More than 160 publicly traded companies have adopted bitcoin as a core treasury strategy, collectively holding nearly one million BTC, roughly 4% of the circulating supply. What started as a bold experiment by one company has morphed into a global playbook: raising capital, buying bitcoin, and offering partial equity exposure to bitcoin through a listed vehicle. These stocks are not traded based on earnings or cash flow, but on their ability to deliver bitcoins per share, and most companies have achieved market capitalizations greater than net asset value, or as it is now known (“mNAV”) multiples greater than one. The question now is not whether the BTC treasury model can be implemented, but what is next in terms of risks and opportunities?
The first era: from narrative to replication
The initial chapter of Bitcoin treasuries was defined by narrative and replication. Michael Saylor’s (née MicroStrategy) strategy demonstrated that raising capital at a premium to NAV, converting it to BTC, and never selling it could transform a software business into a $100 billion substitute for Bitcoin.
From Tokyo’s Metaplanet, US healthcare company Semler Scientific to London’s Smarter Web Company, the workforce spread. But premium multiples may not be sustained by narrative and BTC holdings alone. For this model to survive its adolescence, companies may need to justify NAV multiples above one in more durable ways.
The next levers for bitcoin treasury companies
First lever: performance as an advantage
Just as REITs went from proprietary to yield machines, bitcoin treasury companies will have to demonstrate that they can generate incremental Bitcoin per share rather than simply sitting in their stack.
This can be achieved through BTC-backed loans, Lightning infrastructure, or novel financial products that can monetize balance sheet holdings. For example, locking BTC in payment channels on Lightning allows the BTC holder to charge fees for providing this liquidity, potentially providing yield. However, all performance strategies carry risks that need to be considered and managed, for example, credit and counterparty risk. Without a performance engine, dilution could eventually catch up with it and the mNAV could compress towards one.
Lever Two: Leverage (Risk Weighted)
The winners in the last bear market were not those with the largest balance sheets, but those who structured capital to survive the forced liquidation. Some BTC treasury companies are currently considering the relative value of pledging their BTC as collateral in BTC-backed loans, to be lent to them in dollars. This USD can be used however the company sees fit, for example to earn yield or buy more Bitcoin. However, this type of activity requires rigorous risk management and scenario and cash flow modeling. Leverage amplifies the thoughtful flywheel, but requires discipline: raise only at a premium, never against hard collateral, and hold maturities long enough to ride a bike.
Third lever: complementary business models
The third lever is to provide complementary business models, or the “picks and shovels” of the Bitcoin economy. Some Bitcoin treasury companies are already participating in infrastructure projects: data centers, decentralized artificial intelligence computing, native bitcoin software or merchant services.
This dual model can transform them from pure NAV arbitrage to platforms with operating cash flow. That could make them not only bitcoin substitutes but also stock growth stories. There are parallels with the dot-com era companies that eventually became today’s giant technology infrastructure providers and often have significant cash positions: Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook et al.
Towards professionalization and institutionalization
The reflective phase of the bitcoin treasury model is coming to an end. As the flywheel slows, companies are professionalizing their Bitcoin treasury strategies: designing capital stacks for resilience, perhaps generating Bitcoin yield without diluting per-share exposure, and developing lines of business that link them to a broader digital asset infrastructure.
Those that succeed can justify persistent premiums above NAV, institutionalize their shareholder base, and become the native bitcoin equivalents of REITs, tech giants, or energy majors. There is a risk that those who remain static will fall into irrelevance, perhaps even trading in stock markets as closed-end funds with no growth.
The next game: beyond buying bitcoins
The next game probably won’t be about buying Bitcoin; that playbook is already written. It’s about building the financial architecture to keep mNAV above one, cycle after cycle.
The companies that crack the code will not just be representatives of Bitcoin. They could be the capital layer of a new monetary system.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and reflects the views of the author at the time of writing. It does not constitute financial advice, investment research, or an inducement to engage in investment activities. References to Bitcoin, corporate strategies or publicly traded companies are for illustrative purposes only.
Greengage & Co. Limited is not authorized by the Financial Conduct Authority to provide investment, cryptocurrency trading or regulated lending services. This content is for informational use and is intended primarily for institutional and professional audiences and is not intended for retail investors.
Crypto assets and related investments are high risk. You could lose all the money you invest. These products are not protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) or the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).
