加密货币炙手可热的股票交易显示出降温迹象

深潮Published on 2025-08-10Last updated on 2025-08-11

今年迄今为止,美国上市公司已宣布计划筹集超过 910 亿美元用于购买比特币和其他加密货币。

撰文:Yueqi Yang

编译:Block unicorn

像迈克尔·塞勒的 Strategy 这样主要持有比特币等加密货币的公司股票市场正在出现裂痕。这些股票成为投资者投机比特币以及最近一些更奇特的加密货币的一种非常流行的方式。

Strategy 以及其他公司(包括比特币持有者 Semler Scientific 和 Solana 持有者 Upexi)的估值均有所下降,而持有投机性代币较多的公司估值则大幅下跌,有些甚至跌破了其持有的加密货币的价值。这些公司的结构以及其中一些公司使用的杠杆意味着抛售可能会迅速加速。

Galaxy Digital 全球资产管理负责人史蒂夫·库尔茨表示:「市场有些疲惫的迹象。我不认为它已经失去了动力。未来将会出现差异化,不同垂直领域将出现赢家通吃的局面。」

Strategy 等全球超过 160 只此类股票现被称为加密货币库存股,允许投资者在不直接购买代币的情况下获得加密货币敞口。在这方面,它们类似于自 2024 年初在美国推出以来变得流行的加密货币交易所交易基金(ETF)。

尽管 Strategy 多年来一直在购买比特币,但飙升的加密货币价格引发了新产品的热潮。根据加密咨询公司 Architect Partners 的数据,今年迄今为止,美国上市公司已宣布计划筹集超过 910 亿美元用于购买比特币和其他加密货币。

Dealogic 的数据显示,这远远超过了今年美国公司通过首次公开募股筹集的 380 亿美元。与此同时,今年私募股权和私募信贷的筹资活动有所放缓。

加密基金 Pantera 的普通合伙人科斯莫·江表示:「这些数字资产工具已经从其他所有领域中抢走了风头。这几乎是人们唯一讨论的事情。」今年 Pantera 已向超过 10 只加密货币库存股投资了数亿美元。

大型投资者仍在向这些工具注入资金。据知情人士透露,由肯·格里芬创立的对冲基金 Citadel 是积极考虑投资精选加密货币库存股的公司之一。亿万富翁投资者斯坦利·德鲁肯米勒和凯西·伍德的 Ark Invest 最近投资了以太坊库存股 BitMine,这在一份文件和公告中有所体现。

Citadel 的代表拒绝置评。

放缓的迹象在观察 Strategy(前身为 MicroStrategy)的股票时显而易见。作为加密货币库存市场的先驱,Strategy 现持有价值 730 亿美元的比特币。5 月,其股票交易价格为其持有比特币价值的 2 倍。现在,其交易价格为其持有比特币的 1.75 倍。

根据 Blockworks 的数据,Strategy 的模仿者在过去两周也普遍下跌,在某些情况下抹去了溢价或使股票价格低于其持有的加密货币价值。

ParaFi 副总裁乔什·索尔斯伯里表示,由于夏季交易量减少以及产品数量增加,股票溢价有所下降。

Hyperion DeFi(前身为 Eyenovia 的生物制药股票)在 6 月开始购买 hyperliquid 代币。Hyperliquid 是增长最快的加密货币交易所之一的同名代币。Hyperion 目前的市值为 3050 万美元,尽管根据当前代币价格,它持有的 hyperliquid 代币价值近 6000 万美元。自 7 月 2 日更名为 HYPD 并更改股票代码以来,Hyperion 的股价已下跌 62%。

当这些公司以高于其资产的溢价交易时,筹集资金很容易——但当它们以折扣交易时,情况则相反。这使得它们难以筹集资金购买更多加密货币。在这种情况下,hyperliquid 等基础代币的价值下降可能会进一步压低公司股价。

持有比特币等热门代币的公司表现远优于持有较小代币的公司。根据 Architect Partners 统计的数据,持有比特币、以太坊或 Solana 代币的加密货币库存股自各自公告以来的中位回报率为 92.8%。

相比之下,投资于不太受欢迎代币的加密货币库存股群体的中位回报率为负 24%。

市场疲软可能会降低 Pantera、Hivemind、ParaFi 和 Galaxy Digital 等加密资产管理公司的收益。这些公司会在股票宣布计划之前,通过私募的方式投资那些计划购买加密货币的企业。这些交易几乎总是能带来收益,因为股票通常在公告发布后上涨。

加密货币库存股的兴起增加了传统市场与加密货币之间的联系,可能为股票增加波动性。Hivemind 创始人马特·张表示:「随着这种整合的加深,传统股票投资者将面临他们以前未见过的更多风险。他们可能还不习惯某些代币一天下跌 15%,而这在加密货币领域经常发生。」

