attempt to quickly protect protesters from regime sabotage.

Calle, Bitchat’s co-creator, doesn’t quite see it that way. He’s concerned about the closed-source elements, donation requests, and security risks in adversarial settings—points that are valid and hard to dispute. 

warning: iranian bitchat clone raises multiple red flags:

– full clone of our code but zero attribution or credit for our work.
– not open-source. the app could be spying on you without your knowledge. NEVER USE A CLOSED-SOURCE PRIVACY MESSENGER!
– asks for money. bitchat is… pic.twitter.com/byLlA9Lqmo

— calle (@callebtc) January 11, 2026

Yet the interaction raises a worthy question: Is Bitchat cypherpunk enough to counter the regime’s potential undermining of it, where openness itself could be weaponized? In that sense, does Noghteha achieve something that Bitchat can’t, and should that be the case, can Bitchat be adapted to become more resilient against such tactics?

Ultimately, it’s inspiring to see Bitcoin gaining prominence on the international stage, alongside freedom tech tools rooted in the cypherpunk principles of privacy through cryptography. Cypherpunks and, more recently, Bitcoin developers have pioneered technologies that excel in high-stakes scenarios, empowering individuals to maintain communication and autonomy amid oppression. With many of these tools released under permissive open-source licenses like MIT, they invite cloning and repurposing to fit various needs. While closed-source adaptations introduce new risks, they also can also generate valuable lessons, potentially guiding future enhancements to better withstand information warfare tactics.

The events in Iran demonstrate how innovations from the Bitcoin ecosystem adapt and thrive, offering real support to those navigating censorship, blackouts, and repression through resilient, user-focused tools.

Editor’s Note: A Warning on Security Users should proceed with caution. Noghteha is a closed-source application. Calle, the original developer of Bitchat, has explicitly warned against using the app due to the inability to verify its code or security. However, reports from the ground indicate it is being widely and successfully used by protestors.

This post Breaking the Blackout: Iranian Protestors Use Freedom Tech to Bypass Regime Crackdown first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Conor Mulcahy.

Bitcoin Magazine

What is mNAV? The Investor’s Guide to Valuing Bitcoin Treasuries

mNAV, or market net asset value, is a valuation metric that expresses the real-time economic value of a company’s bitcoin reserves. It adjusts the company’s holdings to the current market price of bitcoin, accounts for liquid cash and debt, and factors in share dilution.

mNAV provides a clearer picture of a bitcoin treasury company’s true financial position than conventional accounting standards. It has become the standard tool for evaluating corporate bitcoin strategies because it centers the analysis on bitcoin itself, rather than legacy accounting conventions that can distort value.

Key Takeaways

• Real-Time Precision: mNAV reflects the current market value of a company’s bitcoin reserves on a per-share basis, updated in real-time rather than quarterly.
• Economic Reality: It provides investors with a transparent measure of reserve value that cuts through GAAP reporting lags.
• Market Sentiment: Premiums and discounts to mNAV reveal how the market interprets a company’s execution, governance, and capital efficiency.
• Valuation Anchor: mNAV is essential for analyzing public bitcoin treasury companies and access vehicles.

Purpose: Why We Need mNAV

The purpose of mNAV is to provide an accurate, real-time valuation anchor for companies that hold bitcoin.

Historically, under US accounting rules (GAAP), bitcoin was treated strictly as an intangible asset. This required companies to recognize impairments when the price fell but prevented them from recognizing gains until the asset was sold. While recent updates to FASB rules (ASU 2023-08) now allow companies to report bitcoin at fair value, GAAP financial statements remain retrospective—snapshots taken only once per quarter.

Bitcoin markets move 24/7. A quarterly earnings report is often stale the moment it is published.

mNAV fills this gap. It replaces static quarterly reporting with dynamic, market-based valuation. Investors gain a consistent, transparent, and economically meaningful measure of the company’s bitcoin position that adjusts with the market. This provides a reliable basis for evaluating performance, governance, risk, and capital strategy.

Mechanics: How mNAV Works

mNAV is straightforward to calculate, but precision is key. It treats the company effectively as a holding vehicle, netting out debts and cash to find the “naked” value of the bitcoin per share.

1. Holdings in BTC

Companies disclose their bitcoin reserves in BTC terms. This is the foundational input. Because bitcoin’s supply is fixed, the quantity held is the primary driver of long-term value.

