Crypto Treasuries May Begin Selling In 2026 As ETFs Increase Pressure: Report

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-02-17Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-17

Introduzione

Crypto prices have declined significantly from their previous highs, and a new report warns that digital asset treasuries (DATs) may be forced to start selling their holdings by 2026. These companies, which hold large amounts of cryptocurrency on their balance sheets, are facing steep paper losses due to falling token prices. If the bear market persists, they may need to liquidate assets to meet debt obligations or margin calls. Additionally, the growing popularity of cryptocurrency ETFs is increasing competitive pressure on DATs. Both offer crypto exposure, but ETFs are seen as less risky than treasury companies, which often use debt financing. Refinancing risks and potential margin calls could force DATs to sell into a declining market, creating a negative feedback loop that drives prices even lower. Analysts caution that if the current slump continues, forced sales from DATs could amplify market weakness and have ripple effects across the entire crypto ecosystem in 2026.

As crypto prices slide sharply from last year’s highs, a new warning suggests that 2026 could bring additional pressure from an unexpected source: the companies that hold large amounts of digital assets on their balance sheets.

Bitcoin (BTC) is currently trading below $70,000, roughly 50% beneath the all-time high it reached last October. With forecasts predicting a renewed bear market, analysts at The Motley Fool argue that digital asset treasuries (DATs) may soon be compelled to sell part of their crypto holdings.

Mounting Pressure On Crypto Treasury Firms

According to their assessment, falling token prices have left many of these firms sitting on steep paper losses, with some now underwater. If the downturn persists, they may need to liquidate assets to meet debt obligations or respond to margin calls.

At the same time, investors could increasingly favor cryptocurrency exchange-traded funds (ETFs), adding another layer of competition and strain. The concern centers on how these treasury-focused companies financed their crypto strategies.

While all DATs hold significant digital assets, their funding structures differ. Some rely heavily on debt, while others issue equity; the method of capital raising will determine how well they can withstand a prolonged slump.

A key risk is refinancing. If credit conditions tighten or asset values continue to fall, companies may struggle to roll over debt. Leveraged positions could also trigger margin calls, potentially forcing them to sell into a declining market.

Such selling could push prices even lower, setting off a negative feedback loop across the broader crypto ecosystem. At the same time, the rapid growth of crypto ETFs is creating additional competition for digital asset treasuries.

The analysts highlight that both investment vehicles offer investors exposure to cryptocurrencies without requiring them to open accounts on exchanges or manage private keys. However, treasury companies carry more operational and financial risk than passively managed ETFs.

A Prolonged Bear Market Ahead?

While the long-term trajectory of digital assets remains uncertain, the analysts caution that 2026 could be a pivotal year for corporate crypto holders. If prices remain under pressure, forced sales from digital asset treasuries could amplify market weakness.

Such developments would not be isolated events; Motley Fool analysts assert that they could ripple across the entire ecosystem, affecting investors, related companies, and broader market sentiment.

For now, much depends on whether the current slump deepens into a prolonged bear market. Should that occur, the combination of debt burdens, refinancing risks, and intensifying ETF competition may place digital asset treasuries under significant strain — with consequences extending far beyond their own balance sheets.

The 1-D chart shows the total crypto market cap dropping toward $2.3 trillion. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to the report, why might digital asset treasuries (DATs) be forced to sell their crypto holdings in 2026?

AFalling token prices have left many DATs with steep paper losses, and if the downturn persists, they may need to liquidate assets to meet debt obligations or respond to margin calls.

QWhat is a key financial risk for crypto treasury companies that could force them to sell assets in a declining market?

AA key risk is refinancing. If credit conditions tighten or asset values continue to fall, companies may struggle to roll over debt. Leveraged positions could also trigger margin calls, forcing them to sell.

QHow are cryptocurrency ETFs creating additional pressure and competition for digital asset treasuries?

AETFs offer investors exposure to cryptocurrencies without the need to open exchange accounts or manage private keys. As they grow in popularity, they provide a less risky alternative to investing directly in treasury companies, which carry more operational and financial risk.

QWhat could be the broader market consequence of forced sales from digital asset treasuries?

AForced sales could push crypto prices even lower, setting off a negative feedback loop that ripples across the entire ecosystem, affecting investors, related companies, and broader market sentiment.

QWhat factors will determine how well a digital asset treasury can withstand a prolonged crypto market slump?

ATheir funding structure will determine their resilience. Companies that rely heavily on debt are more vulnerable, whereas those that issued equity may be better positioned to handle a prolonged downturn.

