State of BTC Digital Asset Treasury Companies (DATs) 2025

📢 Sponsor | 💡 Telegram | 📰 Past Editions

Digital Asset Treasury Companies (DATs) have transformed from a niche experiment pioneered by MicroStrategy in 2020 into a global financial phenomenon. Public companies now collectively hold more than 1,006,000 BTC, valued at over $114.7B, alongside 1.3M ETH and growing allocations to other digital assets.

The model is simple yet powerful: raise capital when equity trades at a premium to net asset value (NAV), convert it into crypto holdings, and benefit from accretive dilution. Strategy (MSTR) remains the undisputed leader, but new entrants like Metaplanet, MARA Holdings, and Bullish have shown that the playbook can be exported internationally.

This report examines the composition of the Bitcoin DAT ecosystem, their capital strategies, valuation dispersion, criticisms, risks, and the opportunities that lie ahead. It also highlights the intermediaries profiting from the boom and the structural questions that could determine whether DATs become permanent fixtures or repeat the boom-and-bust cycles of earlier financial innovations.

Key Takeaways

• Concentration at the top: Strategy (MSTR) dominates with 638,460 BTC, over 60% of public-company holdings. The top 10 firms control 84% of all BTC in corporate treasuries.

• Global but U.S.-led: U.S. DATs hold ~825K BTC, while Japan’s Metaplanet (~20K BTC) is the only serious challenger. Hong Kong, Canada, and Europe remain small but add diversity.

• Capital-formation loop: DATs use equity premiums to issue shares and buy more crypto, creating a reflexive cycle. Premium-rich firms can accumulate faster and more efficiently.

• Premiums drive fortunes: Valuation spreads are wide. MSTR trades at a 25–30% premium to NAV, while Metaplanet once hit 179%. Smaller firms see volatile premiums tied to narrative more than treasury size.

• High risk, big upside: Premium collapse, leverage, dilution, and regulation are major risks. But even a 1% corporate cash shift into DATs could unlock $300B in demand, anchoring digital assets deeper in global markets.

Market Composition

The market for Digital Asset Treasury Companies is increasingly concentrated, with a clear hierarchy emerging between mega-holders, mid-tier firms, and niche entrants.

At the top of the pyramid sits Strategy (MSTR), which alone controls 638,460 BTC, more than 60% of all BTC held by public companies. This concentration gives Strategy systemic influence over both equity-market sentiment toward Bitcoin and the credibility of the DAT model itself. To put this into perspective, Strategy now holds nearly as much BTC as all Canadian-listed treasuries combined.

The second tier consists of MARA Holdings (52,477 BTC), XXI (43,514 BTC), Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (30,021 BTC), and Bullish (24,000 BTC). These firms are significant players in their own right, but each represents less than 10% of Strategy’s treasury size. The presence of Trump Media (15,000 BTC) and CleanSpark (12,703 BTC) illustrates how companies outside the core “crypto-native” sector are entering the DAT arena to capture market premiums.

Metaplanet, with 20,136 BTC, stands out as a geographic pioneer. Branded as “Japan’s MicroStrategy,” it has shown that the model is exportable and resonates with retail and institutional investors abroad.

Together these top ten companies control nearly 848,000 BTC, representing 84% of all Bitcoin held by public treasuries.

Below this, a long tail of more than 150 companies hold less than 5,000 BTC each. These smaller players often operate with high equity premiums relative to NAV, reflecting more narrative-driven investor bases. Collectively, they represent diversification of the model but little systemic heft.

DATs vs. Broader BTC-Holding Entities

It’s important to differentiate DATs from the wider universe of BTC holders. DATs are public companies that make accumulation their core business strategy. They are distinct from:

• ETFs and Funds (44 entities): Passive investment vehicles like BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust or Grayscale’s GBTC, which together hold over 1.6M BTC.

• Governments (12 entities): Sovereign treasuries such as El Salvador (~6,300 BTC) or Ukraine (~46,000 BTC) that integrate Bitcoin into reserves.

• Private Companies (65 entities): Firms like Block.one or Tether that maintain large BTC reserves but are not structured as public DATs.

• DeFi Protocols (11 entities): Smart contract-based holdings such as wrapped BTC (WBTC) or other tokenized reserves.

