Valuation game under new Bitcoin highs: Why MSTR finds it difficult to add encryption king

BitKoala reported on September 16 that when Bitcoin broke through $124,000 to reach a historic high in 2025, MicroStrategy (MSTR), which was once seen as a “shadow stock of Bitcoin,” exhibited a completely different trend: its stock price has continuously declined after reaching a peak of $543, currently hovering around $325, representing a drop of over 40% compared to its stock price at Bitcoin's new high. This divergence of “the king rises, while the followers fall” reflects the differentiation in valuation logic between strategy stocks and native assets in the crypto market, and has sparked intense debate on Wall Street about “discount opportunities” and “risk traps.”

Valuation Discrepancy: 50% Discount Opportunity or Leverage Risk Trap?

The current market perception of MSTR's valuation is sharply divided, creating a fierce battle between two major camps. The bullish camp centers its logic on “asset revaluation,” believing that the stock has significant value gaps. Based on MSTR's latest disclosed holding of 185,000 Bitcoins, with the current price of $124,000, the total value of its held crypto assets is approximately $229.4 billion. Corresponding to a total share capital of 350 million shares, the Bitcoin value per share is about $655. The current stock price of $325 represents a discount of about 50% compared to this “liquidation value,” which has become the core argument for the bullish camp — they believe the market has excessively underestimated MSTR's Bitcoin holding value, and as investor demand for crypto asset allocation increases, the stock valuation will eventually align with its Bitcoin asset value.

The bearish faction focuses on MSTR's “leverage risk” and “competitive diversion” as two major hidden dangers. Financial data shows that as of the second quarter of 2025, MSTR has accumulated over $3.8 billion in debt through the issuance of convertible bonds, pledged financing, and other means, used for increasing its Bitcoin holdings. Approximately 60% of its debt structure consists of floating rate financing; if the Federal Reserve maintains a high interest rate environment, annual interest expenses will exceed $200 million, equivalent to 15% of its revenue in 2024. More critically, 40% of MSTR's Bitcoin holdings have been pledged to financial institutions; if the Bitcoin price falls more than 15% in a single day, it may trigger the risk of liquidation of the pledged assets, leading to a vicious cycle of “passive selling of Bitcoin - stock price collapse.”

The popularity of Bitcoin spot ETFs has further weakened the investment appeal of MSTR. Since the United States approved the first Bitcoin spot ETFs in 2024, by August 2025, the global assets under management of Bitcoin ETFs have surpassed 80 billion USD, with products like BlackRock's IBIT and Vanguard's BTCO seeing average daily trading volumes exceeding 5 billion USD. These ETFs allow investors to directly track Bitcoin prices without bearing the operational risks of listed companies, leverage risks, and tax complexities, creating a “substitution effect” for MSTR. Data shows that in the second quarter of 2025, the institutional ownership ratio of MSTR decreased by 3.2 percentage points, while during the same period, the net inflow of funds into Bitcoin ETFs reached 12 billion USD, highlighting the competitive disadvantage of strategy stocks as funds “vote with their feet.”

The triple logic of strategy stock lagging: from asset attributes to market transmission

The difficulty of MSTR's stock price in catching up with the rise of Bitcoin essentially lies in the inherent differences in attributes and transmission mechanisms between “anchored assets” and “native assets,” which is specifically reflected in three aspects:

The “dilution effect” of value transmission is the core reason. Bitcoin, as a decentralized native encryption asset, directly reflects the supply and demand relationship, macro liquidity, and consensus strength of the global market, without any intermediate value loss. MSTR is a composite carrier of “Bitcoin + listed company,” and its stock price is influenced not only by the price of Bitcoin but also by variables such as the company's leverage ratio, operating costs, and management decisions. For example, when Bitcoin rose by 12% in June 2025, MSTR only increased by 3% due to the disclosure of an additional $200 million high-interest loan, as the leverage operation directly diluted the transmission efficiency of Bitcoin's rise.

The “asymmetry” of risk exposure further widens the gap. The risk of Bitcoin mainly comes from market volatility, while MSTR adds “dual risks”: on one hand, it bears the fundamental risk of Bitcoin price fluctuations, and on the other hand, it faces company-level credit risk and liquidity risk. Historical data shows that when Bitcoin rises, MSTR's stock price increase is usually only 60%-70% of Bitcoin's (due to limited leverage amplification effects and the need to deduct financial costs); whereas when Bitcoin falls, MSTR's stock price decline is often 1.5-2 times that of Bitcoin (leverage accelerates losses). This asymmetry of “rising less and falling more” makes it difficult for MSTR to keep up with Bitcoin's rising pace in the long term.