2. Market Pricing

The real-time spot price of bitcoin is applied to the company’s total BTC holdings to determine the gross value of the reserves.

3. Net Debt (Cash vs. Liabilities)

To get an accurate “Net Asset” value, you must account for the balance sheet.

• Add Cash: Cash and cash equivalents are added to the bitcoin value.
• Subtract Debt: Total debt (including convertible notes and senior secured notes) is subtracted.
• Note: For operating companies (like software firms), this formula is conservative. It effectively values the operating business at zero, assuming its cash flows exist primarily to service the debt.

4. Fully Diluted Share Count

The result is divided by the fully diluted number of shares. This includes outstanding shares, options, Restricted Stock Units (RSUs), and shares underlying convertible notes if they are “in the money.”

Formula for mNAV per share

The output is a reserve-based valuation per share. Investors compare the stock price to this benchmark to understand if they are paying a premium (paying for future execution) or a discount (pricing in risk).

Background and Origins

mNAV emerged as a practical necessity once corporations began holding bitcoin in material size. Early adopters like MicroStrategy (now Strategy) revealed that standard accounting could not capture the reality of bitcoin’s market behavior. Impairment charges made healthy balance sheets look distressed, while massive unrealized gains went unreported.

Analysts began circulating market-value-adjusted figures to understand the true strength of these companies. Even as accounting rules modernize, mNAV remains the dominant metric because it is simple, comparable across companies, and focused on BTC terms rather than accounting classification.

Why Companies Trade Above or Below mNAV

Companies rarely trade exactly at mNAV. The market applies premiums or discounts based on how it interprets execution quality, treasury discipline, and capital structure.

Capital Market Arbitrage & Accretive Issuance: Some companies excel at transforming capital markets into bitcoin acquisition engines. They issue equity or debt at attractive terms to buy more bitcoin.

Notably, if a company trades at a premium to mNAV, it can issue new shares to buy bitcoin, effectively increasing the bitcoin-per-share for existing holders. The market often rewards this “accretive loop” with a sustained premium, as it accelerates the accumulation of reserves.

Bitcoin-Backed Financial Instruments: Companies with deep bitcoin reserves can issue financial products backed by those holdings, such as bitcoin-backed notes or yield-generating instruments. Markets reward the ability to use bitcoin to build new financial infrastructure.

Global Market Access: Large pools of institutional capital still cannot buy or custody bitcoin directly. Treasury companies offer a familiar entry point through equity and fixed income. This utility increases demand for shares, often pushing valuations above mNAV.

Discounts: The Market Referendum: Discounts often signal distress. If a company trades below mNAV, it implies investors are worried about governance, management fees, excessive leverage, or the inability to hold bitcoin long-term.

Premiums to mNAV

A premium to mNAV indicates that investors value the company’s capabilities beyond the raw value of its current holdings.

A premium is a vote of confidence. It suggests investors believe the company will:

1. Generate Accretion: Issue capital efficiently to grow bitcoin-per-share.
2. Mitigate Risk: Manage leverage intelligently to avoid forced selling.
3. Create Utility: Build products or services on top of the bitcoin stack.

Premiums contract when confidence fades. Poor execution or deterioration in capital efficiency can reduce demand for the shares, causing valuations to drift back toward—or below—mNAV.

Example: Strategy ($MSTR)

Strategy is the largest and most studied bitcoin treasury company. Because its strategy involves active capital market management (issuing convertibles and equity to buy BTC), analysts, plebs and investors routinely track mNAV to interpret its valuation.

Strategy often trades at a significant premium to mNAV. This premium reflects the market’s valuation of its ability to borrow cheaply and buy bitcoin that appreciates faster than the cost of that debt. When the company successfully executes this arbitrage, the premium tends to hold. If market conditions weaken or leverage concerns rise, the stock may drift closer to mNAV.

For current data on Strategy’s mNAV, premium, and BTC Yield, view the Strategy’s Company Metrics on BitcoinMagazinePro.com.

mNAV vs. Book Value

Book value reflects historical cost based on accounting rules. It is a lagging indicator, whilst mNAV reflects current economic reality. mNAV replaces historical cost with live market data and adjusts for dilution.

For a bitcoin treasury, Book Value is more suitable for the accountants; and mNAV is preferred by investors.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does mNAV work like NAV in an ETF?

