5/5 🧵 The useful takeaway: BPS shows upside, CEBE BPS shows risk, BTC Yield shows execution. That’s a solid framework for comparing Bitcoin treasury companies, especially as more public firms copy the Strategy playbook. The catch is obvious: these metrics are still Saylor-made, so critics are right to question whether they’ll become a real standard or just a flattering house style. 📎 Source
4/5 🧵 The third metric is BTC Yield: the year-to-date percentage change in BPS. Strategy’s current figure is 12.8% YTD. In plain English, it tracks whether management is actually increasing Bitcoin exposure per share over time, not just making noise on social media and issuing securities with a laser-eye PowerPoint. Saylor’s broader claim is that the gap between BPS and CEBE BPS reflects “amplification” — leverage can boost equity upside if BTC outperforms the company’s cost of capital.
3/5 🧵 The second metric is CEBE BPS, which is the more conservative version. It adjusts for senior claims like debt and preferred stock before calculating BTC per common share. For Strategy, that means backing out roughly $6.75B in debt and $15.5B in preferred stock, which drops the figure to around 118,000–134,000 satoshis per share. Same BTC pile, very different risk picture. That gap is the real story.
2/5 🧵 The first metric is BPS — Bitcoin Per Share. It’s simple: total Bitcoin holdings divided by diluted shares outstanding. Using Strategy as the model, the company holds 845,256 BTC worth about $54.5B, which works out to 220,016 satoshis per diluted share. That tells investors the raw BTC exposure each share represents before dealing with the messy part: leverage.
1/5 🧵 Michael Saylor is trying to give Bitcoin treasury companies their own scoreboard. The big idea: stop judging these firms with vague “we own a lot of BTC” talk and start measuring Bitcoin per share, Bitcoin after liabilities, and how fast that BTC exposure is actually growing. Clean in theory. Debatable in practice.
5/5 🧵 The useful takeaway: BPS shows upside, CEBE BPS shows risk, BTC Yield shows execution. That’s a solid framework for comparing Bitcoin treasury companies, especially as more public firms copy the Strategy playbook. The catch is obvious: these metrics are still Saylor-made, so critics are right to question whether they’ll become a real standard or just a flattering house style. 📎 Source
#threadstorm
4/5 🧵 The third metric is BTC Yield: the year-to-date percentage change in BPS. Strategy’s current figure is 12.8% YTD. In plain English, it tracks whether management is actually increasing Bitcoin exposure per share over time, not just making noise on social media and issuing securities with a laser-eye PowerPoint. Saylor’s broader claim is that the gap between BPS and CEBE BPS reflects “amplification” — leverage can boost equity upside if BTC outperforms the company’s cost of capital.
3/5 🧵 The second metric is CEBE BPS, which is the more conservative version. It adjusts for senior claims like debt and preferred stock before calculating BTC per common share. For Strategy, that means backing out roughly $6.75B in debt and $15.5B in preferred stock, which drops the figure to around 118,000–134,000 satoshis per share. Same BTC pile, very different risk picture. That gap is the real story.
2/5 🧵 The first metric is BPS — Bitcoin Per Share. It’s simple: total Bitcoin holdings divided by diluted shares outstanding. Using Strategy as the model, the company holds 845,256 BTC worth about $54.5B, which works out to 220,016 satoshis per diluted share. That tells investors the raw BTC exposure each share represents before dealing with the messy part: leverage.
1/5 🧵 Michael Saylor is trying to give Bitcoin treasury companies their own scoreboard. The big idea: stop judging these firms with vague “we own a lot of BTC” talk and start measuring Bitcoin per share, Bitcoin after liabilities, and how fast that BTC exposure is actually growing. Clean in theory. Debatable in practice.