In the past two years, "Digital Asset Treasury Companies" (DAT) have gained significant momentum: a large number of publicly listed companies have incorporated cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum into their balance sheets, viewing digital currencies as strategic reserve assets or capital operation tools. However, as industry competition intensifies and valuation pressures emerge, this wave of enthusiasm is gradually cooling, revealing risks, and the industry landscape may undergo profound reshaping.

First, the financing frenzy has shifted from a blue ocean to a "red ocean." According to media reports, the total financing amount for DAT has exceeded $20 billion this year. Some analyses have pointed out that the influx of capital has led many companies to compete for imitation, thereby exacerbating internal competition. At the same time, the valuations of some treasury companies have been significantly compressed, with many companies' stock prices falling below the total value of the digital tokens they hold. This highlights the unsustainability of the capital "burning money" model, and a few leading companies are facing liquidity pressures.

Second, treasury strategies harbor structural risks. Industry insiders have warned about the leverage risks in the DAT model: some companies have acquired Bitcoin at high premiums, and once the price of the coin falls (for example, dropping more than 20% below the average purchase price), there may be pressure to sell off. Some viewpoints compare them to the early Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC): GBTC maintained a premium for a long time, but if it were to trade at a discount, it could trigger systemic risks. Further analysis suggests that if the market value premium disappears, the core competitiveness of these treasury companies may quickly disintegrate.

Third, the industry is witnessing diversification and strategic adjustments. To cope with pressures, some leading companies are making strategic shifts in asset allocation and capital operations. Some publicly listed companies have expanded their treasury assets from Bitcoin to various tokens such as Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. Additionally, some enterprises are enhancing the returns and stability of reserve assets through strategies like "locked period token investment + staking + yield." This diversification and financial engineering innovation signify that the DAT model is evolving from merely hoarding coins to a more complex, actively managed approach. DAT may be transforming its balance sheet into an "active capital engine," rather than just passive holding.

Fourth, the participation of regulators and traditional financial institutions is also reshaping the ecological landscape. U.S. monetary regulators have announced that banks engaging in cryptocurrency custody services under their supervision no longer need prior approval, provided they establish a robust risk management system. This policy shift opens the door for traditional banks to participate in digital asset services. Meanwhile, large financial institutions in regions like Europe are also actively entering the cryptocurrency custody field, providing Bitcoin and Ethereum custody and settlement services for institutional clients. This involvement of traditional finance means that the competitors of treasury companies are expanding, and the entry barriers and specialization requirements in the industry will further increase.

Looking at a typical case of operational difficulties, the British cryptocurrency custody company Copper has publicly disclosed a net loss of $40 million for 2024. This loss reflects the high cost structure and profitability challenges of the custody service business. For many treasury companies, while hoarding coins can bring benefits from future price increases, the current operational costs, compliance costs, and risk control costs cannot be underestimated.

A deeper signal is that industry consolidation may be accelerating. As valuation pressures and liquidity storms approach, some treasury companies may be acquired, transformed, or exit the market. The industry has transitioned from early rapid expansion to a phase of execution and integration. For investors, this may be a critical period of survival of the fittest.

However, a cooling trend does not equate to a complete failure. The reshaping DAT model still holds potential: companies that can effectively manage risks, establish differentiated strategies, optimize capital structures, and enhance transparency are likely to seize the opportunity to become leaders in the new landscape. If capital can refocus on on-chain productivity, governance mechanisms, portfolio diversification, and long-term staking yields, then the true value of treasury companies may far exceed the early speculative significance of hoarding coins. Such companies may represent the future of institutional crypto, rather than short-term speculative tools.

Overall, the enthusiasm for cryptocurrency digital asset treasury companies is cooling, but this is not a simple retreat; rather, it is a process of the industry transitioning from "barbaric growth" to mature reshaping. Risk exposure, valuation compression, and liquidity challenges are currently the most prominent tests; while asset diversification, capital strategy innovation, and increased participation from traditional finance may serve as the foundation for future landscape reshaping. In the coming months and even years, whether DAT can truly transform into a sustainable and healthy financial innovation force will be a focal point of interest for the market, investors, and regulators alike.

Related: Exodus utilizes Bitcoin (BTC) reserves to fund $175 million on-chain payment layout.

Original article: “The Heat of Digital Asset Treasury Companies Fades: Risks Emerge and the Industry Reshapes”

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。