Altogether, 325 entities now hold BTC in treasuries, amounting to 3.71M BTC (~17.7% of circulating supply). Public companies, including DATs, account for just over 1M BTC of this total. The difference is that DATs are not incidental holders, they are equity vehicles designed to maximize exposure, using capital markets as leverage to acquire more.

Geographic Distribution

The DAT model is global but heavily concentrated in a few regions. Based on the top 100 public BTC treasuries, US firms dominate by a wide margin, while Japan has established itself as the leading international hub.

• United States: DATs in the US collectively hold ~825,000 BTC, representing more than 80% of all BTC in corporate treasuries. The depth of U.S. capital markets and investor familiarity with equity-linked BTC exposure have made the U.S. the center of gravity for the model.

• Japan: Japanese DATs hold ~24,700 BTC, almost entirely driven by Metaplanet’s aggressive accumulation strategy. Japan has shown that the DAT playbook can be exported successfully to Asia.
  Hong Kong: DATs in Hong Kong collectively control ~5,000 BTC. While small in absolute terms, the city’s pro-crypto policy stance positions it as a symbolic gateway for Asia.

• Canada: Public companies in Canada collectively hold ~15,500 BTC, but most are miners rather than pure treasury companies. DAT-style firms make up only a fraction of this number.

• Europe: Across Germany, France, the UK, and a handful of smaller markets, DAT-style firms account for ~10,500 BTC. These companies are small relative to their U.S. and Japanese peers, but provide diversification.

In total, US firms account for the overwhelming majority of BTC held by DATs, with Japan standing out as the only serious international challenger. Hong Kong and Europe add regional diversity but remain marginal in scale.

Capital Strategies

DATs are not simply holding companies; they are capital formation machines. The defining feature of the model is its reliance on equity-market premiums to finance further accumulation.

At-the-Market Programs (ATMs): These allow DATs to issue shares gradually at market prices. When shares trade at a premium to NAV, ATMs are accretive, buying more crypto per share than they dilute. Metaplanet has exemplified this strategy, raising capital opportunistically during equity rallies and translating proceeds directly into BTC purchases. This creates a reflexive loop: higher share prices lead to more efficient accumulation, which drives further investor demand.

PIPEs (Private Investments in Public Equity): PIPEs are favored by smaller firms or those with limited liquidity. While they provide fast access to capital, they usually come with discounts to market price, resulting in immediate dilution. Firms like Nakamoto Holdings and SharpLink Gaming have leaned heavily on PIPEs, accepting dilution risk in exchange for speed. In volatile markets, this can be dangerous, as PIPE investors often exit aggressively when lockups expire.

Convertibles and Preferred Stock: Strategy has repeatedly used convertible bonds and preferred offerings to raise billions. These instruments appeal to institutional buyers who want downside protection while capturing upside if equity premiums persist. MARA’s $950M convertible note issue is a recent example, reflecting the continued appetite of capital markets to back the DAT model.

Debt Issuance: Some DATs have experimented with secured lending or traditional bond issuance, but debt-heavy strategies can backfire in downturns if Bitcoin prices retrace sharply. Strategy’s early debt-funded purchases at BTC prices below $30K proved highly accretive, but replicating that success in today’s environment of $110K+ BTC is far riskier.

What distinguishes DATs from ETFs is not just their ability to raise capital, but their discretion in when and how to do so. ETFs are passive vehicles; DATs are active, strategic issuers. This difference is central to both their appeal and their vulnerability.

Valuation and Premiums

The equity premiums applied to DATs are one of the most controversial and defining features of the model. These premiums reflect investor willingness to pay above the market value of underlying crypto holdings, effectively capitalizing the company’s ability to continue growing its treasury.

• Strategy: Typically trades at a 25–30% premium to NAV, down from peaks above 50% earlier in the year. Its scale and transparency make it a relatively stable benchmark.

• Metaplanet: At one point reached a 179% premium to NAV. Investors perceive its capital-formation loop as uniquely powerful, and its aggressive communication strategy has helped sustain demand.

• Ethereum DATs: Often trade at premiums exceeding 100%. This reflects the fact that NAV understates the value of staking yield, which provides a built-in growth vector.

• Smaller players: Premiums are more volatile and can be driven by branding or ecosystem signaling. Tron Inc., for instance, trades at a 64% premium largely because of alignment with the TRON blockchain narrative, not because of treasury scale.

Premium dispersion is not just a curiosity, it has structural consequences. Companies trading at high premiums can raise capital more efficiently, creating a reinforcing cycle. Conversely, firms stuck at low or negative premiums struggle to raise capital and risk being sidelined or acquired.

