The post Is the Bitcoin (BTC) Digital Asset Treasury Model Broken? Industry Banker Says No appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin digital asset treasury (DAT) companies have been making headlines in recent weeks, and often for the wrong reasons. A sharp decline in crypto markets and over 40% slump (as of Nov. 27) in the share price of the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin, Strategy (MSTR), this year, has led some to question the sustainability of these companies. Strategy’s steep underperformance relative to bitcoin (down about 2% this year) in recent months may be due to looming index-inclusion risk rather than crypto-market dynamics, according to Wall Street bank JPMorgan. However, the downturn in the share price of MSTR and other bitcoin DATs still raises the question: Is the bitcoin digital asset treasury model broken? Strategy shares underperformed BTC, falling more than 40% this year (TradingView) According to Elliot Chun, managing partner at investment bank Architect Partners, it’s the opposite. “This is the most exciting period for BTC DATs yet because in real time, we are seeing and will see which DATs will be able to successfully maneuver and communicate through this first ‘macro’ price move lower,” Chun said in an interview with CoinDesk. “We are still so early, as an industry, we haven’t even properly categorized the DAT category yet, so it’s impossible to say if the model is broken,” he added. More than 700% return Chun breaks the bitcoin DAT landscape into four broad groups now unfolding in real time. “Pure play” DATs which direct nearly all corporate resources toward maximizing a bitcoin-denominated outcome, often BTC per share. “Producing” DATs that actually generate bitcoin through operations like mining. “Hybrid” DATs that treat the crypto as a primary pillar but still run non-BTC initiatives, and “participating” DATs that simply hold the digital asset on their balance sheet and leverage it as a capital markets tool. As these categories experiment… The post Is the Bitcoin (BTC) Digital Asset Treasury Model Broken? Industry Banker Says No appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin digital asset treasury (DAT) companies have been making headlines in recent weeks, and often for the wrong reasons. A sharp decline in crypto markets and over 40% slump (as of Nov. 27) in the share price of the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin, Strategy (MSTR), this year, has led some to question the sustainability of these companies. Strategy’s steep underperformance relative to bitcoin (down about 2% this year) in recent months may be due to looming index-inclusion risk rather than crypto-market dynamics, according to Wall Street bank JPMorgan. However, the downturn in the share price of MSTR and other bitcoin DATs still raises the question: Is the bitcoin digital asset treasury model broken? Strategy shares underperformed BTC, falling more than 40% this year (TradingView) According to Elliot Chun, managing partner at investment bank Architect Partners, it’s the opposite. “This is the most exciting period for BTC DATs yet because in real time, we are seeing and will see which DATs will be able to successfully maneuver and communicate through this first ‘macro’ price move lower,” Chun said in an interview with CoinDesk. “We are still so early, as an industry, we haven’t even properly categorized the DAT category yet, so it’s impossible to say if the model is broken,” he added. More than 700% return Chun breaks the bitcoin DAT landscape into four broad groups now unfolding in real time. “Pure play” DATs which direct nearly all corporate resources toward maximizing a bitcoin-denominated outcome, often BTC per share. “Producing” DATs that actually generate bitcoin through operations like mining. “Hybrid” DATs that treat the crypto as a primary pillar but still run non-BTC initiatives, and “participating” DATs that simply hold the digital asset on their balance sheet and leverage it as a capital markets tool. As these categories experiment…

Is the Bitcoin (BTC) Digital Asset Treasury Model Broken? Industry Banker Says No

Bitcoin digital asset treasury (DAT) companies have been making headlines in recent weeks, and often for the wrong reasons.

A sharp decline in crypto markets and over 40% slump (as of Nov. 27) in the share price of the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin, Strategy (MSTR), this year, has led some to question the sustainability of these companies.

Strategy’s steep underperformance relative to bitcoin (down about 2% this year) in recent months may be due to looming index-inclusion risk rather than crypto-market dynamics, according to Wall Street bank JPMorgan. However, the downturn in the share price of MSTR and other bitcoin DATs still raises the question: Is the bitcoin digital asset treasury model broken?

Strategy shares underperformed BTC, falling more than 40% this year (TradingView)

According to Elliot Chun, managing partner at investment bank Architect Partners, it’s the opposite.

“This is the most exciting period for BTC DATs yet because in real time, we are seeing and will see which DATs will be able to successfully maneuver and communicate through this first ‘macro’ price move lower,” Chun said in an interview with CoinDesk.

