The surge in corporate Bitcoin acquisitions has long been celebrated as a symbol of crypto’s growing integration into mainstream finance. However, recent cautionary remarks from VanEck’s head of digital assets research, Matthew Sigel, are forcing a rethink of this strategy. Sigel’s warning shines a spotlight on the hidden risks for firms whose stock prices are increasingly decoupling from the value of their Bitcoin holdings. The question now is whether Bitcoin-buying companies can sustain their aggressive accumulation strategies without eroding shareholder value.

The Rise of Corporate Bitcoin Accumulation

Over the past few years, numerous public companies have embraced Bitcoin as part of their treasury strategy, positioning it as a hedge against fiat devaluation and a long-term growth asset. Inspired by pioneers like MicroStrategy, firms ranging from fintech startups to traditional companies have issued new equity and debt to finance large Bitcoin purchases. For a time, this strategy delivered both media attention and impressive stock rallies, as investors sought exposure to Bitcoin without directly holding it.

However, as Sigel points out, the landscape is shifting. While Bitcoin continues to post gains—recently trading around $107,000—the share prices of some Bitcoin-buying firms are faltering. This disconnect is creating new challenges for both company leaders and shareholders.

Semler Scientific’s Case Highlights the Emerging Risk

Semler Scientific, once primarily recognized for its medical technology products, has emerged as a notable example of this phenomenon. Since entering the Bitcoin space in 2024, the firm has amassed 3,808 BTC, making it the 13th largest corporate holder of Bitcoin. At current market prices, Semler’s Bitcoin stack is valued at over $400 million. Yet despite these impressive holdings, Semler’s market cap has slipped to approximately $435 million—down more than 45% since the start of 2025.

This means that Semler’s market value is approaching parity with the net asset value (NAV) of its Bitcoin holdings, with a multiple of NAV (mNAV) dropping below 1x to around 0.82x. Essentially, the market is valuing Semler as little more than a proxy for its Bitcoin, disregarding its core business and growth prospects.

VanEck’s Recommendations for Bitcoin-Buying Companies

Sigel’s analysis highlights the urgent need for Bitcoin-buying firms to reassess their strategies. He argues that as stock prices near or dip below NAV, continued issuance of equity to purchase Bitcoin risks becoming extractive rather than accretive. In other words, issuing shares to fund more Bitcoin buys could hurt existing shareholders rather than enhance value.

Sigel proposes several safeguards that companies should implement immediately:

• Pause at-the-market offerings if the stock trades below a 0.95x NAV multiple for at least 10 days, to avoid further dilution.
• Prioritize share buybacks when Bitcoin appreciates, but the stock price fails to reflect that increased asset value.
• Launch strategic reviews if NAV discounts persist, which could involve exploring mergers, spinoffs, or even winding down the Bitcoin buying strategy.

Furthermore, Sigel emphasizes aligning executive compensation with NAV growth per share rather than the size of the Bitcoin stack or the number of shares issued. This, he argues, would encourage management to focus on creating shareholder value rather than simply expanding Bitcoin holdings.

Balancing Bitcoin Accumulation with Shareholder Value

The core challenge for Bitcoin-buying firms is finding a balance between leveraging Bitcoin’s potential and safeguarding shareholder interests. While holding Bitcoin can provide long-term upside, indiscriminate accumulation—especially through dilutive funding—may erode confidence and market value.

Semler’s situation serves as a cautionary tale. Its initial Bitcoin purchases were applauded, but as its stock price has fallen despite Bitcoin gains, investors are questioning whether the strategy serves the company’s best interests. The firm’s declining premium over NAV has made it vulnerable to criticism and calls for strategic change.

Broader Implications for Corporate Bitcoin Strategies

The risks identified by VanEck are not unique to Semler. Any company aggressively funding Bitcoin buys through equity or debt faces similar dangers if market sentiment shifts or if their core business performance weakens. As more companies adopt Bitcoin treasuries, they must ensure that these strategies complement rather than overshadow their primary value propositions.

There is also a lesson here for firms considering their first steps into Bitcoin. While the asset offers compelling long-term prospects, prudent capital management and clear communication with shareholders are critical to ensuring that Bitcoin holdings enhance, rather than dilute, corporate value.

Conclusion

The message from VanEck is clear: discipline and strategy must govern corporate Bitcoin accumulation going forward. Companies that fail to heed these warnings risk turning a promising financial tool into a source of vulnerability. As Bitcoin-buying firms navigate these challenges, the coming months will test their ability to adapt, safeguard shareholder value, and maintain market confidence in their dual roles as businesses and Bitcoin holders.