The “marginalization” of market positioning exacerbates liquidity differentiation. As the derivatives market for Bitcoin ETFs, futures, options, etc. matures, professional investors are more inclined to allocate Bitcoin through standardized tools, and the role of MSTR as a “transitional tool” is gradually weakening. In the second quarter of 2025, the average daily trading volume of MSTR dropped from 1.5 billion dollars in 2024 to 800 million dollars, while the average daily trading volume of IBIT ETF reached 6.2 billion dollars. The decline in liquidity has led to a more sluggish response of MSTR's stock price to the rise of Bitcoin, forming a divergence pattern of “Bitcoin hitting new highs — MSTR trading remains quiet.”

Options Hedging: “Safety Net” Strategy in a High Volatility Environment

Faced with the high volatility of Bitcoin and MSTR, options tools have become a core choice for investors to balance risk and return. Currently, three main hedging strategies have emerged in the market:

Protective put options are the “defensive choice” for holders. Taking the current stock price of $325 as an example, an investor can buy a put option with a strike price of $300 and an expiration date of 1 month, with a premium of about $12. If the MSTR stock price falls below $300, the profits from the put option can offset the losses from the stock drop; if the stock price rises, only the $12 premium is lost, preserving the upside gains. Data shows that in August 2025, the trading volume of MSTR put options increased by 45% compared to July, reflecting growing market concerns about downside risks.

Covered call options are suitable for long-term holders to reduce costs. Investors holding MSTR stock sell call options with a strike price of $350 and an expiration date of 1 month, receiving about $8 in premium. If the stock price is below $350 on the expiration date, they can keep the $8 premium to lower their holding costs; if the stock price exceeds $350, the stock will be exercised at $350, missing out on some of the upside but locking in profits early. This strategy is particularly effective when MSTR stock price is moving sideways, and currently about 20% of institutional holders are using this strategy.

The price difference options combination meets the gaming needs of high-risk preference investors. Aggressive investors can build a “bull spread” strategy: buy a call option with a strike price of 320 dollars (premium 15 dollars), while selling a call option with a strike price of 360 dollars (receiving a premium of 8 dollars), with a net cost of 7 dollars. If the stock price rises to 360 dollars at expiration, the profit of this combination will be 33 dollars (360-320-7), with a return rate of 371%; if the stock price is below 320 dollars, only a loss of 7 dollars will occur. This strategy is widely used when it is expected that Bitcoin will drive MSTR's short-term rebound, and in August 2025, the transaction volume of this strategy increased by 60% month-on-month.

Common insights of asset intermediation: The logical resonance from MSTR to Pokémon cards

The relationship between MSTR and Bitcoin is akin to the relationship between physical Pokémon cards and RWA-based NFTs — both reflect the pricing differences between “intermediated assets” and “native assets.” The previously analyzed Collector Crypt platform has turned Pokémon cards into NFTs, which, while addressing the circulation pain points of traditional collectibles, still sees NFT prices influenced by intermediary variables such as platform operations, authentication costs, and token economics, making it difficult to fully equate their value with that of physical cards; similarly, MSTR, as a “stock intermediary” for Bitcoin, also has its price affected by additional factors such as company operations, leverage, and market sentiment, making it impossible to completely replicate the rise of Bitcoin.

This phenomenon reveals the core rule of the financialization of alternative assets: the higher the degree of intermediation, the greater the potential deviation of asset prices from their intrinsic value. Whether it is the RWA conversion of Pokémon cards or the stockification of Bitcoin, the risks and costs of intermediaries (platforms, listed companies) will become the “resistance” to value transmission. For investors, it is essential to recognize the “discount” nature of intermediation assets — the discount can be an opportunity, or it may be a “devaluation” of risk, requiring a comprehensive judgment based on the qualifications of intermediary institutions, market liquidity, and the maturity of alternative tools.

As the Bitcoin ecosystem continues to improve, the debate over the valuation of MSTR will persist. However, it can be confirmed that strategic stocks are difficult to replace Bitcoin as the “leader of the rise” in the crypto market. In the future, they will serve more as a “supplementary option” for investors with lower risk tolerance who need to allocate Bitcoin through stock accounts. Behind this valuation game is actually a long-term struggle between the standardization of crypto assets and intermediary tools, the outcome of which will profoundly affect the allocation logic of alternative assets.