Letture associate

Stuck Polymarket: The Real Test After Riding the Traffic Boom Has Arrived

Polymarket, a leading prediction market platform, is facing significant technical challenges as its growth outpaces its current infrastructure on Polygon. Users are experiencing laggy transactions, unresponsive orders, and delayed confirmations, severely impacting the trading experience. In response, DeFi Engineering VP Josh Stevens outlined a comprehensive engineering overhaul. The plan includes reducing on-chain data delays, fixing order cancellation issues, rebuilding the central limit order book (CLOB), improving website performance, and developing a unified SDK and API. A major revelation was the ongoing "chain migration," indicating a potential move away from Polygon. The core issue is that Polymarket has evolved from a simple prediction market into a high-frequency trading platform, making Polygon's limitations—such as block space, gas fees, and block time—a ceiling for further growth. The migration is not just a simple chain switch but a fundamental rebuild of its trading system to support more complex products like perpetual contracts (Perps). This announcement has sparked competition among chains like Solana, Sui, and Algorand, all vying to host Polymarket. For Polygon, losing this key application, which contributes significantly to its gas fee revenue, would be a major setback. The real test for Polymarket is no longer attracting users but proving it can provide a stable, reliable trading environment that retains them.

Odaily星球日报18 min fa

Stuck Polymarket: The Real Test After Riding the Traffic Boom Has Arrived

Odaily星球日报18 min fa

Lowering Expectations for BTC's Next Bull Market

The author, Alex Xu, explains his decision to significantly reduce his Bitcoin holdings (from full to ~30% of his portfolio) during the current bull cycle, citing a lowered long-term outlook for BTC's price appreciation in the next cycle. He outlines six key reasons for this reduced expectation: 1. **Diminished Growth Drivers:** The narrative of exponential user adoption has largely played out with institutional ETF adoption. The next major growth phase—adoption by sovereign national reserves or central banks—seems unlikely in the near future. 2. **Personal Opportunity Cost:** More attractive investment opportunities have emerged in other assets, such as undervalued companies. 3. **Industry-Wide Contraction:** The broader crypto industry is struggling, with most Web3 business models (SocialFi, GameFi, DePIN) failing. This overall萧条 (depression) reduces the fundamental demand and consensus for Bitcoin. 4. **Strain on Major Buyer:** MicroStrategy, a major corporate buyer of BTC, faces rising financing expenses for its debt, which could slow its purchasing rate and create significant marginal pressure on the market. 5. **Increased Competition from Gold:** The emergence of "tokenized gold" has closed the functional gap (portability, divisibility) between physical gold and Bitcoin, offering a strong competitor in the non-sovereign store-of-value space. 6. **Security Budget Concerns:** The block reward halving continues to exacerbate the long-standing issue of funding Bitcoin's network security, with new fee source explorations like Ordinals and L2s largely failing. The author's decision to hold a significant (though reduced) position reflects a cautious, not bearish, outlook. He remains open to increasing his exposure if the fundamental reasons for his skepticism change or if new positive catalysts emerge.

marsbit56 min fa

Lowering Expectations for BTC's Next Bull Market

marsbit56 min fa

Can Iran 'Control' the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran has announced a comprehensive plan to assert control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil shipping chokepoint. The proposed measures include requiring all vessels to obtain Iranian permission for passage, imposing fees for security, environmental protection, and navigation management—preferably paid in Iranian rials—and absolutely banning Israeli ships. Vessels from countries deemed hostile by Iran’s top security bodies may also be barred. Analysts suggest Iran’s motives are multifaceted: increasing pressure on the U.S. and Israel by leveraging control over oil transit to influence global prices and inflation; creating a new revenue stream, potentially exceeding $7.7 billion annually, to counter Western sanctions and support postwar reconstruction; and using transit permissions as bargaining chips in future negotiations, notably with the U.S. However, the plan faces significant practical and diplomatic challenges. Enforcing comprehensive interception and fee collection in the busy waterway, patrolled by international military forces, would be difficult. The U.S. has already countering with a blockade of Iranian ports and threats to intercept any ship paying fees, potentially strangling Iran’s oil exports and fee revenue. Broad international opposition, led by European and Gulf states, and legal controversies further complicate implementation. The proposal may ultimately serve more as a negotiating tactic than a feasible policy, with its execution remaining highly uncertain.

marsbit2 h fa

Can Iran 'Control' the Strait of Hormuz?

marsbit2 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片