Deconstructing DAT: Building a Depth Analysis Beyond mNAV

Authors: @sui414, @0xallyzach, @cosmo_jiang Compiled by: @kokii_eth

Original link:

Statement: This article is a reprint. Readers can obtain more information through the original link. If the author has any objections to the reprint format, please contact us, and we will make modifications according to the author's request. Reprinting is for information sharing only and does not constitute any investment advice, nor does it represent the views and positions of Wu's statement.

TL; DR

·Power law distribution pattern: The DAT industry exhibits a power law distribution, with leading projects in various categories occupying the vast majority of market share, while long-tail projects struggle to survive. Despite the presence of bubbles, DAT based on real assets and differentiated treasury strategies still represents significant financial innovation.

·Value and sentiment divergence: mNAV often obscures long-term value drivers. Our growth driver decomposition model separates fundamental compound growth from market sentiment. Data shows that companies like BMNR and HSDT continue to see per-share value growth, while the decline in most DAT stock prices is mainly due to sentiment contraction rather than fundamental deterioration.

·The fragile flywheel effect: DAT relies on the reflexive capital cycle—issuing stocks to grow the treasury when at a premium, defending the per-share value when at a discount. This is particularly challenging in a declining market. Companies like Bitmine manage prudently, while some aggressive issuances by companies lead to dilution, harming long-term sustainability.

·Dual Assessment Framework: A complete assessment should focus on 1. Fundamental value growth independent of emotions; 2. Issuance and treasury management - that is, whether the management responds responsibly to market conditions. The two together determine whether DAT is creating value or eroding value.

· Data infrastructure gap: The industry urgently needs structured comparable data, including establishing disclosure standards, enhancing transparency, and optimizing operational practices. Stronger data transparency will drive industry maturity and ensure investors' right to know.

In 2025, the DAT Summer arrived, with DATs such as Bitmine (BMNR), Sharplink (SBET), and Solana Company (HSDT) entering the mainstream, leading to rapid expansion in the field. Currently, the total market capitalization of the 30 BTC, ETH, and SOL DATs we are tracking has reached 117 billion dollars. However, after the market shock, the initial hype has begun to cool down.

Despite the constant market noise, most investors still evaluate DAT solely through the narrow perspective of mNAV ( market capitalization / net asset value ratio ), failing to grasp the intrinsic mechanisms of its core value, treasury strategy, or issuance discipline.

To this end, we have compiled this report by referring to the DAT data dashboard built by our partner Pantera, aiming to promote discussion, clarify misunderstandings, and establish a more rigorous DAT evaluation framework.

0. What is a digital asset treasury (DATs)?

Digital Asset Treasuries, DATs ( are one of the most remarkable financial experiments in today's public markets. They are publicly traded companies with a balance sheet primarily consisting of digital assets, allowing investors to indirectly gain exposure to the risks of digital assets like BTC, ETH, SOL through the stock market. This means that investors can trade in a regulated environment through traditional brokerage accounts, avoiding the complexities of on-chain platforms.

Unlike ETFs or trusts, DAT is an operational company rather than a passive investment tool. They can directly hold, trade, or even stake digital assets, issue new shares, or raise funds, forming an actively managed treasury tool, with its value linked to both the underlying digital assets and the company's capital management strategy.

A typical DAT starts with a small publicly listed company or newly listed instrument holding digital assets )SAPC(, whose net asset value )NAV - Net Asset Value( reflects the total fair value held, and market capitalization )Market Cap - MCAP( represents the pricing of the same asset exposure in the stock market—often with a premium or discount due to market sentiment, liquidity, and management confidence.

Some DATs, such as the Strategy for BTC, have a core business model that relies on equity financing to continuously increase their target assets. Other DATs explore staking yields, derivatives exposure, or diversified portfolios, layering returns on top of price exposure.

For investors, DAT becomes a bridge between traditional finance and on-chain assets:

For both retail and institutional investors, DAT provides regulatory clarity, broker accessibility, and compliance compatibility, allowing them to gain exposure to digital assets through familiar channels.

For the crypto ecosystem, DAT creates new channels for capital inflow, which can increase the circulation scarcity of underlying assets, support staking infrastructure, and deepen liquidity in the secondary market.

