In the past week, the most explosive news in the crypto circle is not the rise and fall of coin prices, but the foundation of the Bitcoin treasury model (DAT) is being shaken.
First, the leading company MicroStrategy (MSTR) was reported to potentially be removed from the MSCI global index due to its high proportion of Bitcoin assets, resulting in approximately $8.8 billion of passive funds being forced to withdraw.
Next, a $1 billion scale Ethereum treasury plan led by big shots like Li Lin, Shen Bo, and Cai Wensheng abruptly fell apart. In the bear market, all the money was returned to investors, raising widespread doubts in the market about the DAT model.
Once hailed as a 'model for publicly listed companies hoarding coins,' has DAT reached its end? Is it truly a financial innovation in the capital market, or just another disillusionment of a cyclical bubble?
01 What is DAT? A 'two-way rush' between publicly listed companies and crypto assets.
DAT, short for digital asset treasury, is essentially a strategic model where publicly listed companies allocate part or all of their assets to Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other crypto assets. It is not just about 'buying and holding coins' but involves raising funds through traditional financial instruments like equity financing, convertible bonds, and preferred shares, continuously purchasing crypto assets, forming a capital cycle of 'funding - buying coins - stock price increase - refinancing'.
Compared to Bitcoin ETFs, DAT has several distinct characteristics:
Active management: Can time the issuance of new shares, buybacks, hedging, and even achieve coin-based appreciation through staking and participation in RWA.
Valuation elasticity: There is arbitrage space when stock prices fall below net asset value.
Diverse income: Includes fluctuations of underlying assets and integrates company operating cash flow.
In other words, DAT is not a passive ETF tracking coin prices but an actively managed 'coin-based capital game' by publicly listed companies.
02 The Rise of DAT: From MicroStrategy's 'all in' to the global trend of publicly listed companies.
The origin of DAT can be traced back to 2020.
At that time, the established software company MicroStrategy, under the leadership of founder Michael Saylor, decided to significantly shift the company's balance sheet towards Bitcoin. In August 2020, they spent $250 million to acquire 21,454 Bitcoins and continued to increase their holdings through issuing convertible bonds and additional stock offerings.
This strategy proved effective in a bull market:
If BTC rises by 10%, MSTR could rise by 30%-50%; the company’s stock price soared from less than $200 in 2020 to $543 in November 2024, an increase of over 3700%.
The success of MicroStrategy has led to imitation by publicly listed companies worldwide:
The Japanese listed company Metaplanet is known as 'Japan's MicroStrategy,' having repeatedly bought Bitcoin.
American listed companies like Mara Holdings and Riot Platforms have also joined in.
As of October 2025, there are 205 publicly listed companies globally that publicly trade Bitcoin, with total holdings exceeding 1.1 million coins, accounting for 5.38% of Bitcoin's circulating supply.
03 The Crisis of DAT: Why is the model no longer favored?
However, this once 'sacred' model is facing severe challenges.
1. Risk of index removal: $8.8 billion in funds may flow out.
Recently, MSCI proposed that it may remove 'digital asset treasury companies' from global investable market indices.
J.P. Morgan's analysis indicates that if realized, just MSTR alone will face $2.8 billion in passive fund selling pressure. If other indices (such as Russell) follow suit, the total outflow could reach $8.8 billion. This would undoubtedly be a fatal blow to DAT companies that rely on index funds to support liquidity.
2. Regulatory tightening: Exchanges in Hong Kong, Australia, and India are collectively resisting.
Not just the United States, but exchanges in the Asia-Pacific region are also saying 'no' to DAT.
The Hong Kong Stock Exchange has recently questioned the plans of at least five companies to transition to DAT, clearly stating that it does not support publicly listed companies transforming into pure crypto asset hoarding companies.
Exchanges in India and Australia are also tightening. The consensus among regulators is that publicly listed companies must have feasible and sustainable core businesses, rather than relying solely on hoarding coins to support valuations.
3. Premium collapse: DAT has fallen from 'faith premium' to 'discounted trading'.
The logic behind DAT companies achieving high premiums in a bull market is disintegrating.
A key indicator is mNAV (market value/net asset value of holdings). In the 2024-2025 bull market, MSTR's mNAV once reached 4-5 times, but has now fallen back to nearly 1, with some small to medium DAT companies even dropping below 1.
This means: the market is no longer willing to pay a premium for the story of 'coin hoarding'.
04 Exploring the Future of DAT: From 'coin hoarding' to 'ecosystem building'.
Despite the looming crisis, the DAT model has not ended; instead, it is moving towards differentiation and evolution under pressure.
The DAT companies that can survive in the future must complete the transformation from 'asset warehouse' to 'ecosystem engine'.
From 'dead assets' to 'living computing power'.
Companies like Hut 8 and Core Scientific are renting out the high-performance computing (HPC) of Bitcoin mining machines to AI companies (such as OpenAI and xAI), achieving annual returns of 8%-15% in USD.
Valuation models have also upgraded from 'holding coin value 1.0x' to 'holding coin value + HPC revenue premium 0.5-1.0x'.
Actively participating in Bitcoin ecosystem construction.
Including investments in Ordinals, Bitcoin Layer 2, BTCFi, and other projects.
For example, Marathon has achieved a 2-3 times valuation premium through its layout in the BTC ecosystem.
Transitioning from 'capital game' to 'open platform'.
Early DAT relied on a closed 'premium-increase-buy coins' cycle, which was fragile and highly reflexive. The new generation of DAT companies like Bitdeer attempts to introduce external funds, co-build computing power networks, and reduce single reliance on Bitcoin prices, gradually constructing platform value.
DAT has no endgame, only evolution.
The DAT model is undergoing a 'stress test'; the future winners will not be the companies hoarding the most coins but those that can transform Bitcoin into ecological value and cash flow.
Do you have confidence in the future of the DAT model? Will you invest in 'pure hoarding' or 'ecosystem' DAT companies? Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments!
▌Disclaimer:
The content of this article only represents the author's views and does not promote or endorse any business or investment behavior, nor does it serve as actual investment advice. Readers are encouraged to establish correct investment concepts and enhance risk awareness.
