.
Nurphoto | Getty Images
The phrase “digital‑asset treasury” (often abbreviated as DAT or DATCO) has become one of the most talked‑about concepts in the cryptocurrency space this year. These publicly listed entities hold crypto assets such as Bitcoin or Ether on their balance sheets and sell shares to give investors exposure to the underlying tokens. In theory, a DAT can generate returns that exceed the spot price movement of the crypto it owns.
Recent market weakness, however, has put these firms under the microscope. Critics argue that the rapid proliferation of DATs could intensify price pressure on an already fragile crypto market.
What is a DAT?
A digital‑asset treasury is a corporation that purchases and retains cryptocurrencies directly on its books. Shareholders gain indirect ownership of the digital assets through equity in the company.
The model was popularized by Michael Saylor’s firm, which began buying Bitcoin in 2020 and has continued to add to its holdings. Since then, the landscape has exploded. In 2021, fewer than ten companies reported holding Bitcoin in treasury; that figure has risen to roughly 190, with an additional 10‑20 firms focusing on alternative digital assets, according to a recent legal‑industry survey.
Collectively, these DATs control roughly $100 billion worth of crypto, based on data from The Block.
Why do DATs exist?
The surge in DATs is driven by three forces: buoyant crypto valuations, a more permissive regulatory tone in the United States, and investor demand for a regulated pathway to digital‑asset exposure. At the same time, the market now offers several alternative routes—including direct purchases on exchanges and regulated exchange‑traded funds (ETFs) that track crypto prices.
DATs differentiate themselves by seeking to outperform the assets they hold. Unlike passive ETFs, which mirror the price of Bitcoin or Ether on a one‑to‑one basis, DATs can employ active strategies—such as capital‑raising programs, staking, or on‑chain yield generation—to enhance returns.
Should any of the key variables — investor sentiment, crypto prices, or capital‑market liquidity — falter, the DATCO model could unravel.
Industry analysts argue that DATs provide regulatory clarity. By packaging crypto holdings within a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)‑registered security, they inherit the same reporting standards, disclosures, and investor protections as any listed equity.
For institutional investors constrained by fiduciary mandates or internal compliance rules, DATs offer a pragmatic alternative to direct token ownership or crypto‑focused ETFs.
DAT strategies
DATs leverage a suite of tools unavailable to most ETFs. One common approach is an at‑the‑market (ATM) equity program. When a company’s share price trades above the net asset value (NAV) of its crypto holdings, it can issue new shares at a premium, raise cash, and then purchase additional tokens. This creates an accretive feedback loop: higher share prices fund more acquisitions, which in turn lift per‑share NAV and potentially widen the premium.
Staking represents another growth lever. By locking tokens into proof‑of‑stake networks, a DAT earns yield in the form of additional coins. Because the unstaking process can take weeks, this strategy is better suited to firms with longer‑term capital horizons than to ETF providers that must preserve liquidity.
The yield generated from staking can be redeployed across a range of initiatives—mergers and acquisitions, further token purchases, on‑chain venture opportunities, or shareholder distributions—adding a layer of operational flexibility to the business model.
What happens when the market plunges?
Crypto’s recent correction—marked by a steep decline in Bitcoin from its all‑time highs—has driven many DATs’ market‑adjusted NAV (mNAV) below 1.0, meaning the equity trades at a discount to the underlying token balance.
When the premium evaporates, DATs face a narrowed set of options. Some may view the dip as a buying opportunity and hold their positions, while others—especially those that have taken on debt or issued convertible securities—may be forced to liquidate part of their holdings to meet liquidity needs.
Equity issuance also becomes dilutive in a discount environment. New shares no longer increase token‑per‑share exposure; instead, they dilute existing shareholders, potentially breaking the self‑reinforcing cycle that sustains a premium.
Will DATs affect crypto prices?
Should a wave of DATs be compelled to sell tokens to shore up balance sheets, the added supply could exacerbate price volatility in an already thin market. Although DAT holdings currently represent less than 1 % of global crypto capitalization, the sector’s rapid expansion could amplify its impact over time.
Analysts warn that an unwind of large corporate treasuries would erode a key narrative supporting mainstream adoption: the normalization of digital assets on public balance sheets. This could dampen institutional appetite for crypto ETFs, slow inflows, and pressure token valuations.
Has the DAT bubble burst?
The consensus among market observers is that the DAT space is experiencing a correction. Many firms now trade at mNAVs below parity, reflecting investor concerns that they may be forced to liquidate assets under adverse market conditions.
Nevertheless, there is a view that the model will evolve. Companies that diversify beyond a single token, generate on‑chain yield, and blend crypto exposure with traditional cash or Treasury‑bill holdings could emerge as sustainable digital‑asset infrastructure players.
Original article, Author: Tobias. If you wish to reprint this article, please indicate the source:https://aicnbc.com/13925.html