“We are still so early, as an industry, we haven’t even properly categorized the DAT category yet, so it’s impossible to say if the model is broken,” he added.

More than 700% return

Chun breaks the bitcoin DAT landscape into four broad groups now unfolding in real time.

“Pure play” DATs which direct nearly all corporate resources toward maximizing a bitcoin-denominated outcome, often BTC per share. “Producing” DATs that actually generate bitcoin through operations like mining. “Hybrid” DATs that treat the crypto as a primary pillar but still run non-BTC initiatives, and “participating” DATs that simply hold the digital asset on their balance sheet and leverage it as a capital markets tool.

As these categories experiment publicly, failures are inevitable, but according to Chun, that’s standard for any emerging corporate or capital-markets model.

What all bitcoin DATs must ultimately solve, Chun notes, is revenue: how to generate yield or cash flow, whether denominated in BTC or otherwise. And not all will make it.

He expects that within five years, half of today’s pure play, producing and hybrid DATs will disappear through failure, delisting, mergers or acquisitions.

About 35% will survive without outperforming, 10% will beat major market indices like the S&P 500, and the top 5% could challenge the Magnificent Seven’s decade-long run, returning more than 700% between 2025 and 2034, Chun said.

Can these companies withstand a true downturn? It depends on how one defines ‘severe.’ If the recent pullback counts, Chun expects most DATs to make it through. The real test will be deeper macro stress, where operational clarity, treasury discipline and a credible plan will separate survivors from targets.

$1 million bitcoin

So what comes next for this industry? Just like any other industry that rises in breakneck speed during a bull run and starts to crumble during a downturn, it’s consolidation.

The firms blending TradFi discipline with bitcoin-native understanding will craft messages that resonate with investors and position themselves to raise and deploy capital effectively. And those that can’t, will be acquired, often by other DATs, Chun said.

Over the longer term, he expects the strongest performers to become acquisition targets for the world’s largest public companies as the bitcoin price marches toward $1 million and corporate treasuries increasingly view BTC as a strategic, rather than speculative, asset.

Read more: Bitcoin’s $1T Rout Exposes Fragile Market Structure, Deutsche Bank Says

Source: https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/11/30/is-the-bitcoin-digital-asset-treasury-model-broken-architect-partners-says-no

Market Opportunity
Bitcoin Logo
Bitcoin Price(BTC)
$68,740.22
$68,740.22$68,740.22
+1.79%
USD
Bitcoin (BTC) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Yunfeng Financial appoints Jiang Guofei as Chairman of Web3 Development Committee

Yunfeng Financial appoints Jiang Guofei as Chairman of Web3 Development Committee

PANews reported on September 19th that the South China Morning Post reported that Jack Ma-backed Yunfeng Financial Group has appointed former Ant Group executive Geoff Jiang Guofei as Chairman of its Web3 Development Committee, further clarifying its strategic layout in the Web3 space. Jiang Guofei previously led Ant Group's blockchain project, Trusple , and served as Director of the DAMO Academy's Fintech Lab. Yunfeng recently completed its first real-world asset ( RWA ) tokenization project and purchased 10,000 Ethereum (ETH) for $ 44 million as a strategic reserve, with plans to promote tokenized solutions across multiple asset classes.
Share
PANews2025/09/19 18:01
Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

