As Bitcoin spot ETFs gradually become the "official channel" for traditional funds to enter the market, the integration of the crypto market with traditional finance is entering deeper waters. However, a new investment model called DAT (Digital Assets Treasury) is rapidly rising in the U.S. stock market, becoming a new favorite for capital. This model is no longer a simple "buy and hold," but rather positions publicly listed companies as "reservoirs" and "engines" for crypto assets. From MicroStrategy's heavy investment strategy to the succession of many listed companies, the DAT model is reshaping the investment logic of crypto assets with its unique financial flexibility.
However, is the DAT craze a deep integration of traditional finance and emerging assets, or just another bubble rehearsal under capital euphoria? How will it affect the future market landscape? On September 17, PANews hosted a special Space titled "The First Year of Crypto Coin Stocks: The Present and Future of DAT Companies," engaging in dialogue with several frontline institutional investors and practitioners involved in DAT financing, building, and services, to deeply analyze the operational mechanisms, potential challenges, and investment strategies of the DAT model. Whether it is a bubble or the future, the answer may lie in each subsequent decision.
Q1: How does the DAT model operate? What are the differences compared to Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other ETFs/ETPs?
Jeffery, Director of Research at Hashkey Capital: The essence of DAT is a core strategic model where publicly listed companies allocate part or all of their assets to crypto assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum. It can be divided into two operational forms: one is the active transformation of enterprises, using their own funds and innovative financial tools to finance and purchase coins (like MicroStrategy); the other is using a shell company to allocate crypto assets. During operation, board resolutions are required, purchases are executed through partners, and disclosures are made regularly according to accounting standards, closely aligning with U.S. stock investment strategies.
The core differences from ETFs are reflected in four aspects: in strategy, DAT leans towards active management (timing for issuance, repurchase, hedging, and even achieving coin-based appreciation through staking and participating in RWA), while ETFs are mostly passively tracked; in mechanism, DAT has arbitrage space when stock prices fall below net asset value, while ETFs only provide simple asset exposure; in returns, DAT returns include company operating cash flow and asset volatility, while ETFs only reflect the rise and fall of the underlying assets; in tools, DAT can flexibly allocate through convertible bonds, while ETFs are more direct and singular.
Allen, Director of New Fire Technology Research Institute: DAT can be divided into two categories: one retains the main business and uses coin purchases as an asset optimization method, while the other abandons the main business and finances coin purchases as a shell company (the market pays more attention to the latter).
The differences from directly buying coins or ETFs mainly include three points: first, price correlation differs; ETFs/spot strongly track NAV, while DAT is affected by mNAV fluctuations, which may deviate from the underlying asset's price increase due to premiums or negative information; second, the holdings differ; DAT investors hold shares of publicly listed companies rather than directly holding coins or ETF shares strongly tied to the underlying assets, making it more acceptable to traditional funds; third, costs and management differ; DAT has no management fees, and some non-Bitcoin DATs have active management capabilities (such as staking Ethereum to generate 4%-6% annualized returns), while ETFs all have management fees and lack such value-added operations.
Spencer, Managing Partner at Blockspaceforce: To add details about management fees, DAT typically signs agreements with asset management parties to charge fees based on management scale (e.g., 1% for under $1 billion, 0.5% for over $1.5 billion). Although this is similar to ETF rates, the active management attribute provides differentiated value.
Additionally, the core competitiveness of DAT is related to two factors: first, the team and brand effect; the execution ability of the operating team and their understanding of traditional financial logic will directly impact performance (e.g., BMNR outperformed similar targets due to operational capability); second, structural efficiency; companies with S-3 qualifications can act faster, while the model of hoarding coins after listing is less efficient, requiring attention to the underlying structural logic.
Yetta, Investment Partner at Primitive Ventures: DAT essentially utilizes the financial innovation of U.S. stock flexibility, with core value achieved through diverse financial tools for asset appreciation and capital access. On one hand, its flexibility is reflected in the diversity of fundraising tools, such as MicroStrategy using ATM stock sales, issuing convertible bonds, and preferred stocks to cover investors with different risk preferences; on the other hand, for assets that have not launched ETFs, DAT can help them reach traditional institutional investors restricted by compliance through U.S. stock forms, bridging crypto assets and traditional finance.
Luke, Partner at Sora Ventures: From an entrepreneur's perspective, DAT has two valuation logics: mature leading companies (like MicroStrategy, MetaPlanet) primarily use mNAV and other valuation models, while most startup DAT companies need to be evaluated according to startup logic, relying on future expectations rather than current coin holdings.
Key points include: the operator is crucial; investors pay more attention to the long-term determination and endorsement of the team behind (like the long-term holding belief of MicroStrategy's founder); scale determines the tier; once coin holdings reach a certain level, the company's liquidity and blue-chip attributes become prominent, enabling the ability to issue preferred stocks; BPS (the amount of coins held per share) is a key indicator; if BPS growth exceeds 50%, the long-term returns of holding DAT may outperform direct coin holdings; the U.S. stock market remains the core financing battleground; although competition is fierce, its liquidity and tool richness are globally leading, allowing for the integration of high-quality Asian targets to form scale effects.
Q2: What signals are conveyed by the recent difficulties faced by DAT companies? What directions are there for responding to regulatory challenges?
Yetta: The current volatility in the DAT market is an inevitable result of the cycle, as DAT inherently carries leverage attributes (amplifying coin holdings through fundraising). In a bear market, leverage can produce negative effects, testing the asset management capabilities and determination of the team. The core feature of quality DAT is a deep binding with project parties and foundations, such as Sharp Link with Consensus and Litecoin DAT aligning interests with its founders; such targets are better able to withstand bear market fluctuations.
