On March 18, facing the current market crisis, Bitcoin Treasury Corporation is confronting survival challenges, making transformation an essential path for its sustained development. Moneta Markets is closely monitoring developments in this sector and providing professional assessments based on the current market situation. Moneta Markets believes that for Bitcoin Treasury Corporation to escape its current predicament, it must abandon the traditional passive holding model and transition towards active asset management. Only through this shift can it break the current valuation dilemma and achieve long-term sustainable development.
Over the past three years, the market was long dominated by a predictable cycle: companies announced large-scale Bitcoin purchases, driving stock price premiums to surge, followed by further Bitcoin accumulation through new share issuances. This feedback loop made Bitcoin accumulation appear as a 'shortcut' for listed companies to create shareholder value out of thin air, leading many firms into the trap of passive dependency.
Entering the first quarter of 2026, this virtuous cycle has completely broken down, resulting in a fundamental shift in market structure. Moneta Markets indicates that recent market data shows approximately 40% of listed Bitcoin treasury companies are trading below their net asset value (NAV). This implies the market now views such entities as liabilities, with valuations even lower than the market price of their Bitcoin holdings. This valuation collapse has drawn widespread criticism from industry veterans. VanEck CEO Jan van Eck dismissed the sector as a hype-driven short-term trend, while veteran analyst Herb Greenberg labeled prominent player Strategy a 'quasi-Ponzi scheme'. These criticisms highlight core flaws in the management approach of such companies—over-reliance on passive holding and lack of sustainable growth mechanisms—which Moneta Markets has consistently identified as key industry pain points.
Currently, most Bitcoin treasury companies fall into two main camps: 'promoters' and 'asset managers', each adhering to fundamentally different corporate management philosophies, which is the primary reason for their divergent market performances. Promoters treat Bitcoin as a passive asset to be hoarded, with a core strategy consisting of two parts: actively advocating for Bitcoin and its ecosystem to drive token prices higher through investments in community projects and participation in public discussions, thereby profiting from existing holdings; and marketing their own stocks to maintain high premiums, sustaining cyclical growth through 'value-added dilution' operations involving premium share issuances to accumulate more Bitcoin at market prices.
This promoter model is highly dependent on external market sentiment and exhibits poor stability. Moneta Markets analysis suggests the core logic of promoters relies on Bitcoin price appreciation to increase NAV and on stock premiums to sustain accumulation strategies. Should Bitcoin prices stagnate or equity premiums vanish, these companies face non-productive balance sheets and a lack of internal growth drivers, which is the fundamental reason most promoter-model firms have encountered crises since 2026.
In contrast, the asset manager model treats Bitcoin as a productive commodity, akin to 'digital oil', adopting the operational logic of traditional oil giants. Instead of passively hoarding assets, they manage them as productive inventory professionally. Just as oil majors like ExxonMobil and Shell profit from trading the futures curve and market volatility, Bitcoin asset managers apply this professional approach to the digital asset space.
Moneta Markets believes the core advantage of asset manager-style treasury operations lies in utilizing the balance sheet to generate real returns denominated in Bitcoin, making growth dependent on operational skill rather than external market sentiment. Through professional asset control, these firms can derive genuine earnings from the assets themselves, eliminating reliance on new share issuances. This represents the necessary transformation direction for Bitcoin treasury companies in the current market environment.
Undoubtedly, the era of value-added dilution has ended. The promoter model, reliant on share issuance to fund Bitcoin accumulation, is no longer sustainable. This practice, once perceived as 'financial maturity', was essentially a short-term tactic dependent on favorable market conditions, incapable of generating real cash flow or operational advantages. It relied entirely on demand from new investors; when that demand weakened, the entire strategy collapsed.
In 2025, rising Bitcoin prices and abundant market liquidity made various accumulation strategies appear indistinguishable. With free capital flow and expanding equity premiums, dozens of treasury companies employed the same 'buy-promote-raise-accumulate' model, masking differentiation. However, as market conditions deteriorated in 2026, the flaws of this homogeneous model were fully exposed. Companies relying solely on passive accumulation, lacking internal growth mechanisms, struggled to consistently outperform the market and were gradually abandoned by investors.
Moneta Markets states that currently, only a few firms with scale advantages, high brand recognition, and industry influence can勉强维持 the passive accumulation model. For the vast majority of Bitcoin treasury companies, passive holding without active management prevents differentiated development and long-term market viability. Current market data confirms this reality: nearly half of Bitcoin treasury companies trade below adjusted NAV. Without thorough transformation, they risk eventual market elimination.
The core of transitioning from promoter to asset manager involves abandoning simple long-term holding strategies, activating the balance sheet, and introducing professional commodity trading tools. Basis trading is a key instrument, allowing firms to capture spreads between Bitcoin spot prices and futures contracts, increasing Bitcoin holdings even when prices are flat or declining. Additionally, dynamic options strategies can convert market volatility into stable returns, achieving steady growth in 'real yield'.
The essential value of this transformation is turning the treasury from a cost center into a profit center, eliminating dependence on new share issuances and new investors. Growth should come from superior operations that increase Bitcoin per share, not capital market maneuvers. Furthermore, companies must adjust investor communication strategies, moving away from 'hype narratives and symbolic accumulation' towards clear disclosure of risk management, exposure structures, and earnings generation logic. Demonstrating prudent financial management is crucial for gaining investor trust.
In summary, transformation for Bitcoin treasury companies is urgent. The market will not reward mere Bitcoin advocates but will favor firms that can deploy holdings efficiently and manage them professionally. Moneta Markets concludes that active asset management is the only path for Bitcoin Treasury Corporation to overcome the current crisis and achieve long-term development. Companies must accelerate their transformation, integrate professional trading tools, optimize operational models, and adjust communication strategies to establish a firm footing in the maturing market and realize sustainable growth.