Deconstructing DAT: Building in-depth analysis beyond mNAV

Author:@sui414, @0xallyzach, @cosmo_jiang，compile@kokii_eth

Summary

• Twenty-eight division pattern: The DAT industry exhibits a power-law distribution, with leading projects of various categories occupying the vast majority of the market share, and long-tail projects being unsustainable.Despite the bubble, DAT based on real assets and differentiated treasury strategies still represents an important financial innovation.

• Value and Sentiment Divergence: mNAV often masks long-term value drivers.Our growth driver decomposition model decouples fundamental compounding growth from market sentiment.Data shows that the per-share value of companies such as BMNR and HSDT continues to grow, while the decline in most DAT stock prices is mainly due to the contraction of sentiment and the deterioration of non-fundamentals.

• Fragile Flywheel Effect: DAT relies on a reflexive cycle of capital—issuing shares at premiums to grow the treasury and defending per-share value at discounts.This is extremely challenging in a declining market.Companies such as Bitmine have prudent management, and aggressive issuance by some companies has led to dilution and harmed long-term sustainability.

• Dual evaluation framework: A complete evaluation needs to focus on 1. Fundamental value growth independent of sentiment; 2. Issuance and treasury management – that is, whether 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, improving transparency, and optimizing operating practices.Greater data transparency will promote industry maturity and protect investors’ right to know.

2025 has ushered in DAT Summer, and the space is rapidly expanding as DATs like Bitmine (BMNR), Sharplink (SBET), and Solana Company (HSDT) enter the mainstream.The total market value of the 30 BTC, ETH and SOL DAT we currently track has reached US$117 billion.However, the initial hype has started to cool down after the market shock.

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

To that end, we compiled this report based on a DAT data dashboard built by our partner Pantera to drive discussion, clear up misunderstandings, and establish a more rigorous DAT assessment framework.

What are Digital Asset Treasurys (DATs)?

Digital Asset Treasurys (DATs) are one of the most high-profile financial experiments in public markets today.They are listed companies with balance sheets dominated by digital assets, allowing investors to gain indirect exposure to digital assets such as BTC, ETH, SOL, etc. through the stock market.This means that investors can trade in a regulated environment through traditional brokerage accounts, avoiding the complexity of on-chain platforms.

Unlike ETFs or trusts, DATs are operating companies, not passive investment vehicles.They can directly hold, trade or even pledge digital assets, issue new shares or raise funds, forming actively managed treasury tools whose value is dually linked to the underlying digital assets and the company’s capital management strategy.

A typical DAT begins with a small public company or newly listed vehicle (SAPC) holding a digital asset, with Net Asset Value (NAV) reflecting the total fair value of the holdings and Market Cap (MCAP) reflecting how the stock market prices exposure to the same assets – often at a premium or discount due to market sentiment, liquidity and management confidence.

The core of the business model of some DATs, such as BTC’s Strategy, is to use equity financing to continuously increase their holdings of target assets.Other DATs explore staking returns, 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 mass and institutional investors, DAT provides regulatory clarity, brokerage accessibility and compliance compatibility to have digital asset exposure through familiar channels.

• For the crypto ecosystem, DAT creates new capital inflow channels that can increase the scarcity of underlying asset circulation, support staking infrastructure, and deepen secondary market liquidity.

Many companies and institutions participate in DAT issuance through PIPE (Private Investment in Public Equity), and their investment logic is 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 viewed as a perpetual bull market engine, but what happens when mNAV and the price of the underlying digital asset both fall?

• PIPE investors obtain shares at a price set before the DAT announcement (usually lower than retail investors), which is often questioned as insider trading or harvesting of retail investors.

• Trading above NAV is seen as problematic because retail investors are forced to pay a high premium; trading below NAV is also seen as problematic because assets need to be sold to buy back shares.

This article will analyze these doubts through data, clarify misunderstandings, explain the true meaning of each indicator, and share the DAT evaluation methodology.

1. Analysis of core indicators: mNAV and limitations

Since March 2025, the total market value of the 30 DATs we track has climbed from US$88 billion (mainly attributed to Strategy/MSTR at the time) to approximately US$117 billion, covering the three major digital assets of BTC, ETH, and SOL.However, market discussions still focus too much on the mNAV single indicator, ignoring its true meaning and other important indicators.

DAT company market capitalization growth trend (based on 30 tracking targets)

DAT is essentially a stock traded in the public market. The evaluation needs to pay attention to two major factors:

• Company Value (NAV/Net Asset Value): Reflects the true value of the company.For DAT, total liquid assets held on the balance sheet – including digital assets and undeployed cash equivalents.The company’s core value driver is not traditional operating profit, but the holding and growth of digital assets.

