
mNAV has become the go-to valuation shorthand for bitcoin treasury stocks — but a growing number of analysts are warning it oversimplifies the story.
Over the past few years, a class of publicly traded companies has emerged whose primary value proposition is holding bitcoin on their balance sheets. These “bitcoin treasuries” — including firms like Strategy (MSTR), formerly known as MicroStrategy — have sparked debate among investors, especially when their stocks trade at levels disconnected from the value of the BTC they hold.
The most common valuation yardstick is the multiple of net asset value (mNAV). It compares a company’s enterprise value (EV) to the market value of its bitcoin holdings, giving investors a way to assess how much of a premium or discount the market assigns to its treasury.
mNAV ≈ enterprise value ÷ bitcoin holdings value
The metric is now widely followed. Strategy publishes its own mNAV on its investor site, while third-party dashboards such as BitcoinTreasuries.net track various mNAV figures across multiple firms.
A basic mNAV calculation involves:
This EV-based approach represents just one way to compute mNAV. Depending on how analysts treat debt, cash, and potential share dilution, the ratio can shift significantly — which is why the industry now tracks multiple variants.
A reading above 1.0 implies a premium, while a reading below 1.0 suggests a discount — potentially a red flag or an opportunity, depending on the investor’s outlook.
While Strategy reports an enterprise‑value-based mNAV on its investor site, third‑party data providers publish multiple versions of the metric — each reflecting different assumptions about capital structure and share count.
Once calculated, mNAV gives a sense of how markets are valuing a firm’s bitcoin exposure:
Because mNAV is a dimensionless ratio, it allows comparisons across firms regardless of treasury size or share count. It also reflects broader market sentiment about whether investors trust the firm’s overall strategy.
Some dashboards, e.g., BitcoinTreasuries.net, now show multiple mNAV variants:
As of Nov. 30, Strategy’s reported values were:
That means equity investors may be paying slightly less than $1 per dollar of BTC on a diluted basis, while the broader market — including debt holders — still values the firm above its BTC holdings.
mNAV has real implications for capital markets activity. A firm trading above 1.0 can raise equity or debt at favorable terms and buy more bitcoin, effectively increasing its exposure. When mNAV drops, that playbook becomes harder or more dilutive.
Because of that feedback loop, mNAV influences how companies approach financing — and how investors assess the viability of bitcoin-first business models.
In a June 2025 blog post, Greg Cipolaro, the global head of research at NYDIG, offered a sharp critique of mNAV as it’s commonly used. He argued the metric is “woefully deficient” for failing to reflect key balance sheet risks — especially assumptions about convertible notes.
Many analysts, Cipolaro noted, treat these convertibles as if they’re guaranteed to convert into equity. But if market triggers aren’t met, the notes might have to be repaid in cash, creating a refinancing risk that mNAV fails to capture.
Cipolaro also flagged that mNAV often ignores the value of the operating company (opco), which could be a source of hidden risk or upside. Instead of scrapping the metric, he suggested refining it to incorporate more robust modeling of capital structure and opco valuation.
mNAV remains the most cited metric for comparing bitcoin treasury stocks, but critiques like Cipolaro’s suggest it may need an upgrade. Investors are increasingly calling for more transparency and standardization — especially as more firms adopt bitcoin-forward treasury strategies.
With bitcoin treasuries growing in number and complexity, the question is no longer just “what’s the multiple?” but “what’s actually in it?”
Source: CoinDesk: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Crypto News and Price Data






