ASST and what's living and breathing in the Data: Warrants are what everyones looking at so let's see how the last few months have looked and how significant Monday through Wednesday were. 4 Slides showing: How Far It Moves, What Changed, What the Premium Buys , and What Happened This Week $BTC $ASST $SATA $MSTR $STRC cc. @GrainofSaltSF @AdamBLiv @ZynxBTC @PunterJeff

Jeff is posing a very interesting question about what the market is signaling when you look at Bitcoin and the rising 30Y yield. And his framing gets even stranger when you separate the trend of what is happening from the shock. June 30th was the Bitcoin low, and since then: 30Y Yield: +49 bps BTC: +44.2% Gold: +6.7% QQQ: +0.7% Go back to 2020 and look across every 60-trading-day window since 2020 where long yields rose. Bitcoin's outperformance vs. QQQ ranks in the 81st percentile. The weird part is Bitcoins 60-day correlation to DAILY 30Y yield changes is still -0.26... which is in roughly the 1ST PERCENTILE since 2020. So what is the market saying? I think the regime pushing the cost of 30-year dollar duration higher is simultaneously pushing monetary assets higher. And BTC's 120D correlation with gold being +0.50, in the 99th percentile since 2020 seems to help. Gold is hearing the same monetary signal from the bond market, but Bitcoin is just expressing it with an absolute flamethrower. Essentially, the bond market is now asking for 5.4% to hold dollars for 30 years. Bitcoin, rightfully so, is asking why you would hold them for 30 minutes.

The best part about Bitcoin and the Treasury space is having so many builders, investors, business owners, and TradFi looking at it from all directions. It's where market psychology and data mix in ways that we've never been able to see and articulate before. Make sure @SullyMichaelvan pops up on your feed. It's useful to use his work as a mirror for your own state of mind and compare where you're landing along this transition from Bear to Bull. $BTC $MSTR $STRC $ASST $SATA

SOV -> UOA?!?!? -> MOE? WTF!!

Bullish. Great move by @Strategy

Strategy is proposing daily dividends on $STRF, $STRC, $STRK, and $STRD, accruing every calendar day, including weekends and holidays, and paid the next business day, with economics unchanged. The proposed changes aim to support price stability, liquidity, and demand.

One of the largest audit firms in the U.S. just made the case that Bitcoin treasury companies are REAL operating businesses, not passive holding vehicles. BDO published “Beyond Asset Holdings” on Sept 22. Here are the key points 👇 1️⃣ The Bitcoin isn’t the business. The machine around it is. Capital raising, preferred stock, BTC-backed lending, collateral, and risk management all require judgment, infrastructure, and execution. 2️⃣ Existing GAAP already supports this. ➡️ ASC 805: BTC as the input, plus real processes and a workforce, can qualify as a business. ➡️ ASC 280: If management runs BTC treasury ops with discrete financials and capital allocation, those ops can be a distinct operating segment. BDO notes that at least one large public DAT already reported it that way to the SEC. Guess who. 🟠 3️⃣ mNAV is legit. BDO calls it the price-to-book of treasury companies. A premium above 1.0x means the market is pricing execution and not just coins. 4️⃣ DATs are not shells or SPACs. BDO compares them to early Amazon and freemium software: business models that looked strange until the market caught up. 💡 Why this is bullish for the ecosystem: ✅ A Big-firm framework for defending “operating company” status helps with auditors, regulators, and index debates. ✅ It strengthens the argument that premiums over NAV are earned. ✅ BDO expects more BTC-backed securities and fintech products to emerge. This means more demand, more structure, and more institutional rails. ✅ Bitcoin is moving from “speculative asset on the balance sheet” to “foundational capital asset,” the way aircraft are for airlines.

