Listen to the article
Experts believe simply acquiring and holding bitcoin is no longer sufficient for bitcoin treasury companies seeking to emulate Strategy’s success.
Deeper Disillusionment Beyond Bitcoin Price Volatility
The high-risk strategy of bitcoin treasury companies trying to replicate the pioneer Strategy’s success is failing to launch, with massive investor losses showing that this model isn’t a simple recipe for outsized gains. Over the past three months, investor capital in BTC copycat firms has been decimated by severe drawdowns.
Importantly, these share price collapses began well before bitcoin’s recent volatility, which saw the cryptocurrency swing from $126,000 on Oct. 6 to just under $105,000 by Oct. 17. This suggests the negative sentiment stems from deeper market disillusionment, not just the latest BTC correction.
The diverging performance and sour investor sentiment indicate that simply acquiring and holding bitcoin is not enough anymore. Strategy’s first-mover advantage was based on unique timing, institutional access, and CEO Michael Saylor’s relentless promotion—factors not easily copied by newcomers.
Some experts, however, attribute the discounts at which many BTC treasury companies trade to structural and governance flaws that erode investor confidence. They note high operational costs, low liquidity, and poor capital discipline often depress these firms’ share prices relative to their bitcoin holdings. Many also argue these companies provide insufficient yield and no compelling strategic value to offset additional layers of corporate risk.
Others, like Bryan Trepanier, founder and president of On‑Demand Trading Inc., believe markets are punishing hype and poor execution. “Markets are punishing poor execution, weak governance, and a lack of transparency. When companies rely entirely on market hype and offer no real operating plan, investors treat them like speculation, not enterprise value,” he said.
The Dilution Trap vs. Strategy’s Debt Model
Unlike many BTC firms raising capital through stock issuance and thus diluting shareholders, Strategy used convertible debt, preserving equity and attracting investor interest as a credible BTC proxy. Meanwhile, Trepanier argues that current approaches—issuing preferred stock without a clear path to value—signal desperation rather than strategy. “The market isn’t fooled by financial gymnastics, especially when bitcoin exposure can be replicated more cleanly through ETFs,” he said.
Mete AI, founder of ICB Verse, agrees, stating, “The market interprets that as desperation, not conviction. As a result, dilution risk compounds faster than BTC appreciation, eroding long-term shareholder value.” He advises investors to focus on metrics like the “BTC-backed liquidity ratio,” which measures companies’ ability to cover 12–18 months of expenses without selling bitcoin.
Still, some experts credit Strategy’s success to luck, first-mover advantage, and the reputation of founder Michael Saylor. Ivo Georgiev, CEO of Ambire, notes that without Saylor’s “hero” narrative, Strategy’s feat would have been hard to repeat.
While Strategy’s model isn’t impossible to copy, experts like Trepanier believe the window has narrowed. Success now demands superior governance and real long-term vision. Mete AI adds, “The next generation of treasury firms must blend Web3 strategy with asset management discipline—not merely mimic Strategy’s financial engineering.”
FAQ
- Why are BTC treasury companies trading at a discount? These firms trade at a discount because of poor governance, high operating costs, and a lack of transparency that erodes investor trust.
- Is simply holding bitcoin a good business strategy? No, experts agree that simply holding Bitcoin is an outdated model and is not enough to create enterprise value today.
- What should the next generation of treasury firms do? Future success demands integrating BTC reserves with real-world utilities, like payment networks, to generate productive yield and strategic value.
- Why did Strategy succeed where others failed? Strategy benefited from unique first-mover timing and its funding choice of convertible debt, which avoided the stock dilution that is currently hurting copycat firms.
