Why Public Companies Are Stockpiling Bitcoin — And the Risks

Global Overview of Corporate Bitcoin Accumulation

Multiple global companies publicly increasing holdings:

• In June 2025, European listed company The Blockchain Group announced the purchase of 75 bitcoins after raising about €7.2 million, increasing their holdings to about 1,728 coins; on June 30, they added 60 more, reaching a total of 1,788 coins.
• The board of Spain’s Vanadi Coffee approved an increase of 20 BTC on June 29, raising holdings to 54 coins, with shareholders supporting the “Bitcoin priority” strategy.
• Canada’s Bitcoin Treasury announced completion of its initial accumulation phase, purchasing 478.57 coins for 70 million CAD, bringing total Bitcoin balance sheet holdings to 771.37 coins.
• US-based Semler Scientific announced plans on June 20 to hold at least 10,000 coins by the end of 2025, and 105,000 bitcoins by 2027.
• Early Bitcoin-holding companies like MicroStrategy continue to add to investments: As of late May, MicroStrategy purchased another 4,020 BTC at an average price of about $106,237 per coin, now holding 580,250 coins with a total investment of about $40.61 billion.
• Other new entrants include Japan’s Metaplanet, UK’s Twenty One Capital, SBC Medical, etc., all announcing large-scale Bitcoin purchase plans.

Summary table of corporate Bitcoin holdings (Source: Gate Learn creator Max)

Disclosure methods: Companies disclose accumulation plans and completions through press releases, announcements, or financial reports. For example, The Blockchain Group announced financing and Bitcoin purchase details through official statements and media reports; Vanadi Coffee disclosed its purchase decision through press releases and board announcements; Semler and others clearly stated their Bitcoin strategy goals through press releases.

Financial and Strategic Motives for Corporate Bitcoin Purchases

Quadrant chart of corporate Bitcoin hoarding motives (Source: Gate Learn creator Max)

Inflation hedging and asset allocation: Bitcoin’s fixed supply and decentralized nature are seen as tools to hedge against inflation. With US CPI around 3.5% in 2024 and significant yen depreciation, Bitcoin as “digital gold” has gained attention. In a low-interest environment, holding cash or traditional bonds yields extremely low returns, prompting companies to turn to high-risk, high-return Bitcoin for diversified asset allocation.

Brand and market positioning: Some companies use Bitcoin holdings as a brand innovation tactic to attract young, tech-oriented user groups. For example, game retailer GameStop and Japan’s Metaplanet announced Bitcoin purchase plans aimed at reshaping their brand image through a “Bitcoin-first” strategy.

Shareholder and investor pressure: Crypto-focused hedge funds and high-net-worth investors passionate about digital assets are pushing some small and mid-cap listed companies to embrace Bitcoin. For instance, Semler Scientific’s investor background includes crypto funds urging the company to enhance returns through Bitcoin.

Need to reverse financial distress: Some underperforming companies seek to turn around their performance through Bitcoin purchases. Vanadi Coffee, which lost about $3.7 million in 2024, announced plans to raise up to $1.1 billion to buy Bitcoin, seen as a strategy to reverse losses.

Financing and equity incentives: Companies like MicroStrategy raise funds to purchase Bitcoin through financing channels such as issuing preferred and common stock, reporting Bitcoin holdings as assets. Its founder Saylor explicitly states, “I only buy Bitcoin with money I can afford to lose,” emphasizing long-term investment belief.

Analysis of Typical Cases

1. The Blockchain Group (Europe)

Figure: https://www.theblockchain-group.com/

Accumulation action: Launched an “ATM-style” capital increase plan on June 17, 2025, purchasing 75 BTC for €6.9 million after raising about €7.2 million; added 60 more BTC on June 30, spending about €5.5 million, increasing total holdings to 1,788 coins.

Financing method: Raised funds through stock and convertible bond issuance, dedicated to Bitcoin purchases; average purchase price about €90,155 per coin, total investment about €155.8 million.