I've been saying watch out for ETFs to be built around Bitcoin Treasury Prefs since I left Strategy World. Saylor had taken time to point to it as significant during his keynote and few payed attention. Multiple issuers will strengthen this trend further. More Incredible work at the forefront of this industry from the @Strive team. 🙌 $BTC $ASST $SATA $MSTR $STRC

As I alluded to earlier today, I've spent the last two days working on an exciting feature that captures an important nuance in Bitcoin treasury management. The idea is simple. Every Bitcoin treasury company runs some amount of amplification (leverage) — primarily preferred stock or convertible debt — against its BTC. More amplification means more BTC per share on the way up. It also means the common equity gets wiped out faster on the way down. Until now, the Monster Model let you set a constant amplification target and watch what happened as the dynamic treasury management engine attempted to steer either company towards its target under the conditions set by your other parameters (BTC projection path, $STRC / $SATA growth path, USD management, etc.). But that didn't prevent the modeled company from drifting towards a balance sheet whose equity is wiped out in a crash. Now you can pick a share price you want $MSTR or $ASST to survive down to, and the model solves for the most amplification the company could carry if Bitcoin fell and mNAV collapsed. I call it the defensive amplification target, and it's now fully integrated into the dynamic treasury engine. If the system can run nominally, it does; but if the balance sheet gets stressed according to the parameters you specify, it sounds the alarm and begins taking decisive action. The feature calls for you to give it three things: (1) a share price to defend; (2) an mNAV to assume in the crash; and (3) how far Bitcoin might fall (as a fraction of its power law trend). The model works backward to the maximum liability load that still clears your defensive price, converts that to an implied amplification target, and pulls the company's target amplification down to that implied target whenever your own constant target would be higher. The new feature is off by default, so if you want to experiment with it, you'll need to toggle its checkbox, which you can find in the "Defensive target" fieldset in the Amplification section of the parameter pane. Two things I learned while building it that I didn't expect. → The first: capping the target isn't enough. The model doesn't hold amplification at the target — it accepts anything inside a tolerance band around the target, and only acts decisively to delever when amplification exceeds that band. So the target can read as being exactly where you set it while actual amplification sits at the band's upper edge, above your limit. The defense mechanism has to bind the upper edge, not the center; otherwise the width of the band is amplification you never authorized. At the sensitivities involved, a tolerance of 0.01 (one percentage point) in amplification ratio is worth about a dollar of share price — so your $80 floor quietly becomes a $79 floor. → The second: which dollars count. The model tracks "effective USD" — an internal metric inspired by the extension of the model (which was originally @Strategy-only) to @Strive. The Monster Model defines effective USD as all USD assets plus a user-specified haircut on any third-party perpetual preferreds the company holds. That's fine for normal reporting. But as we saw this summer, perpetual preferred equities are least saleable exactly when the common equity is under the most stress, which is the scenario you're trying to defend against. So the defensive calculation uses pure USD while everything else keeps the effective figure. Two different questions, two different answers. (If you don't like the idea of valuing PPE above $0 even during normal operation, feel free to change that parameter; it's called "Fraction PPE counted in Effective USD" and can be found in Strive's "USD and PPE Assets" section in the parameter pane.) If I'm being totally honest, this new feature is just absolutely sick. Watching the dynamic treasury management logic simultaneously dial back on preferred issuance while ramping up use of the common equity ATM to delever so that it can defend your chosen share price at your chosen power law level is an almost religious experience. This is reflexivity in motion, and highlights the power of modeling treasury companies (and Bitcoin itself) with a non-linear dynamical system. Also shipped: → A break-even mNAV basis toggle. Break-even mNAV marks where issuing common stops being accretive — but "accretive" has two meanings. Gross BTC per share is the one BTC Yield measures, and it ignores liabilities entirely. Net BTC per share counts only what's left after senior claims. Those give different answers, and the model was silently picking one based on which mNAV variant you were looking at. Now the user gets to choose, and the choice is always explicit. This is what I called a semantic bugfix in my earlier post from this morning. → As for the technical bugfix I alluded to — that turned out to be a false alarm stemming from Opus's misunderstanding of some of the nuances of the model's mNAV calculations. Once it understood, the issue became clearer, and the LLM agreed that there was only ever a semantic ambiguity. → The power law reference curves moved from +/- 40% to +/- 50% of trend, which is a more honest benchmark after the drawdown we just lived through. → And a batch of quieter fixes: terminology standardized across the parameter and series documentation, so "selected liabilities" and "USD assets" mean one thing each instead of three. The new changes are live at monstermodels.live. Please let me know if you encounter any issues, and as always, thank you for your support. 🧡 $MSTR $ASST $STRC $SATA $BTC #Bitcoin