No. ETFs have an arbitrage mechanism (Authorized Participants) that forces the price to match NAV. Operating companies do not have this. Their shares float freely based on sentiment, allowing for significant premiums and discounts.

Does mNAV apply to private companies?

It can be calculated if the private company discloses holdings and liabilities, but it is most useful for public companies with transparent, liquid share counts.

Why do discounts appear?

Discounts usually reflect risk. If the market fears the company may be forced to sell bitcoin to pay debts, or if the management structure is poor, the stock may trade at a discount to the raw value of the assets.

Related Concepts

Bitcoin Strategic Reserve – A deliberate long-term allocation of bitcoin used to defend against fiat dilution and preserve capital over time. Treasury companies typically build this into their core strategy.

Bitcoin Treasury Company – Bitcoin treasury companies are redefining capital preservation. By placing bitcoin at the center of their balance sheet strategy, these firms unlock access to capital and absorb bitcoin’s supply.

Final Thoughts

mNAV has become one of the most important valuation tools in corporate bitcoin adoption. It reveals the true economic value of bitcoin reserves and gives investors a consistent benchmark for evaluating companies that anchor their balance sheets in the hardest monetary asset available.

As more firms adopt bitcoin strategies, mNAV will remain the central metric for understanding how capital markets integrate with sound money.

This post What is mNAV? The Investor’s Guide to Valuing Bitcoin Treasuries first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Conor Mulcahy.

Bitcoin Magazine

What is a Bitcoin Treasury Company?

Bitcoin is no longer just a grassroots monetary revolution. It’s in the process of moving from the periphery of finance into its centre. The rise of Bitcoin treasury companies is a major force behind this shift. These are firms that accumulate bitcoin not as a side bet, but as a core balance sheet holding. In doing so, they provide access to capital markets, offer yield-bearing instruments, and reshape how companies think about monetary preservation.

This article explores what Bitcoin treasury companies are, how they operate, and why their emergence matters, for both corporate finance and Bitcoin’s long-term trajectory.

Key Takeaways

• Bitcoin treasury companies hold bitcoin as a long-term treasury reserve, often replacing fiat cash or short-term bonds.
• These companies expand bitcoin’s investable capital base by enabling access through public equity or corporate debt.
• Public treasury firms may trade at a premium to their bitcoin holdings due to market access, regulatory arbitrage, and capital efficiency.
• Some companies issue bitcoin-backed financial products such as yield notes or strategic reserves.

What is a Treasury Company?

A Bitcoin treasury company business model, whereby a business integrates bitcoin into its treasury management framework. This approach prioritizes monetary certainty over fiat liquidity. The company treats bitcoin as a base-layer reserve asset superior to sovereign currency, rather than a hedge or speculative position.

Treasury companies may be public or private. Public companies often use their regulatory status to issue stock or debt, which is then converted into bitcoin. Private firms generally rely on retained earnings. Regardless of structure, the key factor is that bitcoin becomes the foundation of the corporate treasury, not a side asset.

These companies use bitcoin to manage long-term purchasing power, defend against monetary debasement, and unlock investor access in regions or structures where direct exposure is restricted. The treasury strategy shapes their business identity and capital allocation, often attracting shareholders who value monetary independence.

For a deeper look at the three operating models—pure play, hybrid operator, and strategic holder—see this breakdown from Michael Saylor.

What Purpose Does It Serve?

Bitcoin treasury companies restructure their balance sheets to reflect a predictable monetary strategy championing absolute scarcity over fiat stability. Holding bitcoin allows them to escape the inflationary decay of sovereign currency while signaling long-term capital discipline.

The strategy serves two core purposes: 

1. it defends shareholder value by shifting reserves into a scarce, non-counterparty asset.
2. it creates financial access for investors who cannot hold bitcoin directly. Through their equity or debt instruments, treasury companies channel restricted capital into the Bitcoin ecosystem.

These firms also develop financial products around their holdings. Bitcoin-backed notes, interest-bearing instruments, and convertible structures create yield opportunities. In these cases, the treasury company acts as a financial services platform as well as a capital allocator.

Expanding Bitcoin’s Capital Base

Bitcoin treasury companies serve as access points to the asset for capital that would otherwise remain on the sidelines. As Steven Lubka put it, they are “fundamentally expanding the amount of capital that can flow into bitcoin… They are not competing for the same pool of dollars; they are making the pool larger.”