• Market Value (MCAP/Market Capitalization): The market’s assessment of a company’s value, calculated by multiplying the share price by the total number of shares outstanding.

Net Asset Value (NAV)

NAV reflects the fundamental value of assets held, but the exact composition varies from company to company.Some companies hold cash reserves, Treasury bills or other equity, while others hold convertible bonds or warrants, differences that make NAV difficult to standardize.Existing data dashboards mostly use simplified formulas, and some have been extended to include debt and convertible instruments.

Multiple NAV / Multiple NAV (mNAV)

While NAV reflects a company’s underlying assets, it does not reflect the market’s assessment of those assets.This requires market capitalization: the market’s real-time assessment of a company’s value.

The Market Cap to NAV relationship provides the most watched metric in the DAT space: mNAV (NAV multiple)

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

• mNAV > 1 → indicates that the market is optimistic about the company’s prospects or believes that the company has growth potential.The market values ​​a company higher than the assets on its balance sheet, typically taking into account expected future token growth per share.

• mNAV < 1 → reflects market skepticism.Investors may worry about dilution, question management’s discipline, or feel that the company’s digital asset exposure is not effectively converting into shareholder value.

Essentially, mNAV is a sentiment multiplier built on fundamentals, revealing the market’s belief in DAT’s ability to accumulate digital asset holdings.

mNAV multiple of BTC DATs (excluding CLSK, CORZ, NAKA and SGNS)

As of today, in the BTC DAT category, Strategy (MSTR), GME, and MARA are all near 1.0 after the recent market correction.But most other BTC DATs have mNAV below 1.0, with EMPD having the lowest at around 0.5.

The current mNAV of new DATs such as DJT and USBC is about 2-3, reflecting the speculative characteristics of early DATs.A few exceptions: CLSK is around 4 and CORZ is closer to 7, both for AI data center companies (formerly BTC miners), indicating that specific narrative or structural factors are still driving premiums despite overall market normalization.

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

Of the Solana DATs where PIPE shares are registered, only HSDT trades at a modest premium of 1.12x (as of November 12, 2025), with the rest all just below 1, indicating that the market is moving broadly in line with fundamentals and cooling off from earlier cycles.

Premium and discount

Premium/discount is essentially another presentation of mNAV, measuring the market’s level of trust or speculation in the value of a company’s treasury, expressed as relative prices rather than multiples.High premiums signal leverage, strong sentiment or operating excess earnings, while discounts often reflect dilution concerns or weak capital discipline.

Approximately 800% of extreme premium cases such as COSM and CORZ can be seen in the data dashboard. This is mostly due to the market valuation based on existing core business and non-DAT attributes.

Digital assets per share

Assessing DAT intrinsic growth requires tracking both digital asset holdings and the number of shares outstanding.Healthy DAT strives to achieve growth in two indicators: increasing digital asset holdings to increase the scale of 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 growth rate of assets exceeds the rate of new share issuance, this dilution will actually bring benefits.

The key derivative indicator of digital assets per share measures how much digital assets each share effectively represents, reflecting the degree of amplification of shareholder exposure.The rise in digital currency per share suggests that proceeds from the issuance were used to grow assets rather than offset equity dilution.

Of the 30 DATs tracked, few are growing digital assets per share along a steady upward trend.Notable exceptions include Strategy (MSTR), BMNR, HSDT, ETHM, BTCS, CEP, and UPXI.

Experience shows that many DATs, even with solid early performance, experience sharp dilution due to large issuances of new shares.In contrast, the above-mentioned companies have maintained sustained growth without significant declines, indicating a more prudent strategy in balancing capital issuance and asset accumulation.

ETH DATs with continued growth in assets per share: BMNR, ETHM, BTCS

SOL DATs with continued growth in assets per share: HSDT, UPXI

Other market indicators

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

• Market share (by NAV, market capitalization or trading volume): measures the relative dominance of different DATs for each digital asset.Since each DAT stock represents a different underlying asset value, comparing raw trading volumes can be misleading, and turnover (trading volume/market capitalization) is a more accurate measure of liquidity and activity.

• Proportion of asset supply: The proportion of DAT tokens held in the total supply reflects its systemic impact on the underlying ecosystem.

Among BTC DAT, Strategy has a significant dominant position: it holds 83.3% of the total BTC DAT holdings (accounting for 3.22% of the total BTC supply) and accounts for 72% of the market capitalization within the category.GME and BRR’s turnover share increased significantly, reflecting the increased activity of retail investors.

