Will ETHZilla’s $40M sell-off prove ‘bad’ for Ethereum’s rally?

ambcryptoPublished on 2025-10-27Last updated on 2025-10-28

Key Takeaways 

Why is ETHZilla dumping its ETH holdings? 

To boost its mNAV and reduce share dilution, according to the CEO.

Will it affect Ethereum’s value?

Yes, if other DATs with mNAV trading at a discount follow the same strategy.


The seventh-largest Ethereum [ETH] DAT (digital asset treasury) firm, ETHZilla Corporation (ETHZ), announced that it sold $40 million worth of ETH to fund share buybacks. 

McAndrew Rudisill, CEO of ETHZilla, said the move would help reduce share dilution and shore up mNAV. 

“By opportunistically repurchasing shares while our stock is trading below NAV, we plan to reduce the number of shares that are available for stock loan/borrow activity, while increasing the NAV per share of the Company.” 

Ethereum

Source: X

The firm added that it has a $250 million share buyback program that will be funded by selling its ETH holdings.

Following the update, ETHZ, rallied 14.5% after the update and closed on the 27th of October at $20.65. After market hours, it rose by another 14% to $ 23.50. 

Is the DAT sell-off bad for ETH?

However, the selling of the underlying ETH to fund share buybacks could be a risk to the altcoin. The trend would be “bad for coin,” claimed Charles Edwards, Founder of crypto VC Capriole Investments.

Ethereum

Source:X

He noted that DATs trading below mNAV typically have two other options — securing buyouts from peers or increasing debt.

The mNAV or Market-to-Net-Asset-Value ratio allows DATs to raise capital and buy more ETH if it trades at a premium. 

But if the mNAV is at a discount, like most DATs are at the moment (including ETHZilla), it would hamper funding and extra ETH bids.  

Ethereum

Source: Blockworks

At press time, Bit Digital [BTBT] had an mNAV of 2. Bitmine [BMNR] and GameSquare (GAME) had a reading of 1, while the rest were below 1. 

In other words, if most of the ETH DATs were to go to the ETHZilla way in the short term, the sell pressure would cap ETH’s price action. 

The DATs control 5% of the ETH supply (about 6 million ETH) while ETFs hold 5.6%. Unless ETFs absorb the sell-off, a wide DAT distress could drag the market. 

ETH price stalls at $4.2k

That said, after recovering about 12% from $3.7k last week, bulls were rebuffed at $4.2k.

The $4.2k has become a short-term supply zone and must be cleared for a meaningful advance to $4.8k or else the $3.8k support could be retested. 

Ethereum

Source: ETH/USDT, TradingView 

Share

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit2h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of S (S) are presented below.

活动图片