The post Most digital asset treasuries are bad ETFs appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial. The cold reality is that many digital asset treasuries, or DATs, are bad exchange-traded funds. They are struggling companies trying to bump their share price and salvage their hemorrhaging balance sheets.  Summary Many digital asset treasuries resemble weak ETFs, boosting share prices with BTC buys but lacking real operations, leaving them vulnerable compared to regulated spot ETFs for BTC, ETH, and SOL. To survive, digital asset treasuries must build genuine operational advantages: become validators, diversify beyond BTC. Strategy stands out due to its ability to fund BTC purchases through equity, but most DATcos rely on debt and face higher risk; long-term winners will be those developing real expertise and sustainable participation in crypto networks, not speculators chasing short-term bumps. This story isn’t new. In 2017, spiraling companies like the infamous “Long Island Ice Tea Company” rebranded to the “Long Island Blockchain Co” and saw their stock price rocket 300 percent. Their experiment, like the many copycats they spawned, ended in disaster. In the five years since Strategy hard-launched the digital asset treasury model with an initial purchase of 21,000 Bitcoin (BTC), some 200 other DATcos have followed suit.  Many have enjoyed early share price gains, only to descend back to earth just days later. In the words of Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, “the best DATs are doing something hard.” Differentiating from ETFs with real, operational expertise to justify their equity premium over NAV.  DATs vs ETFs The U.S. has approved spot ETFs for BTC, Ethereum (ETH), and Solana (SOL). Some include staking returns for SOL and ETH, narrowing the competitive advantage of digital asset treasuries even further. To survive in the long term, digital asset treasuries must maintain… The post Most digital asset treasuries are bad ETFs appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial. The cold reality is that many digital asset treasuries, or DATs, are bad exchange-traded funds. They are struggling companies trying to bump their share price and salvage their hemorrhaging balance sheets.  Summary Many digital asset treasuries resemble weak ETFs, boosting share prices with BTC buys but lacking real operations, leaving them vulnerable compared to regulated spot ETFs for BTC, ETH, and SOL. To survive, digital asset treasuries must build genuine operational advantages: become validators, diversify beyond BTC. Strategy stands out due to its ability to fund BTC purchases through equity, but most DATcos rely on debt and face higher risk; long-term winners will be those developing real expertise and sustainable participation in crypto networks, not speculators chasing short-term bumps. This story isn’t new. In 2017, spiraling companies like the infamous “Long Island Ice Tea Company” rebranded to the “Long Island Blockchain Co” and saw their stock price rocket 300 percent. Their experiment, like the many copycats they spawned, ended in disaster. In the five years since Strategy hard-launched the digital asset treasury model with an initial purchase of 21,000 Bitcoin (BTC), some 200 other DATcos have followed suit.  Many have enjoyed early share price gains, only to descend back to earth just days later. In the words of Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, “the best DATs are doing something hard.” Differentiating from ETFs with real, operational expertise to justify their equity premium over NAV.  DATs vs ETFs The U.S. has approved spot ETFs for BTC, Ethereum (ETH), and Solana (SOL). Some include staking returns for SOL and ETH, narrowing the competitive advantage of digital asset treasuries even further. To survive in the long term, digital asset treasuries must maintain…

Most digital asset treasuries are bad ETFs

Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial.

The cold reality is that many digital asset treasuries, or DATs, are bad exchange-traded funds. They are struggling companies trying to bump their share price and salvage their hemorrhaging balance sheets. 

Summary

  • Many digital asset treasuries resemble weak ETFs, boosting share prices with BTC buys but lacking real operations, leaving them vulnerable compared to regulated spot ETFs for BTC, ETH, and SOL.
  • To survive, digital asset treasuries must build genuine operational advantages: become validators, diversify beyond BTC.
  • Strategy stands out due to its ability to fund BTC purchases through equity, but most DATcos rely on debt and face higher risk; long-term winners will be those developing real expertise and sustainable participation in crypto networks, not speculators chasing short-term bumps.

This story isn’t new. In 2017, spiraling companies like the infamous “Long Island Ice Tea Company” rebranded to the “Long Island Blockchain Co” and saw their stock price rocket 300 percent. Their experiment, like the many copycats they spawned, ended in disaster. In the five years since Strategy hard-launched the digital asset treasury model with an initial purchase of 21,000 Bitcoin (BTC), some 200 other DATcos have followed suit. 

Many have enjoyed early share price gains, only to descend back to earth just days later. In the words of Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, “the best DATs are doing something hard.” Differentiating from ETFs with real, operational expertise to justify their equity premium over NAV. 

DATs vs ETFs

The U.S. has approved spot ETFs for BTC, Ethereum (ETH), and Solana (SOL). Some include staking returns for SOL and ETH, narrowing the competitive advantage of digital asset treasuries even further. To survive in the long term, digital asset treasuries must maintain a legitimate regularity and operational advantage. Becoming core contributors and expanding their investment scope outside of top cryptocurrencies. CoreDAO, Babylon, Stax, and Hemi are examples of BTC DeFi networks that generate real yield on Bitcoin holdings. Digital asset treasuries, given their scale, can and should become full validators and earn commission from delegates, supercharging returns for their shareholders. Managing validator nodes requires a modest level of technical expertise, but it must become standard operating procedure for any digital asset treasury worth its salt. 