BTC DATs transaction volume (USD) market share

ETH DATs crypto asset holdings market share

Bitmine also dominates the ETH DAT sector: it holds more than 66% of the total ETH DAT holdings (approximately 2.9% of ETH supply), accounting for 68% of the market value and 85% of the turnover.The second largest player, SBET, has about 16-20% of its ETH holdings and market capitalization share, and BTBT ranks third (about 6%).

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

SOL DATs crypto asset holdings market share

Interestingly, in terms of trading volume, the situation is opposite: DFDV and UPXI are more active than FORD.Historical trends show that the two are pioneers in the Solana DAT category, and this advantage seems to continue to this day. Even if FORD later obtains a higher NAV, the trading momentum and market attention maintained by early entrants are still difficult to shake.

SOL DATs transaction volume (USD) market share

2. Limitations and misunderstandings

While simple by definition, tracking these fundamental metrics is no easy task—primarily because SEC filing data is neither real-time nor as standardized as on-chain data.

The best source of formatting for balance sheet accounting is Form 10-Q, but it is only published quarterly.Many companies use custom designed or branded PDF files, making extraction more difficult.Even if the data is always reported in the same format, it is often embedded in text files that require semantic parsing.In addition, each company reports items in a different format, which is understandable given the differences in its ownership structure and financial assets.

Sources of position update data can be very fragmented—some companies don’t even file with the SEC, instead disclosing changes via Twitter, press releases, or media interviews.

Nonetheless, most stock market indicators such as price and volume are fairly standardized.However, the number of shares outstanding remains difficult to track—companies are not required to report daily via filings, and many data dashboards rely on third-party APIs that pull data from market makers or banks, often with delays of several days.

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

When interpreting DAT data, be aware of how these data challenges distort the metric:

• Position update

• Low frequency (monthly/quarterly) causes NAV to become obsolete, pushing mNAV higher or premium

• Some DATs hold DeFi tokens, NFTs, other stocks, or semi-liquid assets, complicating asset valuations

• Share count update: Failure to submit a large-scale offering or buyback filing will impact estimated market capitalization, mNAV, premium/discount and digital assets per share.

We found some common blind spots in public reporting:

• Pro-Forma Accounting: Most dashboards rely solely on declared outstanding shares and do not take into account potential exercise of previously issued warrants.In DAT’s PIPE transactions, the warrants are typically bundled with the PIPE stock, and the exercise price is usually equal to or higher than the PIPE stock price.The warrant becomes exercisable any time after the exercise date as long as the stock trades above that level – a reasonable move for the holder.Because exercised warrants increase the number of outstanding shares but not necessarily their corresponding value, they have a significant dilutive impact on key metrics.Including these unexercised warrants in the simulation calculations more accurately reflects the potential dilution effect and true shareholder exposure.

• Prefunded Warrants: Proceeds from these warrants have been received and included 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, the number of shares will be increased without new earnings – the dilution effect is one-sided.We believe these warrants should be included in outstanding shares; otherwise, the resulting mNAV calculation would understate market cap and overstate NAV, creating an imbalance.

• Pending Mergers and Acquisitions and PIPEs: When a company announces a new PIPE, the cash proceeds are typically reflected in the NAV update before the shares are officially issued via an S-3 filing.Without pro forma adjustments for shares, the NAV per share denominator is understated, artificially inflating the metric.The chart below summarizes the main types of share issuance plans and their impact on shares outstanding.

Debt Data and Derivatives Exposure: With the exception of Artemis, few data dashboards currently incorporate information on debt liabilities or leverage exposure.This omission distorts NAV, especially for DATs with structured yield or staking strategies.

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

Because of these complexities, Pantera built the DAT dashboard—designed to present the full picture with greater clarity and depth.In addition to data cleansing and standardization, the goals are to move the conversation forward: comparing DAT to the broader stock market, rather than just its own category; and advocating for greater on-chain transparency by tracking treasury wallets, revenue generation, and other on-chain activity in future releases.

3. Choose the right indicator

mNAV alone does not provide a complete picture of DAT performance.Below is our summary of the analytical frameworks that are most valuable when comprehensively evaluating DAT performance.

Growth drivers and underlying prices

If we view DAT Company stock price as the product of several underlying growth factors (coin growth per share, token price, and market sentiment), we can break it down to see what is truly driving performance rather than pure narrative.

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

This decomposition method allows us to isolate each factor and track independently what is truly driving price movement:

• When a share price falls, we can see whether this is due to cooling market sentiment, a fall in the price of the underlying asset, or a decline in company fundamentals – and conversely, which of these factors is driving the share price higher.

• It can also help us see through noise – for example, when a company’s intrinsic value continues to grow, but the market price falls.

