Strategy and Metaplanet’s Bitcoin experiment faces toughest test yet

With direct access to Bitcoin, can Strategy and Metaplanet survive the ETF era, where there is little reason to invest through corporate treasuries?

Strategy and metaplanet under pressure

When Bitcoin fell below $100,000 in early November, the corporate balance sheets of its largest public holders were decimated. Strategy (MSTR) and Japan’s Metaplanet (3350), two companies that built their corporate identities around Bitcoin (BTC), are now facing increasing pressure as market sentiment weakens.

As of November 10, the strategy held 641,692 BTC acquired at a total cost of $47.5 billion, at an average value of $74,079 per coin. Led by executive chairman Michael Saylor, the company operates more like a Bitcoin investment vehicle than a software company.

The latest purchase worth $49.9 million was made today, bringing the company’s total Bitcoin holdings to more than $68 billion at current market value.

Metaplanet, which is listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, has undergone a complete transformation since 2024, evolving from a hospitality company to a corporate Bitcoin vault. The company currently holds 30,823 BTC, worth approximately $3.23 billion, making it the largest non-US public company holding Bitcoin.

Despite both companies holding huge stakes, their stock prices have fallen significantly. Strategy’s stock was trading around $239 as of November 10, down 55% from its all-time high of $543 in November 2024.

After peaking at 1,930 yen in June 2025, Metaplanet fell to around 427 yen, a 78% drop within a few months, despite continued Bitcoin accumulation.

Daily net outflows from the US Spot Bitcoin ETF accelerated the decline while Bitcoin corrected from a record near $126,000 in October to less than $100,000 in early November.

Let’s take a closer look at their financial structure and how future Bitcoin price movements could change their outlook.

How two publicly traded companies continue to promote Bitcoin purchases

Strategy and Metaplanet have built a lending system that allows you to continue buying Bitcoin without relying completely on cash. Both raise money from the public markets and use that money to expand their Bitcoin holdings.

Strategy uses three main methods to finance its purchases. The first are common stocks, or regular stocks that can be traded on the stock market. When a company issues new shares, it receives cash from investors and uses some of it to acquire Bitcoin.

The second method is through convertible bonds. This is a loan that allows investors to later exchange their debt for equity in the company, often if the stock price increases. This structure allows Strategies to borrow at lower interest rates, with investors looking forward to potential profits if the stock performs well.

The third method involves a new class of preferred stock called Stretch. The Series A Stretch Preferred Stock trades under the ticker STRC and pays a monthly dividend that is adjustable based on market demand.

The goal is to keep the stock price near its official price of $100. According to the October company report, the annualized rate in November was 10.50%.

These tools provide businesses with flexible financing options. As Bitcoin prices rise and investor sentiment improves, Strategy can issue stock and preferred stock on more favorable terms.

When Bitcoin falls, investors demand higher dividends or lower prices to take on more risk, raising the cost of capital for companies. If the stock price also falls, the issuance of new shares will increase dilution and reduce the ownership of existing shareholders.

Metaplanet follows a similar model, combining equity sales and debt financing. Management has set a long-term goal of owning 210,000 BTC by 2027. Metaplanet has also established subsidiaries in Japan and the United States to handle Bitcoin-related operations.

In early November 2025, there were multiple reports that Metaplanet had secured a $100 million loan backed by its Bitcoin holdings. The company pledged some Bitcoin as collateral for the loan.

If the price of Bitcoin falls, the value of the collateral will decline and lenders may request additional Bitcoin or a reduction in their borrowings. As prices rise, businesses have more flexibility in accessing credit facilities.

Vulnerabilities hidden beneath the evaluation of Bitcoin government bonds

As Bitcoin prices fall and treasury companies trade below their net asset values, the debate among analysts has shifted from growth to survival.

Seb Bunny, chief investment officer at Block Rewards, draws parallels between traditional value investing and the current state of Bitcoin holdings. He is referring to Benjamin Graham’s “cigar butt” strategy, in which investors buy companies trading below book value in hopes of extracting the last profitable “puff.”

