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

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-02-17Last updated on 2026-02-17

Abstract

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

Related Questions

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.

Related Reads

Why Do You Always Lose Money on Polymarket? Because You're Betting on News, While the Pros Read the Rules

Why do you always lose money on Polymarket? Because you bet on news, while the pros study the rules. This article explains how top traders ("che tou") profit by meticulously analyzing market rules, not just predicting events. Polymarket, a prediction market platform, often sees disputes over event outcomes due to ambiguous rule wording. For instance, a market asking "Who will be the leader of Venezuela by the end of 2026?" was misinterpreted by many who bet on Delcy Rodríguez, assuming she held power. However, the rules specified "officially holds" as the formally appointed, sworn-in individual. Since Nicolás Maduro was still recognized as president officially, he won the market—even being in prison. To resolve such disputes, Polymarket uses a decentralized arbitration system via UMA protocol. The process involves: 1. Proposal: Anyone can propose a market outcome by staking 750 USDC, earning 5 USDC if unchallenged. 2. Dispute: A 2-hour window allows challenges with a 750 USDC stake; successful challengers earn 250 USDC. 3. Discussion: A 48-hour period on UMA Discord for evidence and debate. 4. Voting: UMA token holders vote in two 24-hour phases (blind then public). Outcomes require >65% consensus and 5M tokens voted; otherwise, four re-votes occur before Polymarket intervention. 5. Settlement: Results are final and automatic. Unlike traditional courts, Polymarket’s system lacks separation between arbitrators and stakeholders—voters often hold market positions, creating conflicts of interest. This leads to herd mentality in discussions and non-transparent outcomes without explanatory rulings, preventing precedent formation. Thus, success on Polymarket hinges on deep rule interpretation, not just event prediction, exploiting gaps between reality and contractual wording.

marsbit27m ago

Why Do You Always Lose Money on Polymarket? Because You're Betting on News, While the Pros Read the Rules

marsbit27m ago

DeepSeek Funding: Liang Wenfeng's 'Realist' Pivot

DeepSeek, a leading Chinese AI company, has initiated its first external funding round, aiming to raise at least $300 million at a valuation of no less than $10 billion. This move marks a significant shift from its founder Liang Wenfeng’s previous idealistic stance of rejecting external capital to maintain independence. Despite strong financial backing from its parent company, quantitative trading firm幻方量化 (Huanfang Quant), which provided an estimated $700 million in revenue in 2025 alone, DeepSeek faces mounting challenges. Key issues include a 15-month gap in major model updates, delays in its flagship V4 release, and the loss of several core researchers to competitors offering significantly higher compensation. The company is also undergoing a strategic pivot by migrating its infrastructure from NVIDIA’s CUDA to Huawei’s Ascend platform, a move aligned with China’s push for technological self-reliance amid U.S. export controls. However, DeepSeek lags behind rivals like智谱AI and MiniMax—both now publicly listed—in areas such as product ecosystem, multimodal capabilities, and commercialization. The funding round, though relatively small in scale, is seen as a way to establish a market-validated valuation anchor, making employee stock options more competitive and facilitating talent retention. It also signals DeepSeek’s transition from a pure research-oriented organization to a commercially-driven player in the global AI ecosystem.

marsbit1h ago

DeepSeek Funding: Liang Wenfeng's 'Realist' Pivot

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片