When we break down the price growth of Bitmine (BMNR), we see that ETH per share has steadily increased since launch, while the mNAV (sentiment multiple) has contracted significantly.This shows that its fundamentals are still strong, and only the market hype has cooled down.

Generalizing this framework into three growth factors, we can chart DAT companies by category to assess their overall health:

BTC DAT: Most fundamental value growth is relatively stable, such as MSTR, CLSK and CEP, showing a clear upward trend.In contrast, while fundamentals for SMLR, FLD, DJT, LMFA and EMPD have remained stable, market sentiment for these companies has declined sharply since tracking began and was largely responsible for the share price declines.The only DAT currently experiencing real value decline is SQNS.

ETH DAT: As category first movers, ETHZ and SBET benefited from an initial uptick in market sentiment, although ETH per share was relatively flat.Since then, BMNR, ETHM, BTCS, BTBT and GAME have all grown steadily in value per share, although their mNAV growth has trended downward – possibly indicating they launched near the top of the market cycle.FGNX is the exception, experiencing significant equity dilution and a sharp decline in market sentiment, leading to significantly worse than expected performance.

SOL DAT: HSDT has seen the most significant growth in SOL per share, increasing 3x from October to the time of the report; UPXI has also grown steadily, but on a smaller scale.DFDV benefited from rising market sentiment, but its SOL per share fell during the same period, suggesting the rise was driven more by sentiment than fundamentals.Meanwhile, both FORD and STSS’s mNAV expanded significantly, but fundamental value growth was essentially flat, suggesting performance was driven by sentiment rather than balance sheets.

fundamental price

As the chart above shows, most DAT companies have gone through a cooling or contraction phase in the market since their launch.To understand its potential trajectory, we can further reconstruct each company’s theoretical fundamental price—essentially answering: “What would the stock price be today if market conditions were the same as they were on the day DAT launched?”

In other words, if you owned a share of stock from the company’s inception and allowed the company to accumulate inventory and issue shares over time, what would that share of stock be actually worth today?

The chart below shows that several DAT companies – HSDT, BMNR, BTBT, BTCS, CORZ, and CEP – have steadily improved in fundamental value, but have not been fully reflected in their share prices due to changing market conditions.Fundamental metrics for these companies have grown significantly since their inception, even as overall market sentiment has shrunk.

Share Issuance and Dilution

DAT companies succeed or fail based on their equity issuance discipline.A key dimension in evaluating DAT companies is how management responds to market conditions, acting strategically or reacting reactively when market sentiment changes.

• When mNAV > 1: The company has the opportunity to issue shares at a premium.The key issue lies in issuance discipline. Overly aggressive issuance will erode digital assets per share, depress NAV per share, and ultimately destroy market sentiment.Disciplined issuers expand the scale of issuance responsibly, while reckless issuers play the so-called “infinite ATM game.”

• When mNAV < 1: greater challenge.A valuation multiple below 1x indicates a lack of confidence in the company’s capital discipline, liquidity, or money management strategy.The market may price in expectations of future equity dilution and worry that management will continue to issue additional shares when market sentiment is low.It could also indicate capital inefficiency, with companies failing to convert their digital asset exposure into shareholder value.

Sustained mNAV below 1 breaks the DAT flywheel effect.Companies can no longer issue new shares at a premium without diluting existing shareholders.If the issuance is forced, digital assets per share will decline further, damaging trust and losing the ability to be an equity growth tool.Over time, this dynamic can turn a company into a “zombie DAT”: a static holding company that trades below its liquidation value.

When mNAV falls below 1, the right thing to do is to take defensive measures and restore credibility: stop all equity issuances (including ATM and PIPE), and make the protection of digital assets per share a core metric.Companies must also increase transparency and financial reporting—publishing wallet certifications, dashboards, and regularly updated NAVs that demonstrate they are clean, verifiable financial wrappers rather than opaque shells.If liquidity permits, repurchasing shares at a discount to NAV can add to earnings and send a strong signal of confidence, often restoring premium levels.Management can also leverage on-chain earnings—staking ETH, participating in re-staking, or earning income from financial assets—to naturally boost NAV growth and turn passively held assets into a revenue stream.Finally, companies must strengthen their narrative and position themselves as a clear and credible representative of a specific asset or ecosystem, because investor trust tends to return when the investment thesis is clear.

For DATs with mNAV <1, the right strategy is to protect per-share value, increase transparency and rebuild trust.By studying issuance data, share buybacks, and money management behavior, we can understand which companies choose a value-added path and which companies continue to dilute their equity.

The data shows that the best-managed DATs have historically protected shareholder leverage during downturns—laying the stage for a rebound when market sentiment returns.