Bunney argues that a similar pattern is occurring with cryptocurrencies, with several Bitcoin treasury companies trading below their multiples of net asset value (mNAV).

He defines mNAV as the ratio of a company’s market capitalization to its total Bitcoin holdings. When this ratio is below 1, the market values ​​the entire company less than the value of Bitcoin.

According to him, “Companies trading with an mNAV of 1 or less are preying on a hostile takeover.” He explained that buyers could potentially “buy the entire company and take control of their Bitcoin at a 20% discount off the spot price.”

Companies like Semler Scientific (SMLR), which owns $513 million worth of Bitcoin against a market cap of $406 million, represent exactly this type of opportunity.

Bunney warns that if deep-pocketed acquirers like Apple or Berkshire Hathaway buy these discount companies and liquidate their bitcoins, billions of dollars worth of bitcoin could flood the market.

He also points out that while Bitcoin itself is anti-fragile, “even the most liquid and censorship-resistant assets in the world can still be vulnerable to financial strategies in the short term if they are wrapped in weak corporate structures.”

Similar concerns are echoed in research by Columbia Business School professor Omid Malekan, who believes that digital assets are adding to market stress rather than absorbing it.

Malekan describes DATs as a new type of public crypto asset holding vehicle, many of which were launched “in ways that are likely to cause value destruction of crypto assets.”

He claims that DAT became a “mass extraction and exit event” that allowed insiders to pocket cash through complex public listings and private side transactions. He added, “Raising too much money and minting too many tokens, even if ‘locked’ or for ‘ecosystem growth’, will lead to a gangrenous cryptocurrency.”

“The biggest damage DAT did to the total crypto market cap was by providing a mass exit event for tokens that were supposed to be locked,” he added.

Meanwhile, Pierre Roshard, host of Bitcoin for Corporations and a leading commentator on Bitcoin financial strategies, offers a more technical view on the same issue.

He examines Strategy’s recent performance and attributes the weakness to a combination of cyclical and structural factors.

“The reason MSTR is underperforming compared to BTC year-to-date is because it overperformed in 2024,” he said, explaining that Bitcoin’s volatility has calmed down since then. Roshard believes some of the current pain is due to healthy correction.

He pointed to Strategy’s “rotation from leveraged convertible debt to amplified perpetual senior debt,” and explained that while these funding changes may temporarily put pressure on valuations, improving the company’s capital structure “creates optimal conditions for growth in senior debt.”

He added that the company’s recently utilized at-the-market share program may “put slight pressure on mNAV” in the short term, but over time “will increase the fundamental value of the company by expanding its collateral base.”

He sees the current uncertainty as an investment opportunity and argues that the market may be discounting strategies too harshly.

DAT survival test

Bitcoin treasury companies are now facing a new reality. ETFs are taking over the role once held by companies like Strategy and Metaplanet.

Before spot ETFs became available, investors looking for exposure to Bitcoin through traditional markets often turned to these companies. Purchasing their shares provided an indirect way to gain exposure to Bitcoin without using an exchange or wallet.

With regulated ETFs allowing investors to buy Bitcoin directly, treasury companies will need to prove continued relevance. Strategy Inc. was once well-positioned with a complex financing system involving stocks, notes and preferred stock, but now that enthusiasm has waned, its model must demonstrate sustainable value.

Metaplanet’s position appears to be even more fragile. The company’s Bitcoin-backed loans magnify each price volatility, putting the company at risk during market downturns. Managing debt while growing your asset holdings will determine whether you can survive long enough to benefit from the recovery.

In smaller treasuries, there is even less room for error. Because ETFs offer an easier and cheaper way to access Bitcoin, many of these companies will have to evolve from passive holders to reliable businesses that can generate steady cash flow.

What remains to be seen is whether these companies can evolve from exposure vehicles to businesses with an enduring purpose.