Strategy, the company once widely known as MicroStrategy, has entered one of the most uncomfortable chapters in its long and controversial relationship with the public markets. By the final days of December, its stock had slid to a fresh yearly low, closing at $155.32 after a broad technology-led sell-off on the 29th wiped another 2.15% from its value. That price point was more than just another red candle on the chart. It marked a stark contrast to the optimism that surrounded the stock less than a year earlier, when it was trading as high as $543 and was often cited as one of the most aggressive corporate expressions of confidence in Bitcoin.
From that 2024 peak, Strategy’s stock has now fallen by roughly 71%, erasing hundreds of billions in market capitalization and leaving behind a trail of bruised long-term holders and vindicated short sellers. For many Wall Street bears, this decline represented a near-perfect trade. Those who positioned early and stayed disciplined were able to ride the stock down through multiple failed rebounds. Even when some of those bearish players began to unwind short positions in November to lock in profits, the selling pressure never truly disappeared. The stock continued to grind lower, eventually finding itself back inside the same $100 to $180 range that defined much of its trading behavior in 2024.
What makes this decline particularly striking is that it unfolded against a backdrop of continued conviction from the company itself. Strategy has not wavered in its core narrative: Bitcoin remains the superior long-term store of value, and the firm’s role is to accumulate as much of it as possible using every available financial instrument. In 2025 alone, Strategy spent an estimated $22.5 billion acquiring Bitcoin, nearly half of the more than $50 billion it has invested in BTC since first adopting its Bitcoin-centric treasury strategy in 2020. This was not a defensive posture. It was an escalation.
Yet the market’s response has been far from enthusiastic. One of the most closely watched signals during this period was the firm’s shifting stance on dilution. Earlier, Strategy had stated it would not sell common stock if its multiple to net asset value, or mNAV, fell below 2.5x. That threshold was later revised downward to 1x, a move that raised eyebrows across both equity and crypto-focused investor circles. To many, it signaled that management was willing to tolerate significant shareholder dilution in order to continue accumulating Bitcoin, even if the stock itself was trading at or below the value of the firm’s underlying assets.
This concern became more tangible as the months progressed. According to analyst Novacula Occami, Strategy issued roughly $4.9 billion in common stock following its July announcement, with about $4 billion of that issuance occurring while the stock was trading at a common mNAV below 1. In plain terms, the company was selling shares at prices that implied the market valued its Bitcoin holdings and operating business less than their book value. That kind of move is difficult to defend in traditional equity analysis, and it added persistent pressure to an already fragile stock.
The most recent Bitcoin purchase, totaling around $108 million, was funded entirely through MSTR stock sales, reinforcing the perception that dilution had become a primary funding mechanism. Combined with preferred stock offerings and debt issuance, Strategy has leaned heavily on capital markets to fuel its Bitcoin accumulation. As of now, the company controls an extraordinary 672,497 BTC, making it one of the largest single holders of Bitcoin in the world. That position is both its greatest strength and its greatest vulnerability.
Another factor weighing on sentiment has been the growing discussion around a potential MSCI index delisting. Over the past several weeks, this risk has moved from a fringe concern to a central talking point among institutional investors. Strategy, along with other crypto-focused treasury firms, faces scrutiny over whether it still qualifies as an operational company under MSCI’s inclusion criteria or whether its Bitcoin-heavy balance sheet fundamentally changes its classification.
Michael Saylor, Strategy’s founder and executive chairman, has been vocal in defending the company’s status. He has argued that Strategy remains an operating business with software roots and that its Bitcoin strategy is an extension of capital allocation, not a replacement for core operations. Despite these assurances, market skepticism has grown. Prediction markets reflected this uncertainty, with Polymarket pricing a greater than 75% chance of an MSCI delisting by early 2026 at one point.
The potential consequences of such a move are not trivial. JPMorgan analysts have warned that an MSCI delisting could trigger as much as $8 billion in forced outflows as index-tracking funds are compelled to sell their holdings. For a stock already under pressure, that kind of mechanical selling could exacerbate volatility and push prices even lower. Some commentators went further, speculating that a delisting could eventually force Strategy to liquidate a portion of its Bitcoin holdings. While expectations for a large-scale BTC sell-off remained low, the mere possibility added another layer of uncertainty to the narrative.
All eyes now turn to MSCI’s decision, expected in mid-January, which could serve as a defining moment for the stock’s near-term trajectory. A decision in Strategy’s favor might relieve some of the pressure and stabilize sentiment, while an unfavorable outcome could validate the bears’ thesis and usher in another wave of selling.
What makes this entire situation more complex is the sharp contrast between market behavior and analyst opinion. Despite the brutal sell-off throughout the second half of 2025, Wall Street analysts have not abandoned the stock. Over the past month alone, there have been 13 buy ratings issued on MSTR, with price targets ranging from $465 to $485. These targets imply an upside of roughly 170% to 200% from current levels, a striking vote of confidence given the stock’s recent performance.
This divergence highlights the philosophical divide at the heart of the Strategy debate. For critics, the company represents an extreme form of financial engineering, one that exposes shareholders to asymmetric downside through dilution, leverage, and dependence on a single volatile asset. From this perspective, the stock’s collapse is not surprising but inevitable, a delayed reaction to years of aggressive risk-taking finally being repriced by the market.
Supporters, on the other hand, see Strategy as a leveraged proxy for Bitcoin adoption, one that is still early in a long-term transformation of global finance. They argue that short-term price action obscures the larger picture: a finite asset being accumulated by a public company with access to deep capital markets and a leadership team willing to think in decades rather than quarters. To them, the current price range represents an opportunity rather than a warning.
There is also a psychological dimension to this story that is easy to overlook. Strategy’s rise and fall has been closely tied to broader sentiment around Bitcoin itself. During periods of euphoria, the stock often traded at a significant premium to its underlying Bitcoin holdings, reflecting optimism about future gains and admiration for Saylor’s bold vision. In more cautious environments, that premium has evaporated, replaced by scrutiny and doubt. The compression of the mNAV multiple tells a story not just about balance sheets, but about trust.
As 2025 draws to a close, Strategy finds itself at a crossroads. The stock is trading near yearly lows, dilution concerns remain unresolved, and the threat of index exclusion looms large. At the same time, the company holds one of the most formidable Bitcoin positions in existence, and a sizable portion of the analyst community continues to see massive upside potential.
Whether Strategy’s next chapter is defined by recovery or further decline will likely depend on a combination of factors: the outcome of the MSCI decision, the direction of Bitcoin itself, and management’s ability to balance accumulation with shareholder confidence. What is clear is that this is no longer a simple story of a software company buying Bitcoin. It has evolved into a complex experiment at the intersection of corporate finance, market psychology, and digital asset adoption.
For investors watching from the sidelines, Strategy offers a case study in conviction taken to its extreme. It raises uncomfortable questions about how far a company should go in pursuit of a single thesis, and how markets ultimately reward or punish that kind of focus. The coming months will not just determine the stock’s price, but may also shape how future companies think about holding Bitcoin on their balance sheets.
At $155, Strategy is a shadow of its former market self, yet still a titan in terms of Bitcoin ownership. That contradiction captures the essence of where it stands today: deeply discounted by the equity market, but unwavering in its belief that time will eventually vindicate its strategy. Whether that belief proves visionary or reckless remains one of the most compelling stories unfolding at the edge of traditional finance and the crypto economy.
