Both Suffer Losses Exceeding $9 Billion, Which Is More at Risk: Strategy or Bitmine?

Odaily星球日报Опубликовано 2026-06-04Обновлено 2026-06-04

Введение

As Bitcoin and Ethereum prices drop significantly, two major corporate treasury holders, Strategy and Bitmine, are facing massive unrealized losses—approximately $100 billion and $90 billion, respectively. The article compares their financial health and underlying risks. Bitmine, holding over 5.4 million ETH, relies primarily on equity financing (like ATM offerings) and has substantial cash reserves, alongside staking income from its ETH holdings. It plans a $300 million perpetual preferred stock offering. In contrast, Strategy, holding Bitcoin, is burdened by significant convertible debt and preferred stock dividends, with cash reserves covering only about six months of its annual dividend obligations. Strategy's leverage is higher, and it faces potential liquidity pressure if BTC prices fall further, possibly forcing asset sales. While both companies are under pressure, Bitmine’s financial structure appears more resilient, whereas Strategy’s high leverage makes it more vulnerable to continued market declines.

Original|Odaily Planet Daily(@OdailyChina)

Author|Wenser(@wenser2010)

Amid the ongoing market decline, Strategy and Bitmine, the "Twin Titans of DAT Treasuries," have both incurred massive floating losses.

This morning, BTC briefly fell below $62,000, currently hovering around $63,800; ETH dropped below $1,800, currently around $1,780. At current prices, Strategy's floating loss has reached a staggering $10 billion; Bitmine's floating loss is also around $9 billion. For now, Michael Saylor and Tom Lee are "fellow sufferers in the same predicament," with Strategy and Bitmine ranking as the top two "DAT companies with the largest losses."

However, compared to Strategy, which requires continuous dividend payments, Bitmine faces less financial pressure and retains flexibility such as raising funds through STRC preferred shares. It is reported that Bitmine plans to raise $300 million by issuing perpetual preferred shares with an annual dividend yield of 9.5%. It seems Bitmine's pace of acquiring ETH continues; meanwhile, the Sword of Damocles hanging over Strategy becomes: Where will the funds for subsequent STRC dividend payments come from? Between the two, who faces greater financial pressure? Odaily Planet Daily will analyze for readers.

Bitmine VS Strategy: The Divergent Paths of DAT Holdings

Following today's BTC plunge, community members used AI to mock Saylor's "promotion" of BTC: "A man in his sixties personally promotes, ancestral BTC price drops to $62,000 per coin."

Returning to Bitmine and Strategy, currently, Bitmine's financial structure appears safer; whereas Strategy's leverage pressure is greater.

Bitmine's Equity Issuance Game: The Debt-Free DAT Financing Play

As of June 1, Bitmine holds 5,416,901 ETH; accounting for approximately 4.49% of ETH's total supply, nearing the '5% cap' repeatedly emphasized by Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee. Yesterday, Bitmine once again acquired 25,000 ETH via BitGo, valued at $48 million at the time. Currently, its holdings stand at 5,441,901 ETH.

The reason Bitmine has the confidence to continue accumulating during a market downturn is multifaceted. The primary reason is that Bitmine's funding source is equity issuance:

  • When initiating its ETH treasury and establishing the DAT company in June last year, Bitmine obtained initial seed capital through financing — $250 million, along with a small PIPE financing.
  • After July last year, Bitmine primarily relied on ATM equity issuance, gradually increasing this figure from $2 billion to $24.5 billion.

Sufficient funds give Tom Lee ample confidence, and Bitmine's book cash supports further acquisitions — in its June 1 public announcement, Bitmine also mentioned: The company's stake in Beast Industries is valued at $180 million; its stake in Eightco Holdings is valued at $93 million. The company's total cash amounts to $446 million.

Additionally, Tom Lee has previously boasted that Bitmine's Ethereum treasury generates daily staking rewards of $1 million. This refers to Bitmine staking approximately 87% (about 4.71 million ETH) of its ETH holdings through its MAVAN staking network, with estimated annualized returns of about 2.73%-3% (approximately $250-$300 million), which can also provide relatively stable cash flow.

In summary, Bitmine's financial condition is sound; and the latest preferred share financing with a 9.5% annualized dividend is expected to secure $300 million, further alleviating its financial pressure. For this company, the biggest risk points lie in equity dilution (issuing new shares) and further stock price declines due to book floating losses. If mNVA remains <1, it might trigger stock selling.

Strategy's Debt Leverage Game: Pressure from Convertible Bonds and Preferred Share Dividends

Compared to Bitmine's "using investors' money to buy ETH," Strategy faces greater financial pressure in acquiring BTC because it primarily "borrows money to increase BTC holdings."

According to information on Strategy's official website, currently, Strategy holds approximately $6.7 billion in convertible bond debt, plus about $9.9 billion in STRC preferred shares and market-value-varying amounts of STRD, STRK, STRF, requiring annual massive dividend and interest payments. At the end of May, after repurchasing $1.5 billion in convertible debt, Strategy's cash reserves fell to about $871 million, covering only about 6 months of its estimated $1.7 billion annual preferred dividend obligation.

Moreover, Strategy previously initiated a vote on "proposing to increase STRC dividend payments from monthly to twice monthly." The voting began on April 28 and will conclude on the meeting day of June 8. If approved, the first record date under the new schedule is June 30, and the first payment date is July 15. Eligible voting shareholders (holders of MSTR and STRC shares) must have held shares before April 17.