As can be seen from the chart above, there are clear differences between ETH DATs in terms of equity issuance and market sentiment management.Most companies are showing a gradual increase in the number of outstanding shares – indicating a possible PIPE or ATM offering.

BMNR data shows the company has a more gradual pattern of share issuance and mNAV changes compared to peers.This sets an example for how companies can scale responsibly—using equity as a growth vehicle without disrupting the mNAV growth flywheel.

BTBT, GAME, and BTCS have seen sharp, sudden increases in the number of shares outstanding while mNAV has remained flat or declined, but the timing of their issuances still makes sense, as the issuance occurs when mNAV trades above 1, within the premium window.

In contrast, FGNX and ETHZ conducted large-scale additional issuances when mNAV <1, effectively issuing shares when the market was weak rather than waiting for favorable market conditions, which is a typical feature of lax capital discipline.For FGNX, early and aggressive dilution when mNAV was close to zero created a damaging dilution event that wiped out investor leverage and long-term confidence.However, ETHZ briefly showed signs of corrective action, reducing its stake count in mid-October, helping its mNAV recover from below 0.2 and partially regain balance.

4. Open issues for further research

Pantera’s dashboard data also opens up new research directions:

• Unlocking Events: How Much Contribution to Price Drop?

• PIPE Investor ROI: Which deals are delivering positive returns in the DAT space?What if you adjust for underlying token performance (e.g. relative to spot ETF returns)?

• Market microstructure: How does PIPE pricing news affect trading behavior?

• Modeling mNAV dynamics: Is there a quantifiable relationship between issuance/repurchase and mNAV recovery?

More work still needs to be done on DAT data, calling for better data standards.Stock data is much messier than on-chain data: the format is inconsistent, updates are infrequent, and there is no unified pattern.For DAT to evolve into a legitimate asset class, we need open, standardized APIs for companies to report daily financial updates covering:

• Shares issued (including prepaid and PIPE shares)

• Treasury holdings by asset

• Warrants and Debt Data

Just as on-chain data transparency drives DeFi analytics, 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 a culprit.

They are a new form of capital formation—innovative investment tools that operate in both directions: helping to increase the value of digital assets while providing financial institutions with leveraged exposure with on-chain returns.They are not perpetual motion machines, as the flywheel can snap under market shocks, but rather asset management companies that require disciplined strategy and execution.At its best, DAT unlocks meaningful value for both sides of the ecosystem:

• To traditional investors, they offer regulated, liquid, and return-multiplying exposure to digital assets—often providing additional on-chain returns that cannot be provided by ETFs or trusts.

• For the crypto ecosystem, they funnel traditional market funds directly into token vaults – anchoring asset value and enhancing liquidity within a compliant structure.

• If managed well, they can amplify positive feedback loops between capital markets and digital asset fundamentals: rising mNAV leads to new issuance, new money flows into digital asset purchases, and the cycle continues 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.

To be sure, criticism is true and often instructive:

• Some DATs are just hype shells, lacking real operational strategies. They are short-term tools for PIPE investors to withdraw from retail investors. Their essence is no different from Memecoin;

• Markets don’t need dozens of DATs tracking the same assets.Without differentiation in money management strategies or governance, the proliferation of DATs will only add to market noise and erode trust in the model.Likewise, there is no need to establish DATs for hundreds of digital assets that have no long-term value, especially those operated by teams with low credibility, lack of community recognition, or limited technological innovation.This expansion could reduce DATs to a speculative fad rather than a reliable financial instrument;

• The death spiral (mNAV < 1) remains the most difficult challenge.DATs are essentially amplified exposure to an already highly volatile asset class, and discounts can quickly widen once market sentiment shifts.But mNAV < 1 usually signals a dislocation, not a collapse.Investors may reflect weak capital discipline, concerns about equity dilution, or inefficient money management, rather than a failure of the underlying digital asset itself.Excellent operators can turn things around through transparent communication and strict equity management.

Ultimately, holding DAT requires market participants to believe in two things:

• Long-term bullish on the underlying asset – believes its price will rise over time and seeks leveraged exposure through active equity vehicles;

• Trust operator execution and capital discipline – as Fundstrat’s Tom Lee points out, mNAV < 1 is illogical and a competent management team will eventually bring the stock price back to parity.

If both are true, then lower mNAV is not an alarm, but simply a temporary blip in market sentiment mispricing actual balance sheet value.

At its core, DAT represents a new type of investment tool that helps digital assets accumulate lasting value while providing financial institutions with a revenue-enhancing, regulated path to participate in the future development of the digital asset era.