Here’s the trap nobody can make disappear: The Fed raises the price of money to suppress inflation while the Treasury must borrow more money partly because the price of money went up. Read that again. Net interest is now over $1 trillion a year -> bigger than defense and every individual mandatory program except Social Security and Medicare. Raise rates → interest expense rises. Interest expense rises → deficits rise. Deficits rise → Treasury borrows more. And now the 10-year is around 5%+ We built a debt structure where the medicine used to fight inflation increasingly aggravates the fiscal disease. That’s the paradox

How I track my location in the Bitcoin Cycle. Especially for the Deep Bear phase where I want to be accumulating aggressively and last weeks close triggered the exit. This isn't projecting price. It is like a map to be my compass in time. Having a sense of where we are helps us make better decisions. (I'll start sharing these cards more often until I release a proper website) $BTC $ASST $SATA $MSTR $STRC

Using my Pace Table today to Deciding where to add to ASST. I've recently been rotating Contracts with spent Delta from the Jan 28' to March 27' Recently purchased the $36 March 27' Calls in a similar rotation. My Jan 28' ladder is a bit thin towards the top strikes so i've added a few more $40's to that expo. Looking forward to the $45 strike when it releases. The pace table calculates the required pace of each contract then looks at Bitcoins pace and adjusts for ASSTs amplification to see if the contract strike and expo are within reasonable expectation to meet or exceed the decay. $BTC $ASST $SATA $MSTR $STRC

I still put this on every time im about to buy bitcoin

Bitcoin Doesn't Look Tired. Not to get overly excited but sometimes price gets pulled up into these outer deviation bands like a Rip Current. Feel the need to at least share. -Bands compressed. -Linear regression flipped Bullish. -Lower indicator trend median wanting to attack 50 (4hr), also bullish. -Room on Daily. +Seeing many shy to punch long Usually I don't bull post but we may see 93-94k in short order. Guess I'll find out with y'all in the am. $BTC $ASST $MSTR $STRC $SATA

21 Reasons I’ve Never Been More Bullish on Bitcoin Timestamps: 00:00 #1 Bitcoin’s 53% Bear Market Drawdown 00:49 #2 The 200-Week Moving Average 01:14 #3 Bitcoin Is Boring Again 01:32 #4 Long-Term Holders Own 79% 01:58 #5 Bitcoin Trades at 18 Ounces of Gold 02:34 #6 Volatility Has Fallen ⅔ Since 2014 03:10 #7 Lower Volatility Enables Bigger Allocations 03:32 #8 Bitcoin Is Becoming Better Collateral 04:16 #9 Falling Volatility Unlocks More Credit 04:58 #10 Digital Credit Changes Bitcoin 05:54 #11 The $300T+ Fixed Income Opportunity 06:15 #12 The Exit From Bitcoin Is Bitcoin 07:28 #13 Digital Credit Survived the Bear Market 07:57 #14 Public Companies Hold ~1.3M BTC 08:14 #15 ETF Demand Is Returning 08:30 #16 A 2% Allocation Could 14x Bitcoin 08:49 #17 U.S. Interest Expense Hits 3.3% of GDP 09:36 #18 35,000 BTC of Interest vs. 450 New BTC 09:58 #19 U.S. Money Supply Is Rising Again 10:16 #20 AI Is Making Everything More Abundant 10:43 #21 Bitcoin Remains Perfectly Scarce