Many companies and institutions participate in DAT issuance through PIPE ) Private Investment in Public Equity, with their investment logic based on the “forward flywheel” shown in the figure below:

However, the market also has many doubts about DAT:

This positive flywheel can easily be seen as an eternal bull market engine, but what happens when both mNAV and the underlying digital asset prices fall? ·PIPE investors set the price before the DAT announcement (, which is usually lower than the retail investors ) acquiring shares, often being questioned as insider trading or retail investor harvesting. · Trading above NAV is considered problematic because retail investors are forced to pay a high premium; trading below NAV is also seen as problematic because it requires selling assets to repurchase shares.

This article will analyze these doubts through data, clarify misunderstandings, explain the true meanings of various indicators, and share the DAT evaluation methodology.

1. Core Indicator Analysis: mNAV and Limitations

Since March 2025, the total market capitalization of the 30 DATs we track has risen from 88 billion dollars (mainly attributed to Strategy/MSTR at the time) to about 117 billion dollars, covering the three major digital assets: BTC, ETH, and SOL. However, market discussions still overly focus on the mNAV single indicator, neglecting its true meaning and other important indicators.

DAT is essentially stocks traded on the open market, and the evaluation should focus on two key factors:

· Company Value ( NAV/ Net Asset Value ): Reflects the true value of the company. For DAT, it refers to the total current assets held on the balance sheet— including digital assets and undeployed cash equivalents. The core value drivers of the company are not traditional operating profits, but the holding and growth of digital assets.

·Market Value ( MCAP/ Market Capitalization ): An assessment of the company's value by the market, calculated by multiplying the stock price by the total number of outstanding shares.

Net Asset Value /Net Asset Value (NAV)

NAV measures the total value of a company's holdings in the simplest way:

NAV reflects the basic value of held assets, but the specific composition varies by company. Some companies hold cash reserves, short-term government bonds, or other equities, while others hold convertible bonds or warrants, making it difficult to standardize NAV. Existing dashboards often use simplified formulas, with some extended to include debt and convertible instruments.

NAV multiple / Multiple NAV (mNAV)

Although NAV reflects the company's underlying assets, it does not reflect the market's assessment of those assets. This necessitates market capitalization: the real-time assessment of the company's value by the market.

The relationship between market value and NAV provides the most关注指标 in the DAT field: mNAV ( NAV multiple )

mNAV represents how much the market is willing to pay for each dollar of net asset value:

·mNAV > 1 → Indicates that the market has an optimistic view of the company's prospects or believes that the company has growth potential. The market values the company higher than its assets on the balance sheet, usually considering the expected future growth of each token per share. ·mNAV < 1 → Reflects a skeptical attitude from the market. Investors may be concerned about equity dilution, question the management's discipline, or believe that the company's digital asset exposure has failed to effectively translate into shareholder value.

Essentially, mNAV is an emotional multiplier based on fundamentals, revealing the market's belief in the ability to accumulate digital asset holdings of DAT.

As of today, in the BTC DAT category, Strategy (MSTR), GME, and MARA are all close to 1.0 after recent market adjustments. However, most other BTC DATs have mNAVs below 1.0, with EMPD being the lowest at about 0.5.

The new DATs like DJT and USBC currently have an mNAV of about 2-3, reflecting the speculative characteristics of early DATs. A few exceptions: CLSK is around 4, and CORZ is close to 7, both of which are AI data center companies that were previously BTC miners (, indicating that despite the overall normalization of the market, certain narratives or structural factors are still driving premiums.

The ETH DAT market is similar to: BMNR, SBET, GAME trading around 1x mNAV, reflecting fair value pricing; BTBT and COSM have higher multiples because these companies have profitable business lines beyond their digital asset holdings, and the market may not view them as pure DAT assessments.

In the Solana DAT registered with PIPE shares, only HSDT trades at a slight premium of 1.12 times as of November 12, 2025 ), while the rest are slightly below 1, indicating that market trends are generally consistent with the fundamentals, cooling down from earlier periods.

Premium and Discount

Premium / Discount is essentially another presentation of mNAV, measuring the market's trust or speculation level regarding the company's treasury value, expressed in relative prices rather than multiples. A high premium indicates leverage, strong sentiment, or operational excess returns, while a discount typically reflects concerns about equity dilution or weak capital discipline.

In the data dashboard, extreme premium cases of about 800% for COSM, CORZ, etc. can be seen, mainly due to the market valuing based on existing core business valuations, not due to DAT attributes.

digital asset per share

Evaluating the intrinsic growth of DAT requires tracking both the amount of digital assets held and the number of circulating shares simultaneously. A healthy DAT aims to achieve growth in both indicators: increasing the amount of digital assets held to enhance the scale of the underlying assets, and issuing new shares to raise funds to support growth. Although the issuance of new shares dilutes the equity of existing shareholders, if the rate of asset growth exceeds the rate of new share issuance, this dilution can actually result in gains.