Most institutional allocators are still trapped inside structures that prohibit direct bitcoin exposure. Their mandates require them to hold equities, bonds, or fund shares—not bearer assets. Treasury companies bypass that restriction. By holding bitcoin and offering tradable equity or fixed income products, they act as financial bridges that translate bitcoin exposure into forms institutions can legally hold.

This approach allows adoption to scale without waiting for regulatory charters or compliance approval. This is infrastructure that routes around the choke points.

Mechanics: How It Works

While each company operates within its own legal, regulatory, and financial constraints, most follow a similar operational structure. The details may vary, but the following components form the backbone of how they operate.

1. Acquisition –  The company acquires bitcoin using excess cash or proceeds from capital raises. This is typically done through over-the-counter (OTC) trading desks or institutional-grade exchanges. Some firms that operate in the mining space may allocate mined bitcoin directly to treasury, removing market exposure altogether.
2. Custody –  Firms must decide between self-custody and third-party custodians. Institutional custodians like Fidelity Digital Assets, Anchorage, or Coinbase Custody offer compliance and insurance options, while self-custody provides sovereignty at the cost of internal security complexity. Custody decisions affect not just risk, but also regulatory posture.
3. Accounting –  Under current US GAAP rules, bitcoin is classified as an intangible asset. Impairments are recognized if market value drops below the acquisition cost, but gains are not recorded unless realized through a sale. This creates an asymmetric treatment that can distort quarterly earnings and force conservative reporting, even if treasury value increases.
4. Reporting –  Public treasury companies are required to disclose bitcoin holdings and changes in treasury structure through filings, earnings reports, and shareholder updates. Some choose to go further, publishing regular updates or dedicating resources to explaining their bitcoin strategy in detail.
5. Security –  Private key management is without question, a critical part of the operation. Companies typically use multisignature wallets, geographic key separation, cold storage, and internal controls to secure holdings. Firms with large positions may employ Shamir’s Secret Sharing or multiple independent signers to ensure redundancy and resilience.
6. Governance –  Policies must define how bitcoin is acquired, secured, and reported. This includes buy thresholds, custody control frameworks, access rights, key management protocols, and recovery plans. Strong governance ensures the strategy survives beyond the initial executive vision and becomes embedded in company operations.

Read More: 9 Ways Bitcoin Treasury Companies Can Differentiate in a Crowded Market.
Read More: The Global Bitcoin Treasury Playbook 

How Are They Even Possible?

Bitcoin treasury companies operate within a regulatory environment where public firms enjoy broader access to capital markets than individuals or funds. This creates a structural advantage. A public company can issue equity or debt, raise fiat capital efficiently, and convert it to bitcoin. In contrast, many institutional investors face custodial, legal, or charter-based constraints that prevent them from holding bitcoin directly.

This dynamic creates a form of regulatory arbitrage. The company acts as a wrapper for bitcoin exposure, allowing capital to enter the market through familiar financial instruments like stocks and bonds. Investors gain indirect access to bitcoin, often through vehicles they are already authorized to hold.

This mechanism is similar to financial innovations of the past. In the 1980s, Salomon Brothers restructured the bond market by slicing and repackaging fixed-income assets to match investor demand. Other sectors used wrappers to route capital around institutional constraints. Bitcoin treasury companies apply the same principle: they turn capital markets into a funnel and aim it at a harder monetary asset.

Regulatory Arbitrage: Why These Companies Even Exist

Bitcoin treasury companies operate in a unique zone of regulatory asymmetry. As Lubka notes on p39, of issue 39 of Bitcoin Magazine, “What bitcoin treasury companies are doing is engaging in regulatory arbitrage.”

Public companies can access large pools of capital through stock and debt issuance. They can then deploy that capital into bitcoin. Retail investors, pension funds, and even many hedge funds cannot hold bitcoin directly—but they can buy shares in public companies.

This is not a technicality. It’s a structural end-run around the gatekeepers of capital. While a retirement fund can’t buy spot bitcoin, it can buy shares in a firm like MicroStrategy. That dynamic turns treasury companies into Trojan horses—pulling bitcoin exposure into portfolios that would otherwise be prohibited from touching it.

