Can Digital Asset Treasuries Like Strategy Survive Bitcoin’s 2025 Losses?

Low interest rates fueled this growth in the early 2020s, following the approval of 2024 exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and an increasing institutional view of Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation and currency debasement.

Strategy Inc.’s Bitcoin Accumulation Strategy Explained

Strategy scaled the digital asset treasury model faster than any other public company. 

By late December 2025, the firm had controlled 671,268 BTC, acquired at a total cost of approximately $50.33 billion, with an average purchase price of nearly $75,000 per Bitcoin.

The company funded these acquisitions through a combination of at-the-market (ATM) equity programs, convertible notes, and multiple preferred share classes, including the Strategy’s variable-rate preferred stock (STRC) series. 

This structure allowed Strategy to continue buying Bitcoin regardless of software revenue performance, effectively separating treasury expansion from operating cash flow.

While the model enabled rapid accumulation, it also increased financial risk. 

Higher leverage and shareholder dilution became central concerns as Bitcoin prices turned volatile, leaving Strategy’s balance sheet highly sensitive to market swings.

Metaplanet adopted the same accumulation-first playbook, replicating both the speed of Strategy’s expansion and the financial risks that came with it.

Metaplanet’s Rapid Bitcoin Adoption Reshaped Corporate Treasuries in Asia

Japan-based Metaplanet executed the same Bitcoin-first treasury strategy, but at a faster pace and from a much smaller starting point.

After pivoting to a Bitcoin-first strategy in 2024, the company rapidly expanded its holdings, moving from near-zero exposure to one of the largest public Bitcoin treasuries in the region.

By late December 2025, Metaplanet held 30,823 BTC, positioning it as Asia’s largest corporate Bitcoin holder and placing it among the top 10 public Bitcoin treasuries globally.

That level of exposure left little room for error once market conditions shifted.

Market Downturn Put Digital Asset Treasuries Under Pressure in 2025

In 2025, the resilience of corporate treasuries with a Bitcoin-centric focus proved to be a test. 

As Bitcoin traded in the mid-$80,000 range toward the end of the year, companies with extensive BTC holdings faced declining asset values at the same time their publicly listed shares came under sustained pressure.

For firms like Strategy and Metaplanet, falling Bitcoin prices not only reduced the market value of treasury assets. 

They also weakened investor confidence in equity structures built around continuous accumulation. 

Share prices began to reflect concerns about leverage, dilution, and long-term sustainability rather than the underlying Bitcoin thesis alone.

Heading into 2026, several structural risks are particularly notable:

• Continued price volatility: Bitcoin’s large price swings increase balance-sheet instability, making earnings visibility difficult for companies whose valuations closely track BTC.
• Leverage pressure: Debt and preferred share obligations create the risk of forced asset sales if Bitcoin prices fall sharply or refinancing conditions tighten.
• Shareholder dilution: Repeated equity raises to fund Bitcoin purchases can strain investor patience, particularly when stock prices trade at discounts to net asset value.
• Regulatory shifts: Changes in accounting standards, disclosure rules, or index inclusion criteria could materially affect how Bitcoin treasury companies operate and how markets value them.

Together, these pressures raise a central question for 2026. 

Can digital asset treasuries evolve beyond pure accumulation strategies, or will volatility and capital constraints force a rethink of the model?

How Digital Asset Treasury Models May Adapt After 2025

The market stress of 2025 is already reshaping how corporate Bitcoin treasuries operate. 

Rather than focusing solely on rapid accumulation, companies are reassessing capital structures, risk exposure, and long-term sustainability. 

Several structural adjustments may shape how digital asset treasuries attempt to stabilize and endure in 2026, such as the following:

• Separating treasury from valuation: Companies may decouple Bitcoin accumulation from day-to-day corporate valuation, reducing the frequency of capital raises and prioritizing balance-sheet durability over headline BTC totals.
• Operational use of digital assets: Firms may diversify how holdings support operations, not by moving away from Bitcoin, but by integrating digital assets into infrastructure, custody, or payment-related activities that generate limited but stable income.
• Yield as a secondary strategy: Some treasury firms have explored modest yield generation through network participation or financial services, although these initiatives remain secondary to core accumulation strategies.
• Stronger governance and disclosure: Clearer reporting on acquisition costs, leverage exposure, and dilution impact could help investors better assess downside risk and long-term sustainability.
• Higher transparency standards: Companies that adopt stricter transparency practices may retain shareholder confidence more effectively during periods of volatility.
• Regulatory and index adaptation: As accounting rules and index eligibility standards evolve, treasury firms may need to adjust corporate structures to remain attractive to institutional investors.
• Early structural alignment: Firms that adapt governance, reporting, and compliance frameworks ahead of regulatory changes may gain a competitive advantage as the market matures.

Taken together, these changes point to a clear shift in priorities. Digital asset treasuries are shifting away from expansion driven solely by accumulation and toward strategies centered on balance-sheet resilience.

What Survival Looks Like for Digital Asset Treasuries in 2026

Survival in 2026 will likely depend on whether digital asset treasury firms can move beyond a single-variable strategy tied only to Bitcoin price appreciation. 

The 2025 downturn made one point clear. Scale alone does not guarantee resilience when balance sheets depend heavily on external financing and market sentiment.

Michael Saylor continues to defend that long-term view. He has repeatedly argued that digital capital can preserve and grow corporate value because mainstream adoption has not yet occurred. 

In his assessment, Bitcoin remains early in its monetization cycle, and companies willing to endure volatility position themselves ahead of institutions that have not yet entered the market. That belief still anchors Strategy’s approach, even after deep drawdowns.

Why Conviction Alone Is No Longer Enough for Digital Asset Treasuries

Conviction will not be enough in 2026. Markets increasingly demand proof of durability. 

For companies like Strategy and Metaplanet, survival requires redefining how Bitcoin functions within a broader capital structure. 

Bitcoin can remain a long-term reserve asset, but it cannot serve as the only source of balance sheet strength during volatile market cycles.

Treasury firms must demonstrate how they can operate through extended periods of flat or declining Bitcoin prices without relying on constant capital raises. 

Investors want evidence that digital asset exposure strengthens corporate balance sheets rather than turning equities into leveraged Bitcoin substitutes.

That concern reflects a broader structural shift already taking shape in market behavior. As Bitcoin treasury strategies mature, leverage increasingly sits outside corporate balance sheets and inside equity markets themselves.

Bitcoin analyst Pierre Rochard highlighted this shift in a post, noting that future leverage tied to Bitcoin treasury companies is more likely to emerge through retail equity margin and derivatives rather than within the companies themselves, increasing the risk of equity liquidations during market stress.