@HurdleRatePod ep. 75. Straight from the management team running the most amplified Bitcoin company in the market. @Strive now holds 26,355 Bitcoin. Holdings grew 5.4% in one week and 30% in 25 trading days. $ASST was the top performing stock in the Russell 2000 over the past month. It was second in the entire Russell 3000, behind only Moderna. The first Bitcoin buy was at $116,610. The cost basis is now $90,610. That 22% reduction happened during a bear market. Nobody gets that by waiting for good weather. @PunterJeff was asked how you measure trust. His answer was liquidity. ASST is roughly the 1,390th largest company in the US by market cap. It's the 195th by trading volume. That gap is the market voting. SATA averaged $12.5M in daily volume in July. The last 10 days averaged $58M. Today SATA pays its 75th dividend. On a quarterly schedule, that would be 18 years of payments. Strategy traded $119M on this day in 2023. Today it traded $6.9B. Liquidity is built. Nobody hands it to you. Past Bitcoin bull runs were funded by convertible debt, with arbitrage desks trading around the common. This one is being funded by digital credit, and those holders care about credit quality. That market structure is new. @ColeMacro warning: most short-term traders of amplified Bitcoin get wrecked. MSTR went 40x last cycle with multiple 40 to 50% drawdowns along the way. Almost nobody who sold managed to buy back in. This team shows up every week, in down markets and up markets. Buffett earned trust by talking to his shareholders honestly. They are doing the same thing with a podcast. That is why I listen. Bitcoin just broke out to its highest level since January. If a single day in this stock gives you anxiety, you are overexposed. Zoom out. Sit still. Trust the people who show up. @HurdleRatePod @Werkman @ColeMacro @PunterJeff @TimKotzman @AdamBLiv

Watching The Hurdle Rate is my favorite piece of due diligence. 😉

🔥BITCOIN, CAPITAL, RISK: DIGITAL CREDIT MASTERCLASS🔥 Bitcoin is beginning to transform from a treasury asset into the foundation of an entirely new credit market. In this digital credit masterclass, we examine how perpetual preferred capital can convert Bitcoin’s long-term appreciation into recurring income for investors. Using 100,000 Monte Carlo simulations, we model a Bitcoin balance sheet with 40% compound annual growth, 40% volatility, recurring preferred dividends, and multiple liquidity-reserve designs. We compare Strategy’s STRC with traditional preferred securities from JPMorgan and examine how Apple and Berkshire Hathaway manage liquidity alongside productive assets. The results reveal how common-equity amplification, loss absorption, sequence risk, and forced asset sales can produce radically different outcomes from the same Bitcoin return. We also identify what investors must prove before claiming that digital credit is mispriced rather than merely offering a high yield. This is the ultimate breakdown of Bitcoin, risk, capital structure, and the financial engineering that could reshape global credit markets:

Bitcoin vs. Amplified Bitcoin I ran 500,000 paired Monte Carlo simulations over four years. Bitcoin starts at $86,000, with a 40% geometric CAGR assumption and 40% annualized volatility. The amplified model takes 1.5× each simulated daily Bitcoin return, producing roughly 60% volatility. Same Bitcoin shocks. Same $86,000 starting investment. Different sensitivity. Median ending value: Bitcoin: $330,057 - 3.84× Amplified Bitcoin: $508,584 - 5.91× At the 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $1.235 million Amplified Bitcoin: $3.676 million At the 99th percentile: Bitcoin: $2.132 million Amplified Bitcoin: $8.327 million The probability of finishing at 10× or more rises from 11.6% to 33.1%. Amplified Bitcoin finishes ahead in 85.9% of the paired simulations. But the wider upside distribution comes with a materially rougher ride. Median maximum drawdown increases from 42.2% to 57.7%. The probability of finishing below the starting investment rises from 4.7% to 7.0%. A company targeting sustained amplified exposure needs to actively manage its capital structure and Bitcoin exposure. Issuing preferred equity once does not permanently lock in 1.5× stock-price sensitivity, and balance-sheet amplification is not the same as market beta. These are the mathematical results of a maintained-sensitivity projection, not a forecast for any company. Financing costs, preferred dividends, dilution, valuation changes, and company-specific risks are excluded. Volatility is vitality: