Bitcoin’s (BTC) slide to as low as $60,233 overnight, before recovering somewhat to $65,443, has left most of the largest pure-play Bitcoin treasury companies deeply underwater on their holdings, with combined unrealized losses approaching $10 billion across eight entities that collectively control more than 850,000 BTC.
The reckoning hits hardest at the top. Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, holds 713,502 BTC at an average cost basis of $76,047 per coin, resulting in an unrealized loss of $6.85 billion at current prices.
That’s a 12.6% drawdown on a treasury worth $47.4 billion at spot, but the company’s scale means every $1,000 move in Bitcoin’s price swings its paper position by $713.5 million.
Metaplanet, the Japanese hotel firm turned Bitcoin accumulator, sits $1.45 billion underwater on 35,102 BTC acquired at an average of $107,716. Its 38.3% unrealized loss reflects the timing risk associated with late-2024 and early-2025 purchases made near all-time highs.
Twenty One Capital reports a $906.7 million paper loss on 43,514 BTC purchased at $87,280.37, leaving it 23.9% underwater. The value considered is derived from a July 29, 2025, filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
The dataset, sourced from Bitcoin Treasuries, tracks only companies whose business model centers exclusively on Bitcoin accumulation.
Coinbase, Tesla, and other firms with diversified operations don’t qualify, making this a pure test of conviction versus cost basis.
Seven of the eight names analyzed are currently underwater. The sole exception is Next, which purchased 5,833 BTC at $35,670.09 and still holds an unrealized gain of 86.3% ($179.5 million).
The mNAV compression risk
Market-to-net-asset-value ratios add a reflexive dimension to the pain. Metaplanet trades at an mNAV of 1.018, essentially in line with its BTC holdings, while Strategy’s 0.784 multiple implies the market values its equity at a 21.6% discount to its Bitcoin treasury.
Nakamoto, with 5,398 BTC and a 0.329 mNAV, trades at a 67% discount despite holding coins acquired at $119,729, representing a 44.5% unrealized loss.
This divergence matters because underwater treasuries often need either premium mNAV multiples or dilutive equity raises to keep accumulating. In drawdowns, markets typically demand the opposite: wider discounts and higher hurdle rates for new capital.
Companies that remain profitable, such as Next, retain optionality. They can hold, realize gains to fund operations, or deploy proceeds defensively.
Names 40% underwater face a different calculus: holding becomes a forced bet that Bitcoin rebounds before financing windows close.
The incremental damage
The current $65,443 price is 51% below Bitcoin’s October 2025 peak of $126,000, part of a broader crypto market drawdown that has erased nearly $2 trillion in value.
Earlier this week, $2.5 billion in Bitcoin liquidations accelerated the deleveraging, and Financial Times noted rising prediction-market odds of a sub-$60,000 outcome.
Stifel’s technical models flag $38,000 as a cycle-style crash target based on trendline support.
If Bitcoin sees a sustained drop below $60,000, a 9% decline from current levels, Strategy’s incremental loss deepens by $4.6 billion, Metaplanet’s by $226 million, and Twenty One Capital’s by $280 million.
At $50,000, those figures balloon to $11.73 billion, $577 million, and $715 million, respectively.
A slide to $38,000 would impose an additional $20.29 billion loss on Strategy alone, beyond the $6.85 billion it’s already underwater.
Strive, holding 13,132 BTC at a $105,850 basis, would see its $517.5 million current loss expand by $373.5 million if Bitcoin hits $38,000.
ProCap’s 5,000 BTC, purchased at $104,219.34, would deepen its $188.9 million underwater position by an additional $142 million.