Background and Origins

The treasury model gained serious traction in August 2020, when MicroStrategy ($MSTR) allocated $250 million of its reserves to bitcoin. CEO Michael Saylor framed the move as a rational response to fiat debasement and falling real yields. The firm continued raising capital through debt and equity issuance to expand its position, ultimately acquiring over 650,000 BTC.

Other public companies followed. Tahini’s began stacking bitcoin a mere days after MicroStrategy. Tesla ($TSLA) added $1.5 billion in bitcoin to its treasury in early 2021. Square ($SQ), now Block, also made an allocation, citing long-term purchasing power as the key motivation. These high-profile moves signaled that bitcoin was gaining legitimacy as a treasury reserve among large-cap firms.

To support institutional adoption, MicroStrategy, in partnership with BTC Inc launched Bitcoin for Corporations, an annual event aimed at guiding CFOs, legal teams, and boards through the process of integrating bitcoin into treasury strategy. The event helped normalize bitcoin discussions inside traditional corporate structures.

A major barrier to adoption—accounting treatment—began to shift in 2023. The FASB approved new rules allowing companies to report bitcoin holdings at fair market value. This replaced the outdated impairment model and removed one of the most cited objections among public company CFOs. The change went into effect in 2025.

Read more: The Origin Story of Bitcoin Treasury Companies

Examples of Bitcoin Treasury Companies

MicroStrategy ($MSTR) is the most established treasury company in the market. It has redefined its corporate identity around bitcoin accumulation and capital efficiency. The company has raised billions through convertible notes and direct equity issuance, with proceeds allocated to bitcoin. Shareholders now view the firm as a long-term access vehicle to bitcoin’s monetary appreciation.

MetaPlanet ($3350.T) is a Japanese firm that executes a similar game plan to Strategy. Operating within Japan’s distinct regulatory environment, it adapts the treasury playbook to fit regional constraints. MetaPlanet illustrates how treasury adoption can be localized without losing strategic focus.

Smarter Web Company ($MCP), based in the UAE, blends infrastructure development with bitcoin accumulation. Its jurisdiction allows more flexibility in treasury construction, enabling a hybrid model that integrates operational revenue with bitcoin reserves.

Nakamoto Holdings ($NAKA), a subsidiary of KindlyMD, has built a vertically integrated treasury strategy that includes internal capital management and structured products. The firm was profiled by Steven Lubka as an example of how smaller organizations can implement bitcoin treasury models with institutional rigor.

Evaluating a Treasury Company and Measuring Success

The success of a bitcoin treasury company depends on more than just the size of its holdings. Investors should evaluate how efficiently the company acquires bitcoin, whether it increases bitcoin per share over time, and how effectively it monetizes its position.

A key metric is mNAV, or multiple of net asset value. This measures the company’s market capitalization relative to its bitcoin holdings. A high mNAV suggests that the market values not just the bitcoin, but also the company’s capital efficiency, access, and ability to grow its holdings faster than the open market.

Companies that compound bitcoin holdings through accretive financing deserve to trade at a premium. This premium reflects future expectations of value creation. However, poorly managed firms can destroy per-share bitcoin by issuing too much equity or overpaying for marginal gains.

Evaluating treasury companies requires examining their capital structure, acquisition timing, product issuance, and accounting treatment.

More info: How To Measure The Success Of A Bitcoin Treasury Company

Risks and Structural Headwinds

Bitcoin treasury companies operate within a set of structural risks that are distinct from simple asset volatility. These risks are operational, regulatory, reputational and political. There’s also a fifth opposing risk, which is the risk of not holding or having exposure to bitcoin at all.

1. Operational Risk

Managing a bitcoin treasury introduces technical and procedural risks. Custody is not a service you can outsource without trust tradeoffs, and self-custody requires enterprise-grade key management practices. Multisignature configurations, geographic key separation, internal access controls, and incident recovery protocols must be implemented with precision. Any compromise in key security, whether from internal error or external attack, can result in unrecoverable losses. For companies holding hundreds of millions or billions in bitcoin, this becomes a single point of existential failure.

2. Regulatory Risk

Bitcoin exists outside the traditional financial system, and many jurisdictions still lack a clear legal framework for its treatment. Treasury companies must navigate unclear tax rules, evolving securities classifications, cross-border restrictions, and ambiguous corporate governance expectations. Regulatory risk is amplified for public companies, which face additional scrutiny from auditors, exchanges, and shareholders. In many regions, bitcoin remains classified as a speculative asset, limiting how it can be reported or deployed within treasury operations.