Key derivative indicators measure how much digital asset each share of stock effectively represents, reflecting the degree of shareholder exposure magnification. An increase in digital currency per share indicates that the funds raised from issuance are being used for asset growth rather than offsetting equity dilution.

Among the 30 tracked DATs, few companies have been able to grow their per-share digital assets along a stable upward trend. Notable exceptions include Strategy (MSTR), BMNR, HSDT, ETHM, BTCS, CEP, and UPXI.

Experience shows that many DATs, even if they perform well early on, will undergo severe equity dilution due to the large issuance of new shares. In contrast, the aforementioned companies maintain continuous growth without significant declines, indicating a more prudent strategy in balancing capital issuance and asset accumulation.

Other market indicators

In addition to company-level metrics, several comparative indicators help measure DAT's position in the broader ecosystem:

·Market share ( based on NAV, market capitalization, or trading volume ): measures the relative dominance of different digital assets in various DATs. Since each DAT stock represents different underlying asset values, comparing raw trading volumes may be misleading; the turnover rate ( trading volume / market capitalization ) provides a more accurate measure of liquidity and activity.

·Asset supply ratio %: The proportion of DAT held tokens to the total supply, reflecting its systemic impact on the underlying ecosystem.

In BTC DAT, the dominance of Strategy is significant: it holds 83.3% of the total BTC DAT positions (accounting for 3.22% of the total BTC supply) and occupies 72% of the market value within the category. The trading volume shares of GME and BRR have shown noticeable growth, reflecting an increase in retail investor activity.

The ETH DAT sector is similarly dominated by Bitmine: holding over 66% of the total ETH DAT positions (, accounting for approximately 2.9% of the ETH supply ), which represents 68% of the market value and 85% of the transaction volume. The second-largest player, SBET, holds around 16-20% of the ETH positions and market share, while BTBT ranks third with approximately 6% (.

The concentration of the Solana DAT market is relatively low: FORD leads with a market share of 45% and SOL holds 44%. HSDT, DFDV, STSS, and UPXI each account for about 13-14% of the holdings, but Solana Company )HSDT( is leading the industry with a market share of about 22%.

Interestingly, from the perspective of trading volume, the situation is the opposite: DFDV and UPXI are leading in activity compared to FORD. Historical trends indicate that both are pioneers in the Solana DAT category, and this advantage seems to continue to this day. Even though FORD later achieved a higher NAV, the trading momentum and market attention maintained by the early entrants remain difficult to shake.

2. Limitations and Misunderstandings

Although the definition is simple, tracking these basic indicators is not an easy task—mainly because the data from SEC filings is neither real-time nor standardized like on-chain data.

The best source for balance sheet accounting formats is the 10-Q form, but it is only published quarterly. Many companies use custom-designed or branded PDF files, making extraction more difficult. Even when data is consistently reported in the same format, it is often embedded in text files that require semantic parsing. Additionally, each company reports item formats differently, which is understandable considering their equity structures and differences in financial assets.

The source of position update data can be very decentralized—some companies even disclose changes not through SEC filings, but via Twitter, press releases, or media interviews.

Nevertheless, most stock market indicators ) such as price and trading volume ( are quite standardized. However, the number of shares outstanding remains difficult to track—companies are not required to report daily through filings, and many data dashboards rely on third-party APIs, which obtain data from market makers or banks and often have delays of several days.

One of the best practices comes from Bitmine, which reports its digital asset holdings through 8-K filings sometimes more frequently on a weekly basis ).

When interpreting DAT data, it is important to be aware of how these data challenges can distort the metrics:

·Position Update

·Low frequency (monthly / quarterly) leads to outdated NAV, pushing up mNAV or premium.

· Some DAT holders have DeFi tokens, NFTs, other stocks, or semi-liquid assets, which complicates asset valuation.

·Share update: Failure to submit large-scale issuance or repurchase declarations will affect estimated market value, mNAV, premium/discount, and per share digital assets.

