Almost every CEO tries to maximize
$BTC Yield nowadays but...
$𝗕𝗧𝗖 𝗬𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱
#𝗕𝗶𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗶𝗻 𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝘆 𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄.
Let me explain why … 🧵 👇
$BTC Yield &
$BTC per Share are calculated based on common equity issued by the respective company.
The formula is as follows:
𝗕𝗧𝗖 𝗬𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱 = Δ (𝗕𝗧𝗖-𝗽𝗲𝗿-𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲)
However, major companies like
$MSTR have pivoted away from issuing common equity to issuing hybrid capital like perpetual preferred equity.
Note: although
$MSTR does not dilute common equity shareholders, the claims on the underlying
$BTC holdings are still rising.
These securities are collateralized with those
$BTC holdings as well. Converts & perpetual preferred equity have a more senior claim on
$BTC holdings in case of default than common equity shareholders etc...
Issuing non-common equity securities to acquire more
#bitcoins creates the impression that
$BTC-per-share is rising as
$BTC holdings are rising while the supply of common equity stays constant.
However, claims on underlying
$BTC are still rising as well.
𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗕𝗧𝗖 𝗥𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴
A more encompassing metric to assess the aggregate claims on the underlying
$BTC holdings than just
$BTC-per-share is to look at all outstanding debt & other hybrid capital instruments that ultimately securitize the underlying
$BTC.
In the context of
$MSTR, these include:
$BTC Rating can help you gauge how much higher the
#bitcoin NAV of these holdings are relative to the company's liabilities.
$BTC Rating is defined as followed:
𝗕𝗧𝗖 𝗥𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 = (𝗨𝗦𝗗 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗕𝗧𝗖 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 / 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗗𝗲𝗯𝘁 & 𝗵𝘆𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀)
$BTC Rating across different BTCTCs (per Q1 2025):
$MTPLF 11.8
$MSTR 4.4
$SMLR 3.3
Logic: You should generally favour those companies with a relatively higher
$BTC Rating. They give you a larger buffer in case of
#bitcoin price drawdowns.
In addition, the delta of the
$BTC Rating can be utilised in combination with
$BTC Yield to assess whether a company is really managing to maximize
$BTC holdings relative to underlying claims or whether it is just increasing claims on its
$BTC holdings AT THE potential future EXPENSE of common equity shareholders.
Consider the following
$BTC Yields: (QoQ%, per Q1 2025):
$MTPLF +81%
$MSTR +11%
$SMLR +15%
Compare these to the change in
$BTC Rating over the same time period:
Change in
$BTC Rating (per Q1 2025):
$MTPLF +409%
$MSTR -23%
$SMLR -infinity
In other words, Strategy increased
$BTC-per-Share at the expense of rising liabilities on these bitcoins.
Meanwhile, Metaplanet managed to increase their
$BTC-per-Share while also reducing their liabilities!
It is no surprise that the better execution of Metaplanet is reflected in their strong outperformance against its peers.
A rough rule-of-thumb over any time frame could be:
1⃣
$BTC Yield < -delta
$BTC Rating = „inefficient use of capital“
2⃣
$BTC Yield >= -delta
$BTC Rating = "liability-neutral increase in shareholder value"
Note that common equity shareholders have the lowest seniority in the capital structure and are exposed the most risk with a falling
$BTC Rating.
Also note that
$BTC Rating can fluctuate significantly with the varying performance of
#bitcoin. Nonetheless, more efficient usage of funds and the underlying bitcoins - via lending, options writing etc - will clearly be reflected in higher
$BTC Yield and higher
$BTC Rating over time.
Remember: It's not an art to increase debt and other non-common equity liabilities to acquire more
#bitcoins to maximize
$BTC Yield.
The efficient use of capital is what separates the wheat from the chaff.
I am convinced that those BTCTCs will do well during the next bear market and beyond that combine 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (maximize
$BTC Yield) with 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗺 (maximize
$BTC Rating).
BTCTCs can be a great investment. But you should know your risks and know what you own.
BTCTCs are significantly more risky than direct
#bitcoin investments and are a complete different asset class. As always DYOR. NFA.
Hope you found these insights helpful.
Follow me 👉
@Andre_Dragosch for more institutional
#bitcoin &
#macro insights.
Stay humble and stack Sats,
André