Also worth mentioning is that STRC's authorized issuance cap is approximately $28.3 billion. Possibly affected by BTC's continuous decline and shaken market confidence, STRC fell below $95 this morning, currently at $94.65, "de-pegging" over 5% from the $100 target price.

Compared to Bitmine, Strategy currently faces a significant gap between excessive preferred share financing amounts and dividend payments, exacerbated by BTC's continuous decline. Furthermore, unlike ETH which has a staking ecosystem for additional liquidity, BTC lacks such options.

Therefore, after Strategy sold 32 BTC last month, the market began to doubt the identity of "diamond-handed Strategy that only buys and never sells." Amid BTC's persistent decline, Strategy might face a series of liquidity crises, leading to an inability to repay debts and dividends, thereby selling more BTC and driving down prices. Essentially, Strategy is playing a "high-leverage bet that the BTC price won't fall below a certain level" debt leverage game.

Thus, considering Strategy's current mNAV value of 0.83, the market remains highly skeptical of its future stock performance. Yesterday, its market capitalization already fell out of the top 200 US companies. Currently, Strategy (MSTR) stock is at $126, down 7% in 24 hours; market cap stands at $44.6 billion.

Of course, as a leader among DAT treasury companies, Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee remains quite optimistic about Strategy, previously stating: "Strategy selling Bitcoin and ETF outflows are typical bottoming behavior, not risk signals." At the recent "Proof of Talk 2026" conference at the Louvre in Paris, Tom Lee made bold claims: "With AI and tokenization driving major changes in financial infrastructure, ETH could ultimately reach $250,000." However, when discussing "Bitmine's actions after its ETH holdings reach 5% of the total supply," he also expressed caution about further ETH accumulation. (See "Tom Lee Recharges Faith: Crypto Spring Has Arrived, ETH Will Rise to $250,000")

Currently, Bitmine and Strategy find themselves in highly similar market situations, but Bitmine's financial condition is slightly better; Strategy faces the choice between "selling more BTC to obtain cash flow for dividend payments" and "sitting idle or continuing to borrow for acquisition as BTC keeps falling."

Связанные с этим вопросы

QAccording to the article, what is the main difference in how Bitmine and Strategy finance their digital asset acquisitions?

ABitmine primarily funds its ETH acquisitions through equity issuance (ATM offerings and stock sales), which is a debt-free method. In contrast, Strategy primarily uses debt leverage, including convertible notes and preferred stock, to finance its BTC purchases, creating significant interest and dividend obligations.

QWhat specific financial pressure does Strategy face that the article highlights as its 'sword of Damocles'?

AStrategy faces significant pressure to cover its substantial annual dividend payments for its preferred stock (like STRC), estimated at $1.7 billion. With its cash reserves dwindling, the core question is where the funds for these ongoing dividend payments will come from.

QHow does Bitmine generate an additional income stream from its ETH holdings, as mentioned in the article?

ABitmine stakes approximately 87% of its ETH holdings (around 4.71 million ETH) through the MAVAN staking network. This generates daily staking rewards estimated at $1 million, providing a stable annualized cash flow of approximately $250-300 million.

QWhat are the key risk factors mentioned for Bitmine and Strategy's stock prices respectively?

AFor Bitmine, the main risk is equity dilution from issuing new shares and a declining stock price if its mNVA (market value to net asset value) falls below 1. For Strategy, the key risk is its high leverage and liquidity crisis if BTC prices fall further, potentially forcing asset sales and causing its mNAV to drop (currently 0.83), which could severely impact its stock price.

QWhat recent action by Strategy has caused market doubts about its 'diamond hands' reputation, and what potential consequence does the article suggest?

AStrategy recently sold 32 BTC. This action has led the market to doubt its long-held 'diamond hands' (never selling) policy. The article suggests that if BTC continues to fall, Strategy might face a liquidity crisis, forcing it to sell more BTC to meet its debt and dividend obligations, which could further depress the market.

Похожее

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit1 ч. назад

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit1 ч. назад

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit1 ч. назад

Zcash Bug Could Have Minted Unlimited ZEC Undetected

A critical vulnerability in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, discovered by researcher Taylor Hornby on May 29, 2026, could have allowed an attacker to create an unlimited amount of undetectable counterfeit ZEC. The flaw, involving an under-constrained element in the Orchard circuit, existed from the pool's 2022 activation until an emergency fix was deployed by June 2, 2026. Hornby identified the bug using AI-assisted auditing tools and confirmed its exploitability in a test environment. Due to Orchard's privacy features, which hide transaction amounts and history, there is no cryptographic way to prove whether the vulnerability was exploited before the fix. While Shielded Labs assesses prior exploitation as unlikely, this uncertainty has sparked a debate on proving supply integrity in privacy-preserving systems. In response, Shielded Labs and other developers are exploring a network upgrade, potentially involving a new shielded pool and formal verification of the circuit rules to prevent future vulnerabilities and allow verification of the ZEC supply's integrity. ZEC's price fell nearly 45% following the disclosure.

bitcoinist1 ч. назад

Zcash Bug Could Have Minted Unlimited ZEC Undetected

bitcoinist1 ч. назад

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit2 ч. назад

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit2 ч. назад

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit2 ч. назад

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit2 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片

Популярные категорииright-arrow

Популярные тегиright-arrow