We have identified some common blind spots in public reports:

·Examining Accounting (Pro-Forma Accounting): Most data dashboards rely solely on reported outstanding shares, without considering the potential exercise of previously issued warrants. In DAT's PIPE transactions, warrants are often bundled with PIPE shares, and the exercise price is usually equal to or higher than the PIPE share price. At any time after the exercise date, if the stock trading price is above that level, the warrants can be exercised — a reasonable action for the holder. Since exercised warrants increase the number of outstanding shares but may not necessarily increase corresponding value, they have a significant dilutive effect on key metrics. Including these unexercised warrants in simulation calculations can more accurately reflect potential dilution effects and the true risk exposure of shareholders. · Prefunded Warrants (: These warrants have been received and accounted for in NAV, but the corresponding shares have not yet been issued. In many cases, the exercise price of these warrants is close to zero, meaning that once exercised, it will increase the number of shares without generating new income—resulting in a unilateral effect on equity dilution. We believe these warrants should be included in the outstanding shares; otherwise, the resulting mNAV calculation will underestimate the market value and overestimate NAV, leading to an imbalance. ·Pending mergers and PIPEs: When a company announces a new PIPE, the cash proceeds typically reflect in the NAV update before the shares are officially issued through the S-3 filing. If no adjustments are made to the shares, the per-share NAV denominator is underestimated, artificially inflating the metric. The chart below summarizes the main types of share issuance plans and their impact on the outstanding shares.

·Debt data and derivative exposure: Currently, there is almost no data dashboard that includes information on debt liabilities or leverage exposure, except for Artemis. This omission distorts NAV, especially for DATs that use structured returns or staking strategies.

After considering the debt, the adjusted NAV ) and the adjusted mNAV ( should reflect the true book value. This allows for a clear comparison between pure treasury exposure DATs ) like MSTR ( and hybrid operating DATs ) like BMNR or SBET (. What role does debt play in DAT management? In traditional finance, companies issue debt to finance growth while protecting shareholder ownership. The motivation is similar in the DAT space. Equity issuance means selling future earnings to new shareholders, diluting the interests of existing shareholders. In contrast, debt issuance means borrowing against existing assets, which does not cause equity dilution ) if managed properly (. Therefore, DATs utilize debt to expand on-chain asset scale without reducing the per-share digital asset value.

Due to these complexities, Pantera has built the DAT control panel - designed to present the overall picture in a clearer and more in-depth manner. In addition to data cleaning and standardization, the goal is to advance the conversation: comparing DAT with the broader stock market, not just limited to its own category; and advocating for higher on-chain transparency by tracking treasury wallets, yield generation, and other on-chain activities in future versions.

3. Choose the appropriate indicators

The mNAV alone cannot fully reflect the performance of DAT. Below is the analytical framework we have summarized that is most valuable for a comprehensive evaluation of DAT performance.

Growth Drivers and Fundamental Prices

If we consider the stock price of DAT company as a product of several potential growth factors ) per token growth, token price, and market sentiment (, we can break it down to examine the real drivers of performance rather than pure narrative.

Formally, we can express the stock price at time t as:

Among them:

• = The growth of the basic digital asset price
• = Growth in the number of digital assets held per share (reflecting treasury and issuance dynamics)
• = Market sentiment changes (the pricing method of the market for the same fundamentals)

This decomposition method allows us to isolate each factor and independently track the true drivers of price fluctuations:

When stock prices fall, we can check whether it is due to a cooling market sentiment, a decline in the price of the underlying asset, or a deterioration in the company's fundamentals—conversely, which of these factors drives the stock price up. It can also help us see through the noise — for example, when a company's intrinsic value continues to grow while the market price is falling.

When we break down the price increase of Bitmine )BMNR(, we find that the price of each ETH has been steadily rising since its launch, while the mNAV ) sentiment multiplier ( has significantly contracted. This indicates that its fundamentals remain strong, with only a cooling of market speculation.

Summarizing this framework into three growth factors, we can chart DAT Company by category to assess its overall health:

·BTC DAT: Most fundamental values have grown relatively steadily, such as MSTR, CLSK, and CEP, showing a clear upward trend. In contrast, although SMLR, FLD, DJT, LMFA, and EMPD fundamentals remain stable, the market sentiment for these companies has sharply declined since tracking began, which is the main reason for the drop in stock prices. The only DAT that has shown a real decline in value is SQNS.

·ETH DAT: As a category pioneer, ETHZ and SBET benefited from the initial market sentiment rise, although the per share ETH remained relatively stable. Subsequently, the per share values of BMNR, ETHM, BTCS, BTBT, and GAME steadily increased, despite their mNAV growth showing a downward trend—possibly indicating that they were launched near the peak of the market cycle. FGNX is the exception, experiencing severe equity dilution and a sharp decline in market sentiment, resulting in performance significantly below expectations.

