Bitcoin Treasuries to Move Beyond HODL to Yield, Hedging and Share Buybacks as NAV Discount Bites

The great corporate bitcoin land grab of the summer has substantially cooled, and the latest batch of digital-asset treasury (DAT) stocks is showing the hangover.

Many of the once-hot bitcoin treasury stocks now trade below the value of the crypto stash they hold, forcing companies to move beyond a simple “buy and hold” approach and instead think harder about whether the BTC on their balance sheet is supposed to do more than just sit there.

“We’re moving from accumulation to stewardship,” said Thomas Chen, founder of Function, a firm that aims to turn bitcoin into a productive asset. “The question isn’t who is buying bitcoin today, but who can manage it like a treasury-grade asset,” he said.

Spencer Yang, managing partner at advisory firm BlockSpaceForce, sees a similar turn in sentiment from his clients. With the hype phase largely behind them, companies that rushed into BTC earlier this year are now looking for ways to make the allocation look more like a financial policy than a marketing campaign.

“We haven’t yet seen corporate treasuries actively put their bitcoin to work, but that’s something they should consider if they want to differentiate,” Yang told CoinDesk.

Chen outlined a potential BTC treasury deployment strategy with three key pillars: a slice of holdings earning conservative yield, another portion hedged against 20–30% drawdowns and firm limits on size and exposure, diversifying risks.

• Conservative yield: Use only low‑risk channels with clear rehypothecation rules and collateral segregation. Think simple basis capture or overcollateralized lending at conservative loan‑to‑value thresholds—set by policy, not mood. Avoid chasing double‑digit APYs that depend on opaque leverage.
• Downside hedges: Pre‑authorize derivatives usage (such as puts or collars) with position limits, tenor constraints and approval workflows. The goal is to smooth volatility and protect operating runway, not to speculate on short‑term direction.
• Counterparty diversification: Split exposure across custodians and liquidity providers; run ongoing credit and operational due diligence; and cap per‑counterparty limits to avoid single‑point failures.

For deployment, size matters, Spencer said.

Bigger treasuries can negotiate better terms and justify dedicated risk teams, he said. Meanwhile, smaller firms may need to keep most of their BTC idle, deploying only a sliver under tight policy caps, he added.

As DAT stocks sink below their underlying net asset value and NAV discounts widen, one strategy is also back on the table: Selling a chunk of BTC to buy back outstanding shares.

Yang said that could often be often a “smart strategy” for vehicles trading at a steep discount, a way of showing shareholders that the management isn’t just sitting back collecting fees on gross assets.

“When a DAT is willing to sell underlying assets to defend its market NAV, it shows conviction,” Yang said. “Confidence is contagious. Once investors trust that leadership will defend value, the discount often closes as buyers step in.”

Still, some managers may resist because reducing assets means reducing fees, a stance that could erode trust and send investors looking for more disciplined alternatives, Yang argued.

The HODL pitch isn’t dead yet, but it’s no longer enough.

In a market where many DATs are trading below the value of their own bitcoin, the firms that figure out how to make BTC a productive reserve without turning it into a leveraged experiment may be the ones that will persist.