treasuries

What is mNAV?

mNAV stands for “multiple of net asset value.” For a bitcoin treasury company, it's the simplest possible question:

“Is the company's market cap larger or smaller than the value of the bitcoin it holds?”

It's computed by dividing the company's market cap by its BTC holdings × current BTC price. Three readings to know:

• < 1.00×Below NAV. The market cap is less than the value of the bitcoin the company holds. Historically rare, and historically a strong accumulation signal, because the marginal buyer can pay less for treasury equity than they would for the underlying coins.
• ≈ 1.00×At NAV. Market cap roughly equal to the bitcoin held. No premium, no discount. Boring is good.
• > 1.05×Premium. Investors are paying more than the bitcoin is worth. The premium compensates for management quality, leverage capacity (the ability to issue debt and stock to acquire more BTC), or growth expectations. Premiums above ~1.6× have historically been rich.

Exactly how we calculate it

Our mNAV is the gross version, kept deliberately simple so it stays comparable across every company on the board:

mNAV = market cap ÷ (BTC held × spot BTC price)

• Market cap is the market value of the company's shares. We use the smaller of the basic and fully-diluted figures from bitcointreasuries.net. For most tickers that is the basic count; for SPAC-structured names like XXI (whose basic count still includes locked-up sponsor shares not yet circulating) it resolves to fully-diluted.
• BTC value is only the coins on the balance sheet times spot. Nothing else.

Plainly: this is a gross figure, not a net one. Despite the “net asset value” in the name, the treasury-company convention (and ours) divides by the gross value of the bitcoin, not a balance-sheet net asset value. We do not net out cash, and we do not add convertible notes, other debt, or the preferred stack as claims on the bitcoin. An enterprise-value or “net” mNAV that folded those in would read higher · a smaller discount, or a larger premium. We publish the gross number because it is the cleanest apples-to-apples line across companies, and we would rather state the method than bury it.

Effective BTC price

The companion number in the table. It is the price per bitcoin you are effectively paying for BTC exposure when you buy the stock:

effective BTC price = spot BTC price × mNAV

Below spot, you are getting bitcoin cheaper through the wrapper than buying it outright. Above spot, you are paying a premium for the structure. For example, at a 0.80× mNAV the effective price is 80% of spot · the same coins, roughly 20% cheaper per BTC, if you accept the gross mNAV math above.

The table shows the same idea in sats: Sats / $1 is how many sats of bitcoin each dollar of the stock effectively buys (bitcoin held × 1e8 ÷ market cap). It is the effective-price lens inverted, in the unit a bitcoiner actually thinks in. When a stock trades below NAV you stack MORE sats per dollar than buying bitcoin at spot, so a Sats / $1 above the spot figure shown beside it is the discount, counted in sats.

CEBE · the net-of-claims view

The mNAV above is gross. CEBE (Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure) is the net version · the bitcoin backing each common share after the debt and preferred stock that get paid before common holders. Each row shows it as a net mNAV plus a senior-claims percentage:

net mNAV = market cap ÷ (BTC value − debt − preferred + cash)

The more leverage a company carries, the wider the gap between its gross and net mNAV. Strategy is the clearest case: a gross mNAV under 1.0× (looks like a discount) can flip to a net mNAV above 1.0× once its multi-billion-dollar convertible notes and preferred stack are subtracted · the leverage quietly erases the headline discount. Michael Saylor frames the same split as growth (gross bitcoin-per-share) versus risk (CEBE); we publish both so you can rank on either. Net figures use balance-sheet data as of the dates shown on each row, reviewed quarterly · framework: cebetracker.io. Where a company's senior-claims figures aren't reliably sourced yet, CEBE shows “pending” rather than a guess.

BPS, CEBE BPS, and Amplification

Michael Saylor frames the same gross-versus-net split as two paired per-share metrics. BPS (bitcoin per share) is the bitcoin behind each common share before senior claims · the growth metric. CEBE BPS is the same figure after debt and preferred are paid · the conservative risk metric. Each row shows both as sats per $100 of stock, and the per-ticker pages show the pair side by side.

Amplification = BPS ÷ CEBE BPS = BTC held ÷ (BTC held − senior claims in BTC)

The difference between BPS and CEBE BPS is Amplification. With no debt or preferred, BPS equals CEBE BPS, Amplification is 1.0×, and the company should track bitcoin like an ETF. As liabilities grow the two diverge and Amplification rises above 1.0×, the leverage that creates the potential to outperform bitcoin.

Not all liabilities are equal. Short-duration, high-cost liabilities turn Amplification into risk and underperformance · they can come due before the thesis plays out. Long-duration, low-cost liabilities turn it into common-equity upside. The rule of thumb: if a company's bitcoin annualized return (BTC ARR) clears its cost of capital, a well-capitalized treasury should outperform bitcoin. The shorter the liability duration, the more CEBE BPS (risk) matters; the longer the duration, the more BPS (growth) matters. BTC Yield measures how well management executes that BPS growth over time.

Why this matters

When a treasury company's mNAV compresses below 1.0×, the marginal sophisticated buyer prefers spot bitcoin to leveraged treasury equity. That's the moment in the cycle when the smart money loses interest in paying for the wrapper · historically correlated with bitcoin price bottoms.

MSTR mNAV is one of the ten signals feeding the Bitcoin Buying Gauge. When this scoreboard turns blue, the gauge over there starts glowing.