加密货币风险投资公司 Castle Island Ventures 的创始合伙人尼克·卡特 (Nic Carter) 表示,该公司一直避免投资加密货币库存股。「我们认为,本质上属于零和博弈的企业存在一定的声誉风险,这类企业的回报主要来自于加杠杆或散户股东以不利价格买入。」

Related Reads

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

Three Years Later: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's launch, I made 20 predictions about its future. Now, in mid-2026, I've used AI agents to fact-check each one against the latest data. Overall, most major directional forecasts were correct, with only one outright error (incorrectly stating GPT-4 had 100 trillion parameters). Key successes included predicting that RAG and retrieval architectures would become the standard for handling knowledge and hallucinations, that natural language interfaces (LUI) would create a massive new industry layer beyond the models themselves, and that China would develop viable large language models, significantly closing the performance gap with Western counterparts within about three years. Predictions about the absence of mass unemployment, the rise of a new "robot network" for agent communication, and ChatGPT not possessing consciousness also held true in their core arguments. However, the "devil was in the details." Errors frequently involved specific numbers, timelines, or overlooking distributional effects. I tended to overestimate the speed of adoption (e.g., for agent networks) while underestimating the ultimate scale of capabilities or costs (e.g., AI winning IMO gold without tools, or the extreme capital required for frontier models). Other misjudgments included: underestimating how AI would reinforce, not dissolve, information filter bubbles; incorrectly assuming AI-generated content would easily circumvent copyright (it has instead triggered record-breaking settlements); and misidentifying where value would be captured (it accrued overwhelmingly to the compute layer, like Nvidia, not just the application or model layers). Key lessons from reviewing these predictions are: 1) Directional and mechanistic insights are far more reliable than precise numbers or absolute statements. 2) There's a consistent bias to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude. 3) Errors often lie in missing distributional impacts within a generally correct aggregate trend. 4) Predictions phrased with nuance and caveats aged the best. 5) Some fundamental debates (e.g., on machine consciousness or the ultimate value chain) remain unresolved even after three years. This exercise is less about scoring the past and more about establishing rules for clearer thinking about the next three years of AI.

marsbit1h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back at My Predictions About ChatGPT in 2023

marsbit1h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

Looking Back After Three Years: Revisiting My 2023 Predictions on ChatGPT In March 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's debut and before GPT-4's release, I made over twenty predictions about AI's future based on limited information and intuition. Now, in May 2026, I revisited those forecasts using an AI-driven analysis with 41 Opus 4.8 agents to cross-reference them with the latest data. The assessment used symbols: ✅ Correct, 🟢 Mostly Correct, 🟡 Partially Correct, ❌ Incorrect. Overall, the directional judgments held up well, with only one major factual error regarding GPT-4's rumored parameter size (incorrectly cited as 100T). However, nuances and degrees of accuracy revealed more. **What Was Largely Correct:** Predictions about mechanisms and directions proved accurate. The rise of RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) as the standard architecture for combating AI hallucination was confirmed, as was the transformative potential of LUI (Language User Interface) in creating a new industry layer atop GUIs. The emergence of "robot networks" (agent-to-agent communication protocols) and China's rapid catch-up in developing capable large models (closing the performance gap with top models to ~2.7%) were also on point. The analysis affirmed that LLMs lack consciousness and that the Turing Test merely measures perceived intelligence. **What Was Off Target:** Errors often involved specific numbers, over-optimistic timelines, or misjudged distributions. The prediction that value would primarily accrue to the application layer was half-right but missed NVIDIA's dominance as the profitable infrastructure layer. Forecasts about AI circumventing copyright issues and fostering a "global common ground" by averaging human viewpoints were incorrect; instead, major copyright settlements occurred and AI personalization is increasing. Estimates for model training costs ("$5-10 billion cap") were significantly off, underestimating frontier costs and overestimating replication costs. The notion that LLMs could never do complex math without tools was disproven by later models winning IMO gold. **Key Patterns from the Review:** 1. **Direction over precision:** Judgments about mechanisms and trends were more reliable than specific numbers or definitive statements. 2. **Timing bias:** There was a tendency to overestimate short-term speed but underestimate long-term magnitude and transformation. 3. **The distribution blind spot:** Aggregate-level correctness often masked uneven impacts (e.g., on young professionals' employment). 4. **The value of qualifiers:** Predictions framed with caution (e.g., "reportedly," "for now," "prototype in 2-3 years") aged better. 5. **Some debates continue:** Issues like the nature of "emergent abilities" or machine consciousness remain unresolved. This three-year review highlights that while seeing the big picture is crucial, humility regarding specifics, timelines, and disparate impacts is essential for future forecasting.