FUD has plagued digital asset treasuries since their inception, with some calling it the next dot-com bubble. Much of the fear springs from the lack of diversification, with BTC accounting for around 90 percent of total digital asset treasury holdings. DATcos have to actively manage their portfolio, reducing risk-concentration on BTC while increasing stable yields independent of unreliable price growth. One strategy is borrowing USDC (USDC) against BTC collateral and lending it out at interest, which can generate yields as high as nine percent. Or, for the more risk-tolerant, spot BTC can be leveraged to buy more BTC. 

Digital asset treasuries can also deliver returns as qualified dividends, which are typically subject to lower tax rates than capital gains. But this isn’t enough. Digital asset treasuries must use their core BTC and ETH assets as collateral to provide liquidity in the aforementioned DeFi and RWA marketplaces. Aside from generating yield, these products represent alternative yield and risk curves, limiting market risk when BTC experiences a sharp contraction.

But what about Strategy?

What makes Strategy successful is its ability to leverage the equity-NAV premium to finance most of its BTC buys with equity. They have done so to the tune of $50 billion+ since their inception. In 2024, Strategy accounted for 16 percent of all equity financing that year, a staggering achievement. Their ability to consistently raise capital with equity financing is itself an incredible differentiator. MSTR has created a slew of financial products that are more or less BTC collateralized with corresponding differentials in dividend and yield to appeal to a wide range of risk appetites. 

Each digital asset treasury is different, and most don’t have the MSTR advantage, meaning they have to raise most of their cash with debt and convertible notes. This makes them more vulnerable to sharp drops in price and could kick off a bloodbath that would unwind the market. But even MSTR faces significant risk, given its singular bet on BTC. As the saying goes, only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked. 

To survive, digital asset treasuries will have to move beyond being passive holders of the top three cryptocurrencies and become actual participants in the networks whose tokens they hold. Becoming validators and investing in RWAs and other tokenized assets outside of blue-chip cryptos. Depending on the expertise of the team, digital asset treasuries can leverage their large holdings to become market makers and liquidity providers on DEXs and other nascent protocols while actively participating in governance and protocol development, generating stable returns to shareholders.

The companies that will survive aren’t those chasing quick share price bumps through headline-grabbing BTC purchases. They’re the ones building genuine operational capabilities and generating sustainable yield through active participation in the crypto trenches. As time passes, the distinction between qualified operators and opportunistic speculators will become increasingly stark and unforgiving.

Wojciech Kaszycki

Wojciech Kaszycki is a fintech strategist and digital-asset infrastructure expert serving as Strategy Advisor at BTCS S.A., where he helps shape the company’s Active Treasury model. Drawing on more than 30 years of experience across fintech, blockchain, digital payments, and enterprise innovation, he guides BTCS in building compliant, yield-driven blockchain infrastructure at institutional scale. His background as the founder of Mobilum, CADV.AI, and Solert Games, combined with ACAMS certification in Cryptoasset Anti-Financial Crime, positions him at the forefront of integrating digital assets into regulated financial frameworks.

Source: https://crypto.news/most-digital-asset-treasuries-are-bad-etfs-opinion/

Market Opportunity
Bad Idea AI Logo
Bad Idea AI Price(BAD)
$0.00000000142
$0.00000000142$0.00000000142
-0.69%
USD
Bad Idea AI (BAD) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

CME Group to Launch Solana and XRP Futures Options

CME Group to Launch Solana and XRP Futures Options

The post CME Group to Launch Solana and XRP Futures Options appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. An announcement was made by CME Group, the largest derivatives exchanger worldwide, revealed that it would introduce options for Solana and XRP futures. It is the latest addition to CME crypto derivatives as institutions and retail investors increase their demand for Solana and XRP. CME Expands Crypto Offerings With Solana and XRP Options Launch According to a press release, the launch is scheduled for October 13, 2025, pending regulatory approval. The new products will allow traders to access options on Solana, Micro Solana, XRP, and Micro XRP futures. Expiries will be offered on business days on a monthly, and quarterly basis to provide more flexibility to market players. CME Group said the contracts are designed to meet demand from institutions, hedge funds, and active retail traders. According to Giovanni Vicioso, the launch reflects high liquidity in Solana and XRP futures. Vicioso is the Global Head of Cryptocurrency Products for the CME Group. He noted that the new contracts will provide additional tools for risk management and exposure strategies. Recently, CME XRP futures registered record open interest amid ETF approval optimism, reinforcing confidence in contract demand. Cumberland, one of the leading liquidity providers, welcomed the development and said it highlights the shift beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. FalconX, another trading firm, added that rising digital asset treasuries are increasing the need for hedging tools on alternative tokens like Solana and XRP. High Record Trading Volumes Demand Solana and XRP Futures Solana futures and XRP continue to gain popularity since their launch earlier this year. According to CME official records, many have bought and sold more than 540,000 Solana futures contracts since March. A value that amounts to over $22 billion dollars. Solana contracts hit a record 9,000 contracts in August, worth $437 million. Open interest also set a record at 12,500 contracts.…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:39
Pump.fun CEO to Call Low-Cap Gem to Test New ‘Callouts’ Feature — Is a 100x Incoming?

Pump.fun CEO to Call Low-Cap Gem to Test New ‘Callouts’ Feature — Is a 100x Incoming?

Pump.fun has rolled out a new social feature that is already stirring debate across Solana’s meme coin scene, after founder Alon Cohen said he would personally
Share
CryptoNews2026/01/16 06:26
Iran’s Crypto Use Reaches $7.8 Billion Amid Protests

Iran’s Crypto Use Reaches $7.8 Billion Amid Protests

Iran's crypto usage hit $7.8 billion in 2025, fueled by protests and economic instability, says Chainalysis.
Share
bitcoininfonews2026/01/16 05:51