Author: Zhou, ChainCatcher
In this bearish market for ETH, the two largest treasury companies are both floating at a loss of over 50%.
After an eight-month hiatus, SharpLink has resumed its accumulation, recently purchasing a total of 39,196 ETH at an average cost of approximately $3,609. The current floating loss exceeds $1.7 billion.
During the same period, Bitmine continued to expand its balance sheet, with holdings reaching 5.7 million ETH, accounting for about 4.7% of ETH's circulating supply. Its floating loss has surpassed $11 billion.
Meanwhile, both companies have been included in the Russell indices and are also funders of the newly established Ethereum research institution, Ethlabs.
The acquisition costs and stock price declines of the two companies are actually quite similar, but the valuation discounts the market is willing to assign differ significantly. SharpLink trades at a discount of about 21% relative to its ETH net asset value, while Bitmine's discount is only about 6%—a difference of more than threefold.
If ETH bottoms out in this market cycle and investors want indirect exposure to ETH through stocks, which one should they choose, SharpLink or Bitmine?
The answer may not lie in which company tells a better story, but in specific dimensions such as acquisition cost, financing capability, liquidity, and whether the narratives can materialize—especially in understanding where this divergence in discount originates.
What Chips Do They Hold?
SharpLink holds a comprehensive institutional narrative: co-founder-level Ethereum connections with Joe Lubin as chairman, and Joseph Chalom, former BlackRock digital assets executive, as co-CEO. The company started promoting RWA tokenization collaborations last year, planning to bring SharpLink's own stock onto Ethereum.
Image Source: RootData
Coupled with inclusion in the Russell index and cumulative earnings from ETH staking, each of these tags alone could justify a valuation premium story.
Bitmine's chips lie in more direct scale advantages. Holding 5.7 million ETH, its chairman Tom Lee's market influence and media exposure far exceed peers.
The company is included in the higher-barrier Russell 1000 index. According to management, this will bring hundreds or even thousands of new institutional investors, with passive funds typically holding 18% to 20% of a listed company's float.
The two lists of chips appear strong, but the market has ultimately recognized the discount repair of only one. The real gap is driven by a few more specific metrics.
Acquisition Cost and Stock Price Reaction
First, the most direct question: who bought ETH cheaper?
According to SharpLink's June 30th announcement, the company purchased 10,000 Ethereum at an average price of approximately $1,611, increasing its total holdings to 886,725 ETH, composed of 632,719 native ETH, 181,299 ETH redeemable via LsETH, and 72,707 ETH redeemable via weETH.
SharpLink's acquisition cost is around $3,609 per ETH. At the current price of about $1,650, the floating loss is approximately $1.74 billion, a decline of about 54.3%.
As of June 28, 2026, BitMine's total Ethereum holdings reached 5,700,040 ETH, accounting for about 4.7% of Ethereum's total supply. According to on-chain data, its average acquisition cost is around $3,400 per ETH, with a floating loss of approximately $11 billion, a decline of about 51.5%.
The two companies' acquisition costs and percentage declines are actually very close. The gap lies in the absolute scale of holdings; Bitmine's is 6.4 times that of SharpLink, and the absolute floating loss is also magnified by over sixfold.
In terms of stock price, the trends of the two companies are highly similar, both experiencing a surge after their IPOs, followed by a continuous decline, currently hovering at low levels.
As of the close on July 1st, SharpLink's stock price has fallen from a high of $124 to around $5, a pullback of about 96%. Bitmine has fallen from a high of $160 to around $14, a pullback of about 91%. In terms of market cap, SharpLink is around $1.02 billion, and Bitmine is around $7.6 billion.
Financing Capability and Liquidity
SharpLink's financing history has largely been one of continuous small-scale issuances. The company has primarily relied on ATM (At-The-Market) offerings to raise funds and gradually purchase ETH. This method is slow-paced, with dilution occurring progressively.
The funds for resuming accumulation this time mainly come from a $75 million private placement completed at the end of last month, issuing 1,001,340 shares of common stock and an equal number of warrants. The funds are explicitly designated for working capital, continued ETH accumulation, and stock repurchases.
In addition to financing to buy ETH, SharpLink also enhances earnings through staking. Since initiating its ETH treasury strategy, the company's cumulative staking reward earnings have reached 22,102 ETH.
In contrast, Bitmine's financing rhythm is much more aggressive. According to a 10x Research report, Bitmine raised a total of $19.2 billion through 50 equity issuances between July 2025 and May 2026, all used to purchase approximately 5.54 million ETH.
Last month, the company began emulating the strategy of the largest Bitcoin treasury company, issuing preferred stock products. Its Class A Perpetual Preferred Stock, BMNP, has been approved for listing on the New York Stock Exchange, and the board has approved a cash dividend of $0.1056 per share, to be paid on July 10th to shareholders of record as of June 30th.
It is worth noting that inclusion in the Russell indices has, to some extent, enhanced the financing capabilities of both companies. SharpLink is included in the Russell 3000, while Bitmine is included in the higher-barrier Russell 1000.
