Over 160 publicly listed companies have now adopted bitcoin as a core treasury strategy, collectively holding nearly a million BTC, about 4% of circulating supply. What began as a bold experiment by one firm has morphed into a global playbook: raise capital, buy bitcoin, and deliver partial equity exposure to bitcoin through a listed vehicle. These stocks are trading not on earnings or cash flow, but on their ability to deliver bitcoin per share, and most companies have achieved market capitalizations above Net Asset Value, or as it is now known (“mNAV”) multiples above one. The question now is not whether the BTC treasury model can be implemented, but what comes next in terms of risks and opportunities?
The first era — from narrative to replication
The opening chapter of Bitcoin treasury companies was defined by narrative and replication. Michael Saylor’s Strategy (née MicroStrategy) showed that raising equity at a premium to NAV, converting it into BTC, and never selling could transform a software business into a $100 billion proxy for Bitcoin.
From Tokyo’s Metaplanet, the US healthcare company Semler Scientific to London’s Smarter Web Company, the template spread. But premium multiples may not sustain themselves on storytelling 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 firms
Lever One: Yield as an Edge
Just as REITs matured from landlords into yield machines, bitcoin treasury firms will have to show they can generate incremental Bitcoin per share rather than just sit on their stack.
This may come through BTC-backed lending, Lightning infrastructure, or novel financial products that may monetize balance sheet holdings. For example, locking up BTC into payments channels in Lightning, allows the BTC holder to collect fees for providing this liquidity, potentially providing yield. However, all yield strategies carry risks, which need to be considered and managed, for example credit and counterparty risk. Without a yield engine, dilution could eventually catch up, and mNAV may compress toward one.
Lever Two: Leverage (Risk-Weighted)
The winners in the last bear market were not those with the biggest balance sheets, but those who structured capital to survive 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 USD. This USD can then be deployed as the company sees fit, for example to earn yield or buy more Bitcoin. However, this type of activity demands rigorous risk management and cashflow and scenario modelling. Leverage amplifies the reflexive flywheel, but it demands discipline: raise only at a premium, never against hard collateral, and keep maturities long enough to ride cycles.
Lever Three: Complementary Business Models
The third lever is to provide complementary business models, or the “picks and shovels” of the Bitcoin economy. Some Bitcoin treasury firms are already layering in infrastructure plays: data centers, decentralized AI computing, bitcoin-native software or business services.
This dual model can transform them from pure NAV arbitrage into platforms with operating cash flow. That could make them not just bitcoin proxies, but equity growth stories. There are parallels with the dotcom era companies that eventually grew into the behemoth infrastructure providers of tech today including often themselves sitting on significant cash positions: Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook et al.
Toward professionalization and institutionalization
The reflexive phase of the bitcoin treasury model is ending. 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 business lines that tether them to broader digital asset infrastructure.
Those that succeed may justify persistent premiums above NAV, institutionalize their shareholder base, and become the bitcoin-native equivalents of REITs, tech giants or energy majors. There is a risk that those who stay static may drift into irrelevance, perhaps even trading on the stock markets like closed-end funds with no growth.
The next game — beyond buying bitcoin
The next game probably is not about buying Bitcoin; that playbook is already written. It is about building the financial architecture to keep mNAV above one, cycle after cycle.
The companies that crack the code will not just be proxies for Bitcoin. They could be the equity 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 activity. References to Bitcoin, corporate strategies, or listed companies are for illustrative purposes only.
Greengage & Co. Limited is not authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority to provide investment, crypto-trading, or regulated lending services. This content is for informational use and is primarily intended for institutional and professional audiences and is not designed for retail investors.
Cryptoassets 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).
Source: https://www.coindesk.com/opinion/2025/10/20/bitcoin-treasury-companies-wither-thence