Risks

The DAT model introduces structural risks that could amplify volatility across both equity and crypto markets.

• Premium Collapse: The central vulnerability. Without equity premiums, capital formation stops. Some DATs already trade near or below NAV, raising the specter of forced buybacks instead of new accumulation.

• Leverage Exposure: Debt-financed purchases magnify downside risk. A 30–50% drawdown in BTC could force distressed sales or defaults among the most aggressive issuers.

• Dilution Fatigue: Overuse of ATMs or PIPEs risks eroding investor trust, especially if NAV-per-share accretion slows.

• Regulatory Intervention: Accounting standards were a tailwind in 2023 when fair-value treatment was approved, but new rules on staking, equity issuance, or disclosure could easily reverse sentiment.

• Concentration Risk: Strategy’s 638,460 BTC position makes the ecosystem dependent on a single firm’s governance, balance sheet, and investor sentiment.

• Macro Risk: DATs are highly sensitive to capital-market liquidity. In a risk-off environment, equity demand evaporates, breaking the accumulation loop.

Opportunities

Despite the risks, DATs open up one of the largest untapped sources of demand for crypto: the trillions in corporate cash reserves sitting in traditional financial assets.

• Corporate Cash Allocation: Even a modest 1% shift of global corporate cash (~$31T) into DAT structures would add $300B of demand for Bitcoin and Ethereum.

• Yield Strategies: Ethereum and proof-of-stake assets allow treasuries to generate non-dilutive returns, expanding the toolkit beyond simple accumulation.

• Mergers and Acquisitions: Premium-rich firms like Strategy and Metaplanet could acquire NAV-discount peers, effectively buying Bitcoin below spot price. This dynamic could lead to sector consolidation and more efficient capital allocation.

• International Growth: Japan’s Metaplanet and Hong Kong’s Boyaa Interactive show that the model resonates beyond the US. As regulatory clarity improves, Europe, Southeast Asia, and Latin America may see a surge in DAT adoption.

• Ecosystem Economics: The DAT boom supports custodians, asset managers, and brokers, creating a new financial-services vertical that generates steady fee revenue regardless of market cycles.

In the optimistic scenario, DATs become a structural pillar of the Bitcoin market, creating consistent buy pressure and anchoring digital assets firmly within global capital markets.

Companies Cashing in on Corporate Treasuries

The beneficiaries of the DAT boom are not limited to equity investors. A parallel ecosystem of service providers has emerged, profiting from custody, trading, lending, and advisory roles.

• Custodians: BitGo, Coinbase, and Anchorage now oversee tens of billions in DAT-held crypto, charging 10–30 bps annually. BitGo surpassed $100B in assets under custody in mid-2025.

• Banks and brokers: Morgan Stanley, Cantor Fitzgerald, and Barclays have reaped tens of millions underwriting DAT convertible and preferred offerings.

• Asset managers and lenders: Firms like Maple Finance, Wave Digital, and Galaxy provide staking and lending overlays, charging 25–50 bps for treasury management services.

• Prime brokers and exchanges: FalconX, Cumberland, and Coinbase Institutional profit from steady DAT-driven token purchase flows.

For now, the most consistent winners of the DAT boom are these intermediaries, whose fee-based business models capture value regardless of whether DAT shareholders profit.

Our Take

DATs are best understood as leveraged equity wrappers for Bitcoin and Ethereum. They have provided a compliant, liquid avenue for institutions restricted from holding crypto directly, while also reshaping capital-market dynamics around digital assets.

• In the bull case, DATs continue to expand their holdings past 1.2M BTC by 2026, fueled by high premiums and abundant liquidity.

• In the bear case, premiums collapse, issuance halts, and the trade unwinds, forcing consolidation.

• The base case points to slower but steady growth, with hybrid DATs pairing treasury strategies with operating businesses to sustain credibility.

For now, DATs remain in their expansionary phase. They are reshaping how corporate balance sheets interact with digital assets, but their sustainability depends on whether equity investors continue rewarding the capital-formation loop.

If you enjoy reading this issue, please consider subscribing. It takes 1 minute of your time but it would mean the world to us 🙇

Disclaimer: All the information presented in this publication and its affiliates is strictly for educational purposes only. It should not be construed or taken as financial, legal, investment, or any other form of advice.