A model that looked unstoppable at the peak of the crypto rally is now showing clear signs of strain. Digital asset treasury (DAT) companies, once seen as a simple bridge between Wall Street and crypto exposure, are heading into 2026 facing shrinking valuations, rising competition, and fading investor patience.
Over the past year, dozens of publicly traded firms rushed to position themselves as crypto proxies, building balance sheets stacked with Bitcoin and other major tokens. At first, the strategy worked. As crypto prices surged, share prices followed. But once the market cooled, many of these companies discovered that holding coins alone was not enough to justify their market caps.
Key Takeaways
Many crypto treasury companies are entering 2026 with falling valuations and shrinking investor confidence.
Firms relying only on holding crypto are likely to disappear as premiums over asset value vanish.
Survivors will need yield strategies, strong governance, and closer alignment with traditional finance.
From momentum trade to survival test
According to Altan Tutar, the sector is entering a shakeout phase. He argues that many DATs were built for rising markets only, with little thought given to how they would operate when prices stagnate or fall. As a result, investors are now questioning whether these firms add any value beyond passive exposure.
The biggest weakness, executives say, is the gap between company valuation and the net value of crypto held on balance sheets, a metric closely watched by markets. Once that premium disappears, the business case quickly unravels. Treasury firms focused on smaller or more volatile assets are expected to feel that pressure first, but even those centered on major tokens are not immune.
Holding crypto is no longer enough
Executives across the industry agree that DATs that survive will look very different from the first wave. Ryan Chow says the idea that simply accumulating Bitcoin guarantees growth has already been disproven. Firms that treated treasuries as branding tools rather than financial systems have been forced to sell assets just to cover operating costs.
By contrast, companies that integrated yield strategies, liquidity management, or on-chain financial tools have shown more resilience. These models view crypto not as idle collateral, but as productive capital that can generate returns even during drawdowns.
Traditional finance raises the bar
Another challenge is competition from exchange-traded funds. Spot crypto ETFs now offer regulated exposure, transparency, and in some cases yield, making them a cleaner option for many investors. That shift has put pressure on DATs to justify why investors should choose a corporate balance sheet over an ETF ticker.
Vincent Chok believes the answer lies in evolution. Treasury firms, he argues, must begin operating more like financial institutions, with clear allocation rules, audits, compliance standards, and integration with traditional finance infrastructure. Without that shift, DATs risk being squeezed out by products that offer the same exposure with fewer risks.
A thinner field ahead
As crypto markets mature, the tolerance for loosely structured treasury strategies is fading. What remains is a more demanding environment where only firms with disciplined financial management, clear revenue models, and institutional-grade operations are likely to survive.
The next year is shaping up to be less about who holds the most crypto, and more about who knows how to manage it.