BitcoinWorld Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security Ever wondered why withdrawing your staked Ethereum (ETH) isn’t an instant process? It’s a question that often sparks debate within the crypto community. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recently stepped forward to defend the network’s approximately 45-day ETH unstaking period, asserting its crucial role in safeguarding the network’s integrity. This lengthy waiting time, while sometimes seen as an inconvenience, is a deliberate design choice with profound implications for security. Why is the ETH Unstaking Period a Vital Security Measure? Vitalik Buterin’s defense comes amidst comparisons to other networks, like Solana, which boast significantly shorter unstaking times. He drew a compelling parallel to military operations, explaining that an army cannot function effectively if its soldiers can simply abandon their posts at a moment’s notice. Similarly, a blockchain network requires a stable and committed validator set to maintain its security. The current ETH unstaking period isn’t merely an arbitrary delay. It acts as a critical buffer, providing the network with sufficient time to detect and respond to potential malicious activities. If validators could instantly exit, it would open doors for sophisticated attacks, jeopardizing the entire system. Currently, Ethereum boasts over one million active validators, collectively staking approximately 35.6 million ETH, representing about 30% of the total supply. This massive commitment underpins the network’s robust security model, and the unstaking period helps preserve this stability. Network Security: Ethereum’s Paramount Concern A shorter ETH unstaking period might seem appealing for liquidity, but it introduces significant risks. Imagine a scenario where a large number of validators, potentially colluding, could quickly withdraw their stake after committing a malicious act. Without a substantial delay, the network would have limited time to penalize them or mitigate the damage. This “exit queue” mechanism is designed to prevent sudden validator exodus, which could lead to: Reduced decentralization: A rapid drop in active validators could concentrate power among fewer participants. Increased vulnerability to attacks: A smaller, less stable validator set is easier to compromise. Network instability: Frequent and unpredictable changes in validator numbers can lead to performance issues and consensus failures. Therefore, the extended period is not a bug; it’s a feature. It’s a calculated trade-off between immediate liquidity for stakers and the foundational security of the entire Ethereum ecosystem. Ethereum vs. Solana: Different Approaches to Unstaking When discussing the ETH unstaking period, many point to networks like Solana, which offers a much quicker two-day unstaking process. While this might seem like an advantage for stakers seeking rapid access to their funds, it reflects fundamental differences in network architecture and security philosophies. Solana’s design prioritizes speed and immediate liquidity, often relying on different consensus mechanisms and validator economics to manage security risks. Ethereum, on the other hand, with its proof-of-stake evolution from proof-of-work, has adopted a more cautious approach to ensure its transition and long-term stability are uncompromised. Each network makes design choices based on its unique goals and threat models. Ethereum’s substantial value and its role as a foundational layer for countless dApps necessitate an extremely robust security posture, making the current unstaking duration a deliberate and necessary component. What Does the ETH Unstaking Period Mean for Stakers? For individuals and institutions staking ETH, understanding the ETH unstaking period is crucial for managing expectations and investment strategies. It means that while staking offers attractive rewards, it also comes with a commitment to the network’s long-term health. Here are key considerations for stakers: Liquidity Planning: Stakers should view their staked ETH as a longer-term commitment, not immediately liquid capital. Risk Management: The delay inherently reduces the ability to react quickly to market volatility with staked assets. Network Contribution: By participating, stakers contribute directly to the security and decentralization of Ethereum, reinforcing its value proposition. While the current waiting period may not be “optimal” in every sense, as Buterin acknowledged, simply shortening it without addressing the underlying security implications would be a dangerous gamble for the network’s reliability. In conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s defense of the lengthy ETH unstaking period underscores a fundamental principle: network security cannot be compromised for the sake of convenience. It is a vital mechanism that protects Ethereum’s integrity, ensuring its stability and trustworthiness as a leading blockchain platform. This deliberate design choice, while requiring patience from stakers, ultimately fortifies the entire ecosystem against potential threats, paving the way for a more secure and reliable decentralized future. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the main reason for Ethereum’s long unstaking period? A1: The primary reason is network security. A lengthy ETH unstaking period prevents malicious actors from quickly withdrawing their stake after an attack, giving the network time to detect and penalize them, thus maintaining stability and integrity. Q2: How long is the current ETH unstaking period? A2: The current ETH unstaking period is approximately 45 days. This duration can fluctuate based on network conditions and the number of validators in the exit queue. Q3: How does Ethereum’s unstaking period compare to other blockchains? A3: Ethereum’s unstaking period is notably longer than some other networks, such as Solana, which has a two-day period. This difference reflects varying network architectures and security priorities. Q4: Does the unstaking period affect ETH stakers? A4: Yes, it means stakers need to plan their liquidity carefully, as their staked ETH is not immediately accessible. It encourages a longer-term commitment to the network, aligning staker interests with Ethereum’s stability. Q5: Could the ETH unstaking period be shortened in the future? A5: While Vitalik Buterin acknowledged the current period might not be “optimal,” any significant shortening would likely require extensive research and network upgrades to ensure security isn’t compromised. For now, the focus remains on maintaining robust network defenses. Found this article insightful? Share it with your friends and fellow crypto enthusiasts on social media to spread awareness about the critical role of the ETH unstaking period in Ethereum’s security! To learn more about the latest Ethereum trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Ethereum’s institutional adoption. This post Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 15:30
XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price

XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price

The post XRP holders hit new high, but THIS keeps pressure on price appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ripple [XRP] remains one of the top five cryptocurrencies
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/17 08:49