On the regulatory front, Hong Kong only allows listed companies to allocate virtual assets using their own funds, and U.S. exchanges have begun adjusting token subscription methods (such as In-Token subscriptions), overall reflecting a trend of regulatory and innovation competition.
Spencer: The industry is showing signals of fundraising difficulties and tightening regulations, which is essentially a "stress test" that new tracks must undergo. From a practical perspective, investment banks and law firms have become more sensitive to the "Income Contribution" model recently, with cash subscriptions becoming mainstream, which in turn drives the market towards standardization. For DATs focusing on non-Bitcoin assets, they have not yet experienced a complete bull and bear cycle, and the team's ability to respond to cycles is key; some companies have already conveyed market confidence by releasing stock plans.
In terms of regulatory responses, a professional capital operation team and banking partners are crucial, as they can help companies adapt to compliance requirements in different regions.
Allen: Tightening regulations are beneficial for the industry; Nasdaq's review clauses (requiring shareholder votes, restricting tail assets, prohibiting OTC direct coin purchases) can curb the "chase up and kill down" caused by overheating, eliminating low-quality targets that rely solely on narrative hype and reducing the long-term burden on the industry.
The Hong Kong government's attitude is not negative but rather a cautious state of "not supporting but not opposing." The temporary use of the cost method in accounting standards also reflects the gradual nature of regulation. In the long run, regulation can guide capital towards leading coins (like BTC, ETH, SOL), avoiding an excess of meaningless DATs for mid-tier and lower-tier coins, thus reducing market overextension risks.
Jeffrey: Regulatory cooling helps to squeeze out bubbles and avoid systemic risks caused by overheating in the industry. If strict regulations emerge in the future, it could open up diversified global markets, such as the European market, which has a similar investment structure to the U.S. but lacks DAT layouts, while regions like Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asia also have policy dividends.
The core reason MicroStrategy was not included in the S&P 500 is that it is viewed as an "investment company" rather than an "operating company," indicating that DAT needs to strengthen interaction with underlying assets (such as participating in project governance and on-chain activities) to form a dual attribute of "coin purchase + operation."
Luke: Recent regulatory actions mainly target market overheating, with the U.S. introducing new rules like shareholder voting, fundamentally aimed at protecting investors and preventing bubble bursts. From a global regulatory trend perspective, many countries are gradually opening up in line with the U.S. direction, such as South Korea allowing financing for coin purchases after a change in government, while Taiwan currently has no DAT listed companies but presents a policy window; the Asian market has differentiated opportunities. Although competition is fierce in the U.S., it remains the core of financing and liquidity due to its large capital pool, rich tools, and supportive government attitude, serving as a "hub" for integrating high-quality global targets. For entrepreneurs, it is essential to build leading targets in different jurisdictions and leverage scale effects to withstand cyclical and regulatory risks.
Q3: What are the motivations and benefits for DAT companies to choose altcoins? What are the strategies of various institutions?
Yetta: The launch of DAT for altcoins provides dual value for project parties: first, it reduces the token circulation (DAT holdings are locked in the company's treasury), creating a favorable situation; second, it helps them reach traditional institutional investors in the U.S. who are restricted by compliance, achieving indirect asset exposure through U.S. stocks.
When institutions layout, they need to focus on aligning the interests of DAT with project foundations to avoid dilution of project brands by insufficiently qualified DATs. Primitive Ventures views DAT as a new asset class, focusing on targets deeply bound with foundations while also paying attention to short-term liquidity opportunities brought by cash subscription models.
Spencer: The layout of DAT for non-leading coins reflects the industry's "hundred flowers blooming," helping to enrich the crypto ecosystem. From a fund's practical perspective, compliant funds in Singapore cannot directly purchase coins but can indirectly allocate underlying assets by investing in DAT stocks, expanding investment channels.
The core focus of institutional strategies includes three points: first, the quality of underlying assets; second, financial data (such as mNAV and other indicators); third, the intentions and operational styles of the team, all of which jointly determine the long-term value of the targets.
Allen: DAT for altcoins needs to distinguish between leading (top 30 by CMC market cap) and tail coins; DATs for tail coins are often marketing or capital operation means of the interests behind them, posing manipulation risks; leading coins, due to their market cap size, fundamentals, and liquidity advantages, have more long-term value.
New Fire Technology's strategy is "cautious layout, focus on leading coins, and link traditional funds." Currently, it only participates in DATs for leading coins like ETH and SOL, choosing reliable partners (like HashKey, Distributed Capital, etc.) and promoting traditional fund entry by opening part of the shares to traditional clients.
Jeffrey: The first DAT fund will focus on leading coins like BTC and ETH, primarily due to their strong liquidity and significant ecological synergy (such as HashKey's deep connection with ETH). In the future, while not ruling out the allocation of small coin DATs, it is essential to evaluate team capabilities, data performance, and asset value, without excluding the possibility of direct coin purchases, maintaining an overall strategy that is flexible but based on leading assets.
Luke: From a secondary market perspective, the value of DAT fundamentally depends on the quality of underlying assets. Leading coins like BTC have a consensus foundation and long-term upward volatility; however, small coins are often controlled by a few foundations or founders, making them prone to significant fluctuations or even going to zero during market corrections, leading to a "double death spiral" for DATs (asset plummeting + leverage amplifying risks).
Sora Ventures' current strategy is to first complete layouts for nine listed companies in Asia, focusing on leading coins like BTC, and then reassess opportunities for small coins after market changes, with the core logic being to prioritize the certainty of underlying assets.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
