Satsight / SSC-RN-2026-015
Satsight · Market Note
Bitcoin treasury companies: capital structure, not holdings, decides who owns the bitcoin
The seniority of the claims stacked ahead of common stock — set by both strategy and jurisdiction — matters more than how much bitcoin a company holds.
What you need to know
A “bitcoin treasury company” is not really an operating business; it is a machine for converting capital-markets access into bitcoin per share. In 2026 the three leading examples — Strategy (Nasdaq: MSTR), Strive (Nasdaq: ASST) and Metaplanet (TSE: 3350) — all flipped from a premium to a discount to the value of their bitcoin, and the model only compounds value above parity. Once you account for the debt and preferred stock that rank ahead of common shareholders, the apparent hierarchy inverts: the largest, most sophisticated balance sheet is not the safest, and the most-constrained company leaves common holders the cleanest claim. Figures are point-in-time as of 3 July 2026 and move weekly.
Key findings
- The sector-wide premium has gone. By mid-2026 Strategy (847,363 BTC), Metaplanet (43,000 BTC) and Strive (~19,900 BTC) all trade below the value of their bitcoin, and all three sit beneath their average cost. The bull-market flywheel only spins above ~1.0× mNAV.
- Differences run on two distinct axes. Strategic: Strategy and Strive are both US-listed with the same toolkit but opposite choices — four funding rails versus one. Jurisdictional: Metaplanet operates in Japan, where the rules forbid the US preferred-stock playbook and a NISA tax shelter creates retail demand no US issuer can replicate.
- After senior claims, common owns far less bitcoin than the headline implies. “Claims drag” is ~50% at Strive, ~37% at Strategy and ~17% at Metaplanet — so preferred stock, not size, drives the drag, and the company barred from preferred (Metaplanet) gives common the cleanest claim (~83% of the bitcoin).CEBE (Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure) framework: (CEBE, Bobby Tierney, cebetracker.io, January 2026). Figures in this note were computed by Satscryption from company filings. They are not taken from CEBE Tracker.
- Strategy's credit rail is visibly stressed. Its variable-rate preferred STRC has slid to ~$87 (≈13% below par) by early July; on 29 June Strategy unveiled a “Digital Credit Capital Framework” — USD Reserve raised to $2.55bn, STRC dividend lifted to 12%, buybacks of both preferred and common, and a bitcoin-monetisation program (up to $1.25bn) — while pausing bitcoin purchases. It had already made its first bitcoin sale since 2022 in late May.
- The decisive question for an allocator is no longer “how much bitcoin?” but “what sits in front of the common shareholder?” Scale and financial sophistication are not the same as resilience.
Recommendations
Investors and corporate-development leaders evaluating bitcoin-treasury equities should:
- Read mNAV and claims drag together, never holdings alone — ask what debt and preferred rank ahead of common before crediting a company with its full bitcoin reserve.
- Treat the preferred-dividend obligation (on the order of US$1.5–1.7bn/yr at Strategy) as a fixed cash liability that bites hardest precisely when markets are weakest.
- Separate strategic from jurisdictional differences: the first are changeable choices, the second are structural. Do not benchmark Metaplanet as a smaller Strategy — it is competing for a different (tax-sheltered, domestic-retail) pool of capital.
- Be willing not to pay up for scale. In a discount regime the smaller, more constrained issuer can offer the cleaner economic claim on the underlying asset.
Strategic planning assumptions
These are Satscryption's analytical projections, not measured data or guarantees.
- By end-2026, if bitcoin stays below treasury-company cost bases, sector-wide claims drag rises further as preferred stacks grow faster than bitcoin holdings, widening the gap between headline “bitcoin per share” and what common equity actually owns.
- Through 2027, “stable” variable-rate preferreds (e.g. STRC, SATA) will repeatedly trade away from par in stressed conditions, making them an unreliable funding rail below NAV and forcing issuers toward buybacks, asset sales or dormancy.
- By 2027, jurisdiction-specific structures — most visibly Japan's NISA-driven retail demand — will produce persistent valuation divergence between US and non-US treasury companies that is largely independent of bitcoin's own price.
Get the full note
The full 14-page sector report — Strategy, Strive and Metaplanet side by side: the flywheel, the two axes, the CEBE test, and the 2026 stress test, with sources and methodology.
- Analysis — The model: a flywheel governed by one number
- Analysis — Why now: a sector-wide regime change
- Analysis — How it differs: two axes
- Analysis — What common actually owns (the CEBE lens; framework: CEBE, Bobby Tierney, cebetracker.io, January 2026)
- Analysis — Where it works, and where it does not
- Analysis — Adoption and maturity
- Analysis — Risks and caveats
- Analysis — Guidance for evaluation
- Evidence — 6 primary-sourced items
- Acronyms and full sourcing
✓ You're on the Satsight list — check your inbox to confirm your subscription.
⬇ Download the full note (PDF)
Delivered with a Satsight subscription. No spam; unsubscribe anytime. The film and this summary stay free.
Correction and credit — October 2026
The CEBE (Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure) framework used in this note is the work of Bobby Tierney: (CEBE, Bobby Tierney, cebetracker.io, January 2026). Earlier versions did not credit it. We have also corrected our description of the framework in the full note: CEBE carries preferred stock at its accrued liquidation preference, not at par. For each of Strategy's five preferred series, the liquidation preference reported at 30 June 2026 equalled the stated amount. We have revised our description of the “Spread” to remove the characterisation of it as a forecast. These corrections do not change the CEBE figures. We have also aligned this page's figures to the full note's 3 July 2026 basis. Figures were computed by Satscryption from company filings and remain dated; verify against primary filings.
About this note. This research note is produced by Satscryption in an independent technology-analyst format. Strategic Planning Assumptions are Satscryption's analytical projections, not measured data or guarantees. All figures and market observations are point-in-time as of 3 July 2026 and should be re-verified before reliance. Company mentions are illustrative and do not constitute endorsement. This note does not constitute legal, security or investment advice.