3. Reputational Risk

Corporate media, ESG pressure groups, and risk-averse investors typically view bitcoin adoption as speculative or irresponsible, especially during periods of price drawdown. Even competent treasury execution can be framed as reckless if narrative conditions turn. Leadership teams must be prepared to defend the strategy publicly and educate stakeholders who may not yet grasp the long-term monetary thesis.

4. Political Risk

One of the most insidious risks facing treasury companies is the growing institutional pushback from legacy finance. In 2025, MSCI, BlackRock, and Goldman Sachs’ Datonomy index excluded MicroStrategy and Coinbase from digital asset classifications, despite bitcoin representing a majority of their balance sheet exposure. 

These companies were strategically removed because their alignment with bitcoin poses a structural threat to the existing banking order. Their inclusion in major indexes would legitimize bitcoin as a competing monetary system and weaken the financial establishment’s control over capital allocation.

This index engineering reduces investor access and protects legacy institutions. It is designed to suppress entities that store capital in an asset that cannot be debased, seized, or rehypothecated.

5. Monetary Risk of Not Holding Bitcoin

A more widespread risk facing corporate treasuries is the cost of continuing to rely on fiat-based strategies. Inflation erodes capital over time by reducing purchasing power. Treasury strategies that depend on short-term government bonds or bank deposits are exposed to monetary policy decisions that guarantee devaluation over time. Choosing to avoid bitcoin leads to long-term capital deterioration and the progressive weakening of the balance sheet. For companies that operate in inflation-prone environments or that sit on large fiat reserves, this becomes structural loss.

Holding cash yields nothing. The U.S. M2 money supply has grown by more than 7 percent annually since 1971, with recent years far exceeding that rate. A company holding idle dollars is losing 7 percent of purchasing power each year.

U.S. Treasuries yield between 1 and 3 percent in most cycles. Compared to 7 percent monetary expansion, this results in a real loss of 4 to 6 percent per year. These figures may widen as governments and central banks continue expanding credit to support growing debt obligations.

Stock buybacks are often framed as shareholder-friendly but rely on equity valuations inflated by the same monetary expansion that devalues cash. Once the capital is spent, it cannot be reallocated or used to defend the balance sheet. Buybacks might boost earnings per share but do nothing to preserve long-term monetary value.

Bitcoin provides a structurally different outcome. It has no issuer, no credit risk, and a fixed supply of 21 million. It is the only asset that has consistently outpaced M2 expansion over time. Michael Saylor projects a 29 percent annual return over the next 20 years. If that projection proves accurate, a modest allocation to a bitcoin treasury could fully offset fiat debasement.

As little as 2 percent in bitcoin may be enough to break even in real terms. With regular rebalancing, an allocation between 5 and 30 percent could preserve or grow purchasing power while still maintaining fiat liquidity. This is a strategic hedge against fiat decay and should be evaluated as a treasury defense mechanism, not a speculative bet.

Read More: How a Bitcoin Treasury Converts Idle Reserves Into Strategic Capital 

Related Concepts

• Bitcoin ETF – A regulated investment product that tracks the price of bitcoin. ETFs offer simplicity but no direct control over bitcoin custody or strategic usage.

• Bitcoin Strategic Reserve – A deliberate long-term allocation of bitcoin used to defend against fiat dilution and preserve capital over time. Treasury companies typically build this into their core strategy.

Further Reading

For readers looking to explore this topic in greater depth, two standout resources offer high-signal material:

• BitcoinForCorporations.com – A curated collection of articles, videos, and resources tailored for executive teams, CFOs, and corporate strategists evaluating bitcoin treasury models.
• Bitcoin Magazine Issue 39: The Finance Issue – A print and digital issue dedicated to corporate adoption, bitcoin balance sheet strategies, and treasury engineering at scale.

Final Thoughts

Bitcoin treasury companies do more than store reserves in a the worlds best money. They restructure balance sheets around monetary certainty, offer regulated access to bitcoin, and create financial instruments anchored to absolute scarcity.

As inflation accelerates and fiat-based finance becomes more unstable, treasury companies may become lifeboats for capital seeking long-term preservation.

This post What is a Bitcoin Treasury Company? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Conor Mulcahy.