·SOL DAT: The per-share SOL of HSDT has increased significantly, growing 3 times from October until the report was released; UPXI has also steadily grown, but on a smaller scale. DFDV benefited from rising market sentiment, but its per-share SOL declined during the same period, indicating that the increase was driven more by market sentiment than by fundamentals. Meanwhile, both FORD and STSS saw significant expansions in mNAV, but fundamental value growth remained roughly flat, suggesting that performance is driven by market sentiment rather than balance sheet factors.

Fundamental Price

As shown in the figure above, most DAT companies have experienced a market cooling or contraction phase since their launch. To understand their potential development trajectory, we can further reconstruct the theoretical fundamental price of each company—essentially answering the question: “If market conditions were the same as on the day DAT was launched, what would the stock price be today?”

In other words, if you had held one share of stock since the company's inception and allowed the company to gradually accumulate inventory and issue shares over time, what is the current actual value of that share?

The figure below shows that several DAT companies—HSDT, BMNR, BTBT, BTCS, CORZ, and CEP—have steadily improved their fundamental values, but their stock prices have not fully reflected this due to changes in the market environment. Since their establishment, the fundamental indicators of these companies have significantly increased, even though overall market sentiment has contracted.

Share issuance and dilution

The success or failure of DAT Company depends on its equity issuance discipline. A key dimension in assessing DAT Company is how the management responds to market conditions, whether they take strategic actions when market sentiment changes or respond passively.

·When mNAV > 1: The company has the opportunity to issue shares at a premium. The key issue is the discipline of issuance; overly aggressive issuance will erode the per share digital asset value and depress the per share NAV, ultimately destroying market sentiment. Disciplined issuers responsibly expand the issuance scale, while reckless issuers manipulate the so-called “infinite ATM game.”

·When mNAV < 1: Greater challenges. A valuation multiple below 1 indicates the market's lack of confidence in the company's capital discipline, liquidity, or funding management strategies. The market may be pricing in expectations of future equity dilution, concerned about management's continued stock issuance during periods of low market sentiment. This may also indicate capital inefficiency, as the company fails to convert its exposure to digital assets into shareholder value.

If mNAV remains below 1, it will disrupt the DAT flywheel effect. The company can no longer issue new shares at a premium without diluting existing shareholders' equity. If forced to issue, the value of each digital asset will further decline, damaging trust and losing the ability to grow equity. Over time, this dynamic may cause the company to become a “zombie DAT”: a static holding company with a trading price below its liquidation value.

When mNAV falls below 1, the correct approach is to take defensive measures and restore credibility: stop all equity issuances ) including ATM and PIPE(, and make protecting the digital asset per share a core metric. The company must also increase transparency and financial reporting—publish wallet proofs, dashboards, and regularly updated NAVs to demonstrate that it is a clean, verifiable financial package rather than an opaque shell. If liquidity allows, repurchasing shares at a price below NAV can enhance returns and send a strong signal of confidence, which can typically restore premium levels. Management can also leverage on-chain earnings—staking ETH, participating in restaking, or earning yields from financial assets—to naturally boost NAV growth and convert passive asset holdings into income sources. Finally, the company must strengthen its narrative, positioning itself as a clear and reliable representative of specific assets or ecosystems, because when investment theses are clear, investor trust tends to return.

For DAT with mNAV <1, the correct strategy is to protect per-share value, increase transparency, and rebuild trust. By studying issuance data, stock buybacks, and fund management behaviors, we can understand which companies choose the value-added path and which companies continue to dilute equity.

22

Data shows that the best-managed DATs have historically been able to protect shareholder leverage during economic downturns, laying the groundwork for a rebound when market sentiment recovers.

As can be seen from the above figure, there are significant differences in ETH DATs regarding equity issuance and market sentiment management. Most companies show a gradual increase in the number of circulating shares—indicating a potential PIPE or ATM issuance.

BMNR data shows that, compared to its peers, the company's stock issuance and mNAV change patterns are more gradual. This sets a precedent for how the company can responsibly scale—using equity as a growth tool without disrupting the mNAV growth flywheel.

The circulating share quantities of BTBT, GAME, and BTCS have seen a sharp and sudden increase, while mNAV remains stable or declines, but their issuance timing is still reasonable, as the issuance occurred when the mNAV trading price was above 1, within a premium window.