链捕手4h ago

Three Years Later: Looking Back on My 2023 Predictions for ChatGPT

链捕手4h ago

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

The article issues a stark warning about a potential AI investment bubble. It notes that while the AI boom shares similarities with the TMT bubble of the late 1990s, its scale is vastly larger, currently driving 93% of U.S. GDP growth. Major hyperscale cloud providers like Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Oracle are planning to invest trillions in AI data centers over the coming years. However, calculations based on analyst projections for 2025-2030 reveal a concerning math problem: expected capital expenditure growth far outpaces projected revenue growth. Even under an extremely optimistic scenario of zero costs, the implied return on investment for most of these tech giants (except Amazon) is deeply negative. This suggests that the current trajectory could lead to one of history's largest shareholder value destruction events. The piece outlines two potential escapes: AI generating vastly more revenue than currently anticipated—a near-impossible task—or a significant cutback in the planned investment splurge. The latter scenario could trigger a domino effect, severely impacting the entire tech supply chain (from Nvidia to TSMC), potentially pushing the U.S. economy into recession, and causing a major stock market downturn. The author suggests upcoming high-profile IPOs by companies like OpenAI and Anthropic might represent a transfer of risk from early investors to public market participants. While the peak of the hype cycle might sustain investment through 2026, the fundamental financial dilemma remains unresolved, setting the stage for a potential market correction in 2027 or 2028, similar to the years following Alan Greenspan's "irrational exuberance" warning.

marsbit5h ago

AI Bubble Warning: AI Investments Are Negative Returns for Most Tech Giants

marsbit5h ago

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

The article "From Token to Machine Labor: AI is Evolving from Tool to 'Worker'" argues that the business model for AI is shifting beyond simply selling computational resources (tokens, GPU hours) or model access. Instead, a new "machine labor market" is emerging, where the core economic transaction is the purchase of economically useful work directly performed by software. The central thesis is that AI pricing will evolve through four stages: 1) raw tokens, 2) standardized LLM capabilities (e.g., text generation), 3) industry-specific labor markets (e.g., legal review, radiology), and finally 4) a programmable results market where tasks like resolving a support ticket are bid on and priced based on outcome. In this future, buyers will care less about *which* model or GPU completes a task and more about whether the work meets specified standards for accuracy, latency, and cost. This transition reframes the impact of AI on human labor. Rather than simple replacement, it suggests a re-coordination where machines handle standardized, verifiable work, freeing humans for roles involving oversight, context management, responsibility, and final judgment. In some cases, this "last 1%" of human input becomes more valuable as it enables the other 99% to be automated. Furthermore, as AI reduces the cost of work, demand may expand, creating larger markets (e.g., 24/7 customer service) rather than just cheaper versions of existing ones. The article concludes that while infrastructure (GPUs, models, tokens) remains crucial upstream, the market is converging on a simpler, tradeable unit: machine labor that can be defined, measured, priced, and procured based on contractible specifications.

marsbit5h ago

From Tokens to Machine Labor: AI is Shifting from Tool to "Worker"

marsbit5h ago

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

The price of Xiaomi's MiMo-V2.5 series API has been permanently reduced by up to 99%, specifically for the "Input (Cache Hit)" cost, which covers users re-reading historical context in long conversations. MiMo's head, Luo Fuli, published a detailed technical blog to clarify that this drastic price cut stems from genuine engineering breakthroughs, not a marketing stunt or a simple price war. The core of the achievement lies in six key engineering optimizations. First, the model architecture adopts a Hybrid Sliding Window Attention (SWA), reducing the memory footprint (KVCache) to 1/7th of a traditional model. Second, a dual-pool memory management system actually utilizes these savings, allowing a single GPU to handle over 5 times more concurrent users. Third, an upgraded prefix caching mechanism achieves a cache hit rate of 93-95% for repeated reads, meaning most such requests bypass GPU computation entirely. Fourth, a self-developed distributed cache (GCache) utilizes idle SSD space on existing GPU servers, eliminating additional storage costs. Fifth, an intelligent scheduling system (LLM-Router) efficiently routes requests to maximize cache reuse and performance. Sixth, Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) accelerates the model's text generation ("output") side. Together, these systemic optimizations dramatically lower the real computational cost per request, enabling the 99% price reduction for cached inputs while reportedly maintaining positive gross margins. Luo Fuli's disclosure aims to shift the narrative from "price war" to a demonstration of substantive AI engineering progress.

marsbit7h ago

Xiaomi MiMo's 99% Price Cut is Not Marketing! Luo Fuli Posts on X to Refute Critics

marsbit7h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

363 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

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 BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片