Impact and performance: The company is essentially a Bitcoin reserve company, aiming to increase the digital asset portion of its balance sheet. After this purchase disclosure, its stock performance attracted market attention, but overall stock price trends depend on Bitcoin market price fluctuations, with no excessive volatility observed so far.

2. Vanadi Coffee (Spain)

Figure: https://vanadi.es/

Strategic transformation: Announced an increase of 20 BTC on June 29, 2025 (holding 54 coins), and listed Bitcoin purchase strategy as a core company strategy. Plans to raise funds through new share issuance, targeting up to €1 billion investment in Bitcoin.

Financial background: Lost about $3.7 million in 2024, hoping to reverse financial difficulties through Bitcoin assets. The board and shareholders support this “Bitcoin-first” strategy.

Market reaction: Vanadi’s stock price fluctuated significantly after the announcement. Chairman Martí personally purchased 5 BTC (about $500,000) two weeks prior, showing confidence in the strategy but also warning investors of stock price volatility risks.

3. Semler Scientific (USA)

Figure: https://www.semlerscientific.com/

Reserve plan: Announced appointment of a Bitcoin strategy director on June 20, 2025, planning to hold ≥10,000 BTC by the end of 2025 and 105,000 BTC by 2027.

Achieved purchases: As of June 3, Semler’s Bitcoin assets had realized a 287% return, with a market value increase of about $177 million. Short-term accumulation efforts accompanied by stock rises: daily gains of up to 45%, rising from a low of $23 to $33.

Motivation analysis: Semler’s CFO revealed that Bitcoin’s decentralization and anti-inflation properties align with the company’s “long-term value” philosophy; some shareholders are crypto funds, driving this strategic decision.

4. MicroStrategy (USA)

Figure: https://www.strategysoftware.com/

Purchase scale: Announced on May 26, 2025, that week purchased 4,020 bitcoins at an average price of about $106,237 per coin, spending $427 million; previously purchased 7,390 coins at an average of $103,498 ($765 million). To date, MicroStrategy’s total holdings reach 580,250 coins, with an average Bitcoin investment cost of about $69,979 per coin.

Financing mechanism: Raised funds through multiple rounds of public stock offerings (ATM issuance) and perpetual preferred stock to support Bitcoin purchase plans. Its “42/42 strategy” aims to raise $84 billion through equity and convertible bonds by 2027 for continuous Bitcoin purchases.

Market value impact: Bitcoin price increases have resulted in about $22.7 billion in unrealized gains. MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor has long promoted Bitcoin’s value, enhancing market recognition. The company’s massive holdings and financing actions have become media focal points, also driving other institutions to follow suit.

Short to Medium-term Impact on the Bitcoin Market

Price stimulation and market sentiment: Large institutional buy orders have boosted market sentiment, driving recent price rebounds. Reports indicate that Bitcoin rose over 6.5% last week, breaking through $109,000 to reach new highs, with significant contribution from institutional buyers. Such corporate entries reinforce the market narrative that “Bitcoin has become a mainstream asset.”

Investor confidence and FOMO effect: The entry of leading companies like MicroStrategy and various enterprises into Bitcoin purchases has sparked FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) sentiment among investors. CEO statements (such as Saylor emphasizing long-term value) and continuous accumulation news constantly increase market attention. Analysts expect Bitcoin prices to potentially reach the $115,000-130,000 range in the second half of 2025, driven by corporate reserve demand.

Narrative reinforcement: This wave of corporate Bitcoin purchases is often compared to signs of a “digital gold era” or “corporate-level bull market,” with effects similar to the “MicroStrategy effect” expected to attract more institutional participation. According to institutional forecasts, this force could bring hundreds of billions of dollars in incremental demand and market value increase to Bitcoin in the coming years.

Institutional Hoarding vs. Retail FOMO: Misaligned Beliefs and Risk Dancing

Behind the large-scale Bitcoin purchases by public companies, the market superficially appears “unanimously optimistic,” but in reality, it’s quietly diverging into two distinctly different behavioral logics and motivational structures: the strategic entry of institutions versus the emotional chasing of retail investors. This structure of “linkage without synergy” harbors the potential to amplify risks.

