Bitcoin Treasury mNAV & ATM Accretion Calculator

Where the accretion flips to dilution

Same raise, same company, different share price. The only variable that matters for bitcoin per share is the multiple the market is paying — below the fee-adjusted break-even, every dollar raised takes bitcoin away from existing holders.

Bitcoin price stress against the debt stack

Net asset value per share is the bitcoin stack minus the debt. That subtraction is what turns a 30% bitcoin drawdown into something considerably worse for the equity — and it is why the coverage ratio matters more than the headline holdings number.

A different way to own the same bitcoin

A treasury stock is one of three routes to bitcoin exposure, and it is the only one where somebody else's financing decisions change your position size. Compare the fee-and-custody arithmetic of the other two with the bitcoin ETF vs self-custody calculator, and if you are using leverage to express the same view directly, size it with the liquidation calculator rather than borrowing someone else's.

The premium is a financing machine, not a valuation

A bitcoin treasury company is, stripped of narrative, a listed pile of bitcoin with a capital markets desk attached. The multiple the market assigns to that pile — mNAV — is usually discussed as though it were a sentiment gauge, something between a meme and a mispricing. It is neither. It is the input to a machine. When the stock trades above the value of its bitcoin, management can sell shares into the market and buy more bitcoin with the proceeds, and because each new share arrives carrying more bitcoin than it dilutes, the bitcoin owned by every existing holder goes up. Nobody had to be right about the price. The premium did the work. That single mechanism explains almost all of the strategy these companies run, and the arithmetic behind it is short enough to check by hand: issuance is accretive whenever mNAV exceeds one divided by one minus the cost of issuance.

Which is exactly why the premium collapsing is not a cosmetic problem. At an mNAV of 1.0x the machine stops. Below it, the machine runs in reverse — a raise still brings in cash, still buys bitcoin, and still leaves every existing holder with less bitcoin per share than they started with, because the shares sold were backed by more bitcoin than the cash bought. This is the point at which a treasury company's options narrow to selling bitcoin, issuing debt, or doing nothing, and it is why the first line in any of these filings that matters is not the holdings figure but the multiple at the moment of the raise. The table above prices that directly: hold the raise constant, move the share price, and watch the accretion column cross zero at the fee-adjusted threshold.

The second table prices the other half, which is what leverage does on the way down. Debt makes the strategy work when bitcoin rises — borrowing at low coupons to buy an asset that compounds faster than the coupon is the oldest trade there is — and it is unforgiving in the other direction, because net asset value per share subtracts the notes before it divides. A stack covering its debt four times over at $110,000 covers it barely twice at $55,000, and net asset value per share falls by considerably more than the coin did, because the debt does not shrink alongside it. Add the reflexivity of the multiple itself — premiums expand into strength and compress into weakness — and the share price falls for two independent reasons at once. If you hold one of these instead of the coin, the honest comparison is not against bitcoin's drawdown but against bitcoin's drawdown times the leverage times the multiple compression, and the far-right column above gives you that number at a constant multiple so you can add your own view on the compression.