In contrast, FGNX and ETHZ conducted large-scale issuance when mNAV < 1, effectively issuing shares during a weak market instead of waiting for favorable market conditions, which is a typical characteristic of lax capital discipline. For FGNX, early and aggressive dilution when mNAV was close to zero led to a destructive dilution event, erasing investor leverage and long-term confidence. However, ETHZ showed brief signs of corrective measures by reducing the number of shares in mid-October, helping its mNAV rebound from below 0.2 and partially restoring balance.

4. Open questions to be further researched

Pantera's dashboard data has also opened up new research directions:

·Unlocking Events: How much do they contribute to price declines?

·PIPE Investor Return on Investment: In the DAT field, which trades achieve positive returns? How are the results adjusted based on the underlying token performance (e.g., relative to spot ETF returns)?

·Market Microstructure: How does PIPE pricing information affect trading behavior?

·mNAV Dynamic Modeling: Is there a quantifiable relationship between issuance / repurchase and mNAV recovery?

More work still needs to be done on DAT data, calling for the establishment of more comprehensive data standards. Stock data is much more chaotic than on-chain data: formats are inconsistent, update frequency is low, and there is no unified model. To develop DAT into a legitimate asset class, we need open and standardized APIs for companies to report financial updates daily, covering:

·Issued shares (including prepayment and PIPE shares)

·Asset Classification of Treasury Holdings

·Warrants and debt data

Just as on-chain data transparency drives DeFi analysis, this layer of financial data transparency can change the way capital flows into DAT.

5. Conclusion

DAT is neither an angel nor a devil; neither a savior nor the culprit.

They are a new type of capital formation method—an innovative investment tool that operates in both directions: assisting in the appreciation of digital assets while providing leveraged exposure with on-chain yields to financial institutions. They are not perpetual motion machines, as the flywheel may break under market shocks; rather, they require disciplined strategies and execution from asset management companies. In optimal conditions, DAT can release meaningful value for both sides of the ecosystem:

For traditional investors, they provide regulated, highly liquid, and yield-enhancing exposure to digital assets—often offering additional on-chain returns that ETFs or trust funds cannot provide.

·For the crypto ecosystem, they directly channel traditional market funds into the token treasury—anchoring asset value within a compliant structure and enhancing liquidity.

If managed properly, they can amplify the positive feedback loop between the capital markets and the fundamentals of digital assets: an increase in mNAV leads to new issuances, new funds flowing into the purchase of digital assets, and then the cycle continues to develop upward.

In this sense, DAT serves as the “second cornerstone” of digital assets: institutionalizing capital inflows while providing investors with new, yield-enhancing investment opportunities.

Indeed, criticism is often genuine and instructive:

·Some DATs are merely speculative shells, lacking genuine operational strategies, and serve as short-term tools for PIPE investors to exit to retail investors, essentially no different from Memecoins;

· The market does not need dozens of DATs tracking the same assets. If the fund management strategies or governance methods lack differentiation, the proliferation of DATs will only increase market noise and undermine trust in the model. Similarly, there is no need to create DATs for hundreds of digital assets that lack long-term value, especially those operated by teams with low reputations, lack of community recognition, or limited technological innovation. This expansion may cause DATs to become a speculative frenzy rather than a reliable financial tool;

·Death Spiral )mNAV < 1( remains the most challenging issue. DAT essentially amplifies the exposure of an already highly volatile asset class, and once market sentiment shifts, the discount may quickly widen. However, mNAV < 1 usually indicates misalignment rather than a crash. Investors may reflect weak capital discipline, concerns over equity dilution, or inefficiencies in fund management, rather than a failure of the underlying digital assets themselves. Excellent operators can turn the situation around through transparent communication and strict equity management.

Ultimately, holding DAT requires a dual belief from market participants:

·Bullish on underlying assets in the long term—believing that their prices will rise over time and seeking leveraged exposure through active equity vehicles;

·Trust in operators' execution and capital discipline - As Tom Lee from Fundstrat pointed out, mNAV < 1 is illogical, and a competent management team will ultimately bring the stock price back to parity.

If both are true, then a lower mNAV is not an alert, but just a temporary phenomenon of market sentiment mispricing the actual balance sheet value.

The core of DAT lies in representing a new type of investment tool - it helps digital assets accumulate lasting value, while providing financial institutions with a regulated avenue for enhanced returns to participate in the future development of the digital asset era.