1. Corporate Hoarding and ETF Institutions: Market Driving Forces Are “Involutioning”

Between 2024-2025, Bitcoin ETFs (such as BlackRock’s IBIT) have become the core vehicle driving incremental BTC funds. According to Kaiko data, ETF products currently see net inflows of hundreds of millions of dollars weekly, while listed companies like MicroStrategy and Semler Scientific are simultaneously purchasing thousands of BTC. Though seemingly “resonating,” there are strategic differences:

ETFs are passive allocations (inflows depend on subscriptions), while corporate hoarding is active timing deployment.

ETF-held assets have no direct impact on company shareholders, whereas listed companies’ Bitcoin holdings significantly affect their net asset value per share and profit fluctuations.

ETFs typically have custody and clearing mechanisms with liquidity hedging tools; corporate purchases lack risk hedging, and any drastic coin price fluctuations will reflect in stock prices.

This means: ETFs are more like “pipes,” while corporate purchases are more like “pumps.” Although they flow in the same direction, their force and rhythm are completely different.

2. Retail Perspective: The Fallacy of “Corporate Buying = Bullish Belief”

On social platforms and trading communities, corporate Bitcoin purchases are often viewed as “bullish signals” or even “endorsements,” triggering FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) among many retail investors:

After companies like Semler and Metaplanet announced Bitcoin purchases, their stock prices surged tens of percentage points in the short term, with many retail investors rushing into related stocks, derivative tokens, or even altcoin markets.

MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor has been dubbed the “Bitcoin evangelist,” with each of his Bitcoin purchase tweets being amplified and becoming a “follow-up signal.”

Retail investors tend to overlook that behind corporate Bitcoin purchases are often complex financing structures, accounting treatments, and governance games, rather than simple expressions of faith.

Case Study: GameStop Retail Misjudgment Under the “Buy Bitcoin for Transformation” Narrative

Figure: https://www.tradingview.com/chart/VT9TJA2s/?symbol=NYSE%3AGME

In June 2025, American gaming retail giant GameStop (GME) announced plans to allocate some idle funds to Bitcoin and consider purchasing BTC with a cap of $1.5 billion over the next 6 months as part of the company’s “digital asset transformation.” Upon the news, GME stock surged nearly 30% in pre-market trading, with topics like “retail investors are back” and “GME is becoming the next MicroStrategy” quickly flooding Reddit and X (formerly Twitter) platforms.

However, this event actually reflects a serious mismatch between corporate hoarding behavior and retail expectations:

Source: Gate Learn creator Max

The core issue is: GameStop’s Bitcoin purchase behavior is essentially closer to a strategic attempt rather than an “all-in embrace” like MicroStrategy. But retail investors often automatically equate “company buying Bitcoin” with “long-term faith binding,” ignoring the vast differences in business foundations, risk control capabilities, and capital volumes.

Arbitrage Structure Differences: Corporate Arbitrage vs. Retail Speculation

Corporate Bitcoin hoarding often comes with the following arbitrage paths:

“Stock price-coin price” coupling arbitrage: For example, MicroStrategy raises its valuation through stock price increases to refinance and buy more Bitcoin, forming a “positive flywheel”;

Tax and accounting arbitrage: Bitcoin book pricing rules are favorable to companies under certain jurisdictions;

Liquidity arbitrage: Issuing preferred stocks or bonds to raise funds to buy BTC, then waiting for coin price increases.

Retail investors, on the other hand, typically engage in emotionally driven speculative behavior lacking mechanism support and risk protection. The structural differences between the two lead to vastly different risks assumed under the same market conditions.

Conclusion: Faith Resonance and Reality Gap

The GameStop incident reminds us: Corporate Bitcoin purchases are not simple “bullish bets,” but a highly strategic, structured asset allocation behavior, often involving complex financing structures, accounting treatments, and risk controls. In contrast, retail investors are more likely to make judgments based on intuition and public sentiment, overlooking key elements in corporate Bitcoin purchases: “Why buy, how to buy, what money to use, and how to handle after buying.”