Even Next, still profitable at current prices, would surrender $165.9 million of its $179.5 million paper gain if Bitcoin falls to $38,000, leaving it barely above break-even.
| Company | BTC held | ΔP/L to $60,000 | ΔP/L to $50,000 | ΔP/L to $38,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nakamoto | 5,398 | -$0.03B | -$0.09B | -$0.15B |
| Next | 5,833 | -$0.04B | -$0.10B | -$0.17B |
| ProCap | 5,000 | -$0.03B | -$0.08B | -$0.14B |
| Strive | 13,132 | -$0.08B | -$0.22B | -$0.37B |
| Metaplanet | 35,102 | -$0.23B | -$0.58B | -$1.00B |
| Twenty One Capital (XXI) | 43,514 | -$0.28B | -$0.72B | -$1.24B |
| Strategy | 713,502 | -$4.60B | -$11.73B | -$20.29B |
| Cohort total (ex-Bitcoin Standard) | 821,481 | -$5.29B | -$13.51B | -$23.37B |
| Strategy share of cohort incremental loss | 86.9% | 86.9% | 86.9% |
ETF outflows and the distribution shift
The drawdown coincides with a structural shift in Bitcoin distribution.
US spot Bitcoin ETFs, which accumulated aggressively through 2024 and early 2025, have seen net outflows in recent weeks as institutional allocators rotate toward safer assets.
That flow reversal removes a key buyer bloc that previously absorbed supply pressure, leaving treasury companies as the dominant diamond-hands cohort.
But “diamond hands” is a narrative, not a financing strategy. Companies accumulating via convertible debt or equity raises face rising costs and shrinking mNAV premiums.
Metaplanet’s 1.018 multiple gives it equity-issuance capacity near parity with BTC holdings.
Strategy’s 0.784 means every dollar raised via equity costs 1.27 dollars of Bitcoin value on a look-through basis.
Nakamoto’s 0.329 multiple turns equity raises into a 3-to-1 dilution tax.
Reflexivity trap
The danger isn’t only the mark-to-market loss but also the feedback loop.
Underwater treasuries compress mNAV multiples, raising the cost of new capital, slowing accumulation, weighing on equity sentiment, and compressing multiples further.
Companies with high cost bases bought into strength. If Bitcoin continues to fall, they bought into the top of a cycle.
Twenty One Capital’s $87,280.37 basis, disclosed in SEC filings, sits 24% above current prices but 13% below Strategy’s $76,047 average. It becomes a matter of timing, not conviction.
ProCap’s estimated $104,219.34 basis and Strive’s $105,850 cluster in the same late-2024 buying window. All three are now 36-37% underwater, meaning they would need Bitcoin to rally above $91,000 to break even, a 37% gain from current levels.
What happens at $38,000
If Stifel’s $38,000 target materializes, the aggregate loss for these eight treasuries would exceed $25 billion in incremental damage from today’s levels.
Strategy alone would result in a $20.29 billion hit on top of its current $6.85 billion paper loss, bringing total unrealized losses to $27.14 billion. Metaplanet would be nearly $2.5 billion underwater total, while Twenty One Capital would approach $2.2 billion.
At that price, even Next would fall short of breakeven, erasing its $179.5 million cushion. The entire cohort would be underwater, with no optionality other than to hold and wait for a recovery that markets are increasingly pricing as uncertain.
Pure Bitcoin treasuries bet that conviction plus scale equals compounding.
When Bitcoin rises, leverage amplifies gains and mNAV multiples expand, turning equity into a call option on BTC with embedded financing arbitrage. When Bitcoin falls, the same leverage turns paper losses into financing constraints and multiple compressions into a reflexive trap.
The current $65,443 price doesn’t erase the thesis. Instead, it stress-tests it.
Strategy’s $6.85 billion unrealized loss represents 12.6% of its BTC value, a figure that would be tolerable if Bitcoin rebounds. If it doesn’t, the question becomes: at what price does underwater become unsustainable, and who decides when conviction turns into capitulation?
For now, the market has rendered its verdict through mNAV: premiums for profitable treasuries, discounts for underwater ones, and steep discounts for those without clear exit ramps.
The paper loss leaderboard isn’t static. It recalibrates with every $1,000 move in Bitcoin, and the next leg down will determine whether these treasuries are value traps or cycle survivors.
The post Bitcoin’s slide to $60k puts BTC treasury companies $10B underwater as one major firm is braces for a $27B disaster appeared first on CryptoSlate.