BitMine Chairman Tom Lee stated that many actively managed funds only buy stocks in the Russell 1000, and typically 20% to 25% of a single stock's market capitalization is held by passive index funds or ETFs.
Thus, the passive fund inflows brought by index inclusion directly enhance the stock's trading depth and buying pressure. For DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) companies requiring continuous equity issuance for financing, this broadens their financing channels.
However, the difference in financing capability is ultimately reflected in mNAV (market-adjusted net asset value). According to the latest data tracked by DefiLlama, SharpLink currently trades at a discount of about 21% relative to its ETH net asset value, while Bitmine's discount is only about 6%.
A deeper discount can actually further depress the stock price when issuing new shares, creating a negative feedback loop. SharpLink's eight-month pause in accumulation was largely stuck in this loop.
In terms of liquidity, Bitmine has long been among the most actively traded stocks in the US, with daily trading volumes often reaching hundreds of millions of dollars. SharpLink's average daily trading volume is an order of magnitude smaller.
For investors wanting to execute a discount trading strategy, liquidity directly determines entry and exit costs. Bid-ask spreads and slippage can erode the theoretical discount profit. In this aspect, Bitmine clearly has the advantage.
However, this advantage is not without cost. According to 10x Research estimates, Bitmine incurred an overall loss of about $10.1 billion over the past year. This figure includes not only the floating loss from the ETH price decline but also another layer of loss: investors who bought BMNR stock at prices above mNAV in the past paid a cumulative premium of about $4.6 billion.
In other words, investors buying Bitmine stock bear an additional layer of risk compared to simply holding ETH. They not only bear the risk of price decline but also the risk of the stock price falling from a premium to a discount. SharpLink, long trading at a discount, carries less of this extra burden.
Ability to Deliver on RWA and Ecosystem Narratives
Regarding the recently highlighted stock tokenization narrative, SharpLink actually announced plans in September 2025 to tokenize SBET stock on Ethereum in partnership with Superstate through its Opening Bell platform, aiming to become the first listed company to natively issue stock on Ethereum.
In an interview in October this year, Co-CEO Joseph Chalom mentioned that the company plans to launch a compliant tokenized version in the near future, prioritizing Ethereum over Solana as the underlying infrastructure.
However, as of now, this plan remains at the expression-of-intent stage, with no actual on-chain transactions or revenue seen. The company and Superstate have previously stated that additional regulatory approvals are needed for how tokenized stocks would trade on decentralized exchanges.
Bitmine has taken a different path on the ecosystem narrative, hedging its single-asset exposure through so-called "moonshot" stock investments, including indirect holdings in OpenAI and equity investments in Beast Industries. While such investments have not formed stable cash flow contributions in the short term, they provide an additional layer of imagination for the market.
Furthermore, both companies jointly fund the newly established Ethereum research institution, Ethlabs. The establishment of this institution coincides with the Ethereum Foundation cutting about 40% of its 2026 budget and eliminating 54 positions, with former core development coordinator Trent Van Epps warning that core development could face a funding gap within three to nine months.
Faced with such specific governance risk warnings, SharpLink Co-CEO Joseph Chalom stated that Ethlabs would complement the Ethereum Foundation but acknowledged some overlap and that the "most intense talent" would be concentrated at Ethlabs. Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee directly stated the crisis possibility is zero, with funding already in place.
Overall, whether it's RWA tokenization or Ethlabs, they are currently better positioned as long-term, industry-level narrative support rather than hard business already converted into revenue or valuation. On this front, the two companies are essentially at the same starting line.
Conclusion
If focusing solely on trade execution during this bottom-fishing cycle, Bitmine is the more convenient entry point. The market is willing to price it closer to its NAV, and its liquidity is better, meaning lower trading friction and more certain entry/exit costs—these are tangible advantages.
However, if considering longer-term holding, Bitmine's weaknesses are not hard to see. The perpetual preferred stock layered into its capital structure represents a fixed cost that has already begun to be paid.
In comparison, SharpLink's capital structure is simpler. The current stock price already reflects more pessimistic expectations, and investors buying now do not need to pay for past premiums.
Looking ahead to several scenarios: If ETH continues to decline, the floating losses of both companies will expand simultaneously. Bitmine, due to its larger holdings, will see faster growth in absolute losses. The valuation advantage the market currently gives it may then narrow, which would truly test its financing flywheel for the first time.
If ETH stabilizes and rebounds, SharpLink, starting from a lower base, theoretically has more room for valuation repair. Bitmine would need to digest the accumulated high-valuation bubble from the past before any repair rally could begin.
What the two companies reveal are two risk distributions of the same model. SharpLink's fragility is written in its stock price and liquidity; Bitmine's fragility is hidden in its capital structure and the valuation bubble accumulated in the past.
However, this is not a mutually exclusive choice. The answer depends on which type of risk you are more concerned about.
