VanEck Analyst Sounds Alarm: Bitcoin Treasury Strategy Could Trigger Market Fallout

Bitcoin''s latest institutional darling—corporate treasury adoption—might be its own worst enemy. VanEck''s research team flashes warning signs as companies pile into BTC reserves.

The ticking time bomb in corporate balance sheets

What happens when volatile crypto assets meet quarterly earnings reports? Analysts predict accounting chaos as mark-to-market rules collide with Bitcoin''s price swings.

Wall Street''s new favorite casino chip

While tech firms brag about ''hedging against inflation,'' their treasury departments are effectively running unhedged crypto desks. Spoiler alert: most CFOs still can''t explain UTXOs.

As the institutional crypto experiment rolls on, one thing''s clear—when the music stops, the suits will be first to blame Satoshi. After all, why take responsibility when you can blame ''market irrationality''?

Sigel sees a problem for Bitcoin treasury companies

Sigel’s post began by highlighting how no public BTC treasury company has yet to trade below its bitcoin NAV for a sustained period. However, he claimed one is now approaching break-even territory, an emerging risk for some companies that raise capital through large at-the-market (ATM) programs to buy BTC.

According to Sigel, if the stock trades at or near NAV (net asset value), continued equity issuance can dilute rather than create value, which WOULD lead to capital erosion rather than formation.

Under normal circumstances, companies like Semler and Strategy have stock prices that trade above the value of their Bitcoin (at a premium) which means that investors are willing to pay more for the stock than just the Bitcoin it owns.

However, Sigel says at least one company’s stock price is getting very close to its Bitcoin NAV and if the stock price falls to or below the NAV, it’s a red flag.

If the stock price is close to or below NAV, selling new shares becomes self-harming as it dilutes the value for existing shareholders, meaning each share represents a smaller piece of the company’s Bitcoin, something investors don’t like to hear.

At break-even level, offerings no longer create value. Instead, they destroy shareholder value. It can also become extractive with the company’s management, who keep raising money via ATM offerings, reaping more benefits than the shareholders.

Sigel offers solutions he believes could help

Sigel has advised companies pursuing a Bitcoin treasury strategy to adopt safeguards now, while premiums still exist.

He suggested announcing a pause to ATM issuance if the stock trades below 0.95 times NAV for 10 or more trading days and prioritizing buybacks when BTC appreciates, but the equity fails to reflect that value.

He also mentioned launching a strategic review if NAV discount persists which might include a merger, spinoff, or sunset of the BTC strategy.

As far as Sigel is concerned, “executive compensation should be aligned with NAV per share growth, not with the size of the Bitcoin position or total share count.”

He highlighted how it has happened before with the BTC miners, pointing out that there was persistent issuance and outsized executive pay, things the industry could do without this time.

“Once you are trading at NAV, shareholder dilution is no longer strategic. It is extractive,” Sigel wrote. “Boards and shareholders should act with discipline now, while they still have the benefit of optionality.”

Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More