Once seen as marginal experiments, Bitcoin Treasury companies have now become central players in the digital asset market. Following pioneers like MicroStrategy, these companies accumulate Bitcoin on their balance sheets, standing between operating businesses and cryptocurrency investment funds.
Meanwhile, momentum has accelerated in recent months in Asia, attracting the attention of investors, regulators, and corporate boards. The key question is whether these treasuries can survive under increasing regulatory oversight or collapse under growing risk pressures.
Number of companies holding Bitcoin increased from 70 to 134 this year
Why this matters: Bitcoin has entered corporate finance mainstream. In the first half of 2025, the number of public companies holding BTC doubled. According to K33 Research, the number of public companies with Bitcoin Treasury increased from 70 to 134 from December 2024 to June 2025, purchasing a total of 244,991 BTC. Eight Japanese companies seem to have adopted this strategy, showing that Asia has moved from observer to active participant. This rapid expansion raises fundamental questions about oversight, stability, and sustainability.
Public companies have identified with BTC Treasury strategy. Source: K33Latest developments: Recent headlines emphasize Asia's role. Financial Times reports that American Bitcoin, a US mining company backed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, is seeking acquisitions in Japan and Hong Kong. The goal: build Asian versions of MicroStrategy-style treasury companies. This could be an opportunity for Asian markets to access a new asset class, but without regulatory safeguards, risks of volatility and instability will increase.
Meanwhile, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) issued the July 2025 Digital and AI Ministerial Statement. Leaders from 21 member economies committed to enhancing trust and safety in digital ecosystems. Although the statement does not specifically name treasury companies, it emphasizes the need for robust policy frameworks around emerging digital financial models. APEC's direction signals tighter oversight of companies currently holding thousands of BTC on their balance sheets.
What Treasury Management Companies Do
Context: As explained by BitMEX Blog, treasury companies typically sign advisory agreements with specialized managers, raise capital in public markets, and deploy the proceeds into Bitcoin. They promise BTC exposure without requiring investors to manage custody or trading. This attracts institutions and retail investors but creates risks, as leverage, accounting handling, and governance standards vary significantly.
MicroStrategy pioneered this strategy in 2020, initially viewing BTC as an inflation hedge, then developing into a dedicated treasury company. Tesla pursued this briefly, while Japan's Metaplanet adopted the model in 2023. Today, dozens of smaller companies worldwide have deployed similar strategies. Amina Group estimates that public companies hold nearly 962,000 BTC, valued at over $110 billion.
(Translation continues in the same manner for the remaining text)The risk emerges when the price premium drops sharply. If a company's stock trades close to its Net Asset Value (NAV), new stock issuance no longer increases BTC per share but dilutes it. Matthew Sigel of VanEck noted, "When you trade at NAV, stock dilution is no longer strategic. It becomes exploitation."
This cycle—where price premium supports capital raising, which is used to buy BTC, thus reinforcing the narrative—can quickly collapse. If valuation drops to NAV or lower, capital will dry up, growth will stagnate, and the price premium narrative will weaken. Currently, Treasury companies benefit from investor enthusiasm. However, the model's sustainability depends on financial discipline, transparency, and the ability to increase BTC per share rather than accumulating more coins.
Its Impact Will Not Be Small
Behind the scenes: The motivations for joining this boom are diverse. Some companies see Bitcoin as a way to access capital markets. American Bitcoin's plan to penetrate Asia shows how US political influence intersects with financial centers craving new products. Other companies, especially smaller ones, use the "Treasury" label to attract speculative investors. Regulators see this blend of hype and leverage reminiscent of past bubbles.
APEC economies also differ in risk appetite. Japan and Singapore emphasize compliance and transparency. Hong Kong is a strict gateway between mainland China and global markets. Emerging Southeast Asian economies are still experimenting more, leaving space for Treasury companies to operate in regulatory gray areas.
Broader impact: If Treasury companies succeed in Asia, their impact could spread across industries. Corporations might access new financial channels, with balance sheets functioning like quasi-official ETF funds. Traditional banks might face competitive pressure as companies bypass conventional markets. However, volatility could erode trust if stock prices deviate too far from underlying Bitcoin value.
For small retail investors, listed Treasury companies mean indirect Bitcoin exposure. Employees might find their stock-based compensation tied to the BTC cycle, linking family finances to cryptocurrency fluctuations.
Important information:
- Bitcoin Treasury companies nearly doubled in the first half of 2025, from 70 to 134.
- In total, they purchased 244,991 BTC during that period.
- Eight Japanese companies, along with dozens in North America and Europe, currently hold BTC on their balance sheets.
- Amina Group estimates 962,000 BTC are publicly held by companies, valued at over $110 billion.
- APEC emphasizes "trust and safety" in digital ecosystems.
It Could Encourage Excessive Risk Acceptance
Looking ahead: Upcoming APEC ministerial meetings may address Treasury companies more directly. Regulators in Japan and Singapore are expected to clarify accounting standards and investor protections. Hong Kong is likely to expand disclosure requirements for new listings. Meanwhile, BeInCrypto recently noted that Japanese companies show differences: Remixpoint expanded BTC holdings, while Value Creation completely withdrew. These differences highlight the diversity of strategies in Asia and uncertainty about which approach will prevail.
Historical perspective: MicroStrategy's involvement in 2020 triggered the first wave, followed by Tesla. Asia's moment came with Metaplanet in 2023. By 2025, the scale far exceeded previous stages: company numbers doubled, hundreds of thousands of additional Bitcoins were purchased, and discussions elevated to ministerial level. However, risks still recall the 2021 retail investor-driven bubble, where price momentum overshadowed fundamental factors.
Risks:
- Sharp BTC price drops could damage balance sheets.
- Excessive leverage might push companies toward bankruptcy.
- Stock valuation deviating from NAV could harm small retail investors.
- Blind "Saylorization" — copying MicroStrategy without discipline — risks backfiring.
Expert opinion: BitMEX Blog warns about structural conflicts, "Advisory agreements can create conflicts of interest, as managers can earn fees regardless of outcomes, encouraging excessive risk acceptance."
Matthew Sigel, head of digital assets research at VanEck, commented on X, "Bitcoin Treasury companies can amplify volatility by acting like forced sellers during downturns, magnifying price cycles."
And BeInCrypto reported in its August analysis about these companies' potential risks, "Bitcoin Treasury companies have demonstrated the ability to trigger broader market selloffs, shaking investor confidence and deepening bear markets."
These insights emphasize the dilemma: Treasury companies might accelerate acceptance and open capital markets for Bitcoin, but they also amplify risks. For Asian participants, survival will depend on whether regulations can develop quickly enough to constrain dangers while allowing innovation to flourish.