When both corporations and retail investors view Bitcoin as an “asset safe haven,” the market often creates an illusion of “faith resonance.” In reality, institutions have stronger resource allocation capabilities, hedging tools, and information transparency advantages, while retail investors rely more on fragmented information and emotional judgments. Once the market fluctuates dramatically, it’s often not the Bitcoin-hoarding companies that bear the brunt, but the individual investors who chased high prices.

When faith becomes consensus, risks often lurk in the blind spots of narratives. Investors need to be vigilant: Corporate actions do not equate to the basis of your faith.

Potential Risks and Negative Spillovers

Financial volatility risk: Drastic Bitcoin price fluctuations could lead to significant swings in financial reports. For instance, GameStop’s plan to purchase $1.5 billion worth of Bitcoin is seen by supporters as a transformation, but critics worry such investments could turn financial statements into a “roller coaster,” with profits and losses rising and falling with Bitcoin prices. If enterprises hold too heavily, a market reversal could seriously erode their balance sheets.

Audit and accounting compliance: Holding large amounts of crypto assets poses challenges for auditors. Due to the high volatility of crypto markets and the complexity of valuation and proof of reserves, existing accounting standards struggle to provide unified disclosure. Auditors are concerned about the lack of a digital asset accounting framework and call for clear guidelines to ensure transparency and consistency. If regulatory scrutiny tightens, companies may need to disclose additional risk information and bear higher compliance costs.

Market amplification effect: Synchronized Bitcoin purchases by multiple listed companies could exacerbate market volatility. When Bitcoin prices rise rapidly, it may lead to chasing behavior; if negative sentiment or regulatory intervention occurs, collective selling could cause dramatic price corrections. Such herd effects could amplify market volatility and increase systemic risks.

Corporate governance risk: Overemphasis on Bitcoin holdings may deviate from the company’s main business objectives. In the absence of mature risk management, employee incentives or board decisions that rely too heavily on crypto asset performance may harm long-term shareholder value.

Global Regulatory Responses and Outlook

United States (SEC): In May 2025, SEC Chairman Paul Atkins mentioned plans to promote crypto regulatory reform, considering allowing brokers holding “Alternative Trading System” (ATS) licenses to legally trade Bitcoin and Ethereum. This suggests that compliant investment channels may increase in the future, but the SEC still emphasizes the need to establish a clear regulatory framework for crypto asset issuance, custody, and trading. Under the Biden administration, the SEC’s risk focus is on investor protection, with no direct prohibition on corporate Bitcoin holdings but cautious evaluation.

Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission has adopted an open attitude, approving the first batch of Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs for listing on the HKEX in April 2024; in May 2025, the draft “Stablecoin Ordinance” was passed by the Legislative Council, requiring licenses for issuing fiat-pegged stablecoins. These measures show Hong Kong’s desire to establish a virtual asset regulatory system that meets international standards while promoting financial innovation. Hong Kong regulators are expected to continue improving regulations for trading and custody services, providing rule guidance for reasonable Bitcoin purchases by listed companies.

Singapore (MAS): The Monetary Authority of Singapore launched Digital Token Service Provider (DTSP) regulations in 2025, requiring licenses for all digital token-related transactions, custody, advisory, and other services from June 30. This policy emphasizes anti-money laundering and risk management requirements, imposing strict regulations on corporate Bitcoin purchases and resale businesses. In the future, Singapore tends to regulate market participant behavior through regulatory frameworks to protect financial stability.

Other regions: The EU and other regions have passed MiCA regulations to implement unified regulatory standards for crypto assets; mainland China continues to ban cryptocurrency transactions but focuses on digital RMB development. Overall, global regulations are becoming clearer: on one hand allowing compliant crypto financial innovation, on the other hand strengthening investor protection and market stability mechanisms. Future corporate Bitcoin purchase behaviors will be subject to more compliance constraints and reporting requirements.

Conclusion

The wave of public companies hoarding Bitcoin in June 2025 demonstrates the trend of enterprises viewing Bitcoin as a new asset allocation