In recent years, a growing number of corporations have turned parts of their balance sheets into cryptocurrency treasuries. High-profile firms like MicroStrategy and Tesla made headlines by allocating tens of billions to Bitcoin, and now a new wave of companies is buying Ethereum.
These moves reflect changing attitudes toward crypto as a financial asset. Companies often cite macroeconomic concerns – inflation, fiat devaluation and low interest rates – as motives for holding digital assets.
Regulatory developments are also shaping these strategies: for example, the U.S. GENIUS Act (2025) introduced a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins, and regulators in the U.S. and EU have signaled greater clarity around crypto investment.
Overall, corporate crypto adoption is no longer limited to tech firms; industries from industrials to gaming are quietly converting cash into Bitcoin or Ether, each following a distinct strategy.
In this article we explore the largest corporate holders of Bitcoin and Ethereum, explain how their treasury strategies differ, and find the economic and regulatory factors driving these trends.
Major Corporate Bitcoin Holders
Bitcoin (BTC) has long been promoted as “digital gold,” and some firms have embraced it as a strategic reserve asset. MicroStrategy, a business intelligence software company, is by far the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin. In its July 2025 earnings release, MicroStrategy (now simply “Strategy”) reported 628,791 BTC on its balance sheet, acquired at a total cost of $46.07 billion (about $73,277 per coin). The press release explicitly notes that Strategy is “the largest corporate holder of bitcoin” and even calls itself “the world’s first Bitcoin Treasury Company”. Strategy has consistently raised equity and debt (via stock and convertible debt offerings) to fund Bitcoin purchases. For example, in early 2025 it raised over $10 billion through share issuances, and stated that its Bitcoin-per-share was up 25% in 2025. In practical terms, MicroStrategy’s strategy is to borrow (or raise equity) cheaply and use the proceeds to buy Bitcoin now, betting that future appreciation of BTC will allow debt repayment by selling only a fraction of the holding. As a River.com analysis notes, MicroStrategy’s approach “is to raise debt capital and use it to purchase bitcoin. The theory behind this strategy is that the company can repay the fiat debt by selling less bitcoin in the future”. This leveraged accumulation is unusual but has been emulated by a few other firms.
Electric vehicle maker Tesla, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA) is another public company that famously bought Bitcoin. In early 2021 Tesla invested about $1.5 billion in BTC. By mid-2025, Tesla’s holdings had been reduced (it sold some BTC when prices rose) but still stood at roughly 11,000–12,000 BTC. A Kraken analysis confirms that Tesla “reduced its bitcoin holdings to approximately 11,500 BTC” by 2025. In Tesla’s case, the strategy appears partly experimental: the company’s CFO noted that Tesla would not trade Bitcoin actively, and Tesla once accepted (and then suspended) Bitcoin payments for cars. Unlike MicroStrategy, Tesla has not continued aggressively buying; it appears to hold BTC more as an investment reserve.
Other publicly traded companies have also amassed notable Bitcoin treasuries. Block, Inc. (formerly Square, ticker SQ) owns about 8,485 BTC as of 2025. Led by CEO Jack Dorsey (a Bitcoin proponent), Block allocated a portion of its cash to Bitcoin in 2020 and 2021. Galaxy Digital Holdings (TSX: GLXY), a crypto-focused investment firm, reportedly holds over 8,100 BTC on its balance sheet. Major Bitcoin miners often accumulate coins from their operations: Marathon Digital (NASDAQ: MARA) – one of the largest U.S. miners – held roughly 48,000 BTC by mid-2025. (For context, Marathon’s accumulated BTC is worth on the order of $5–6 billion at mid-2025 prices.) Other mining companies such as Hut 8 and CleanSpark also hold thousands of BTC from mining, although detailed figures fluctuate.
Altogether, Kraken’s research finds that public companies, led by MicroStrategy, Tesla, Block, Galaxy and Marathon, have made significant corporate allocations to Bitcoin. Combined, these firms hold well into the tens of thousands of bitcoins each. For example, Strategy’s 628,791 BTC dwarfs the holdings of the next largest public holders. In terms of supply, corporate treasuries and mining companies together hold only a few percent of all Bitcoin, but their behavior strongly influences market sentiment. Indeed, corporate BTC holdings have attracted attention from blockchain analysts who can track large addresses: firms often cluster addresses and timing to reveal hidden corporate wallets.
Private companies (and organizations) also hold substantial BTC treasuries. One of the largest is Block.one, the private blockchain software firm behind the EOS cryptocurrency. Block.one’s reserves are estimated (via analytics) to be on the order of 164,000 BTC (worth ~$7–8 billion). Tether Holdings (the issuer of the USDT stablecoin) maintains a sizable Bitcoin position (reported ~100,000 BTC) as part of its reserve backing. Foundations and nonprofits have stashed coins as well: the Tezos Foundation of Switzerland reportedly holds “a substantial amount” of Bitcoin, which it can use to fund grants and development. Together, Kraken notes, private entities account for about 1.95% of total Bitcoin supply in their treasuries – roughly 410,000 BTC across all such holders. Not all these holdings are publicized; many firms quietly allocate a fraction of their cash into Bitcoin as a hedge. In fact, an increasing number of smaller public companies have secretly added BTC to their treasuries (often a few hundred or thousand coins). A Cointelegraph review found at least ten overlooked public companies (from a variety of industries) that disclosed Bitcoin in 2024–25, typically holding from a few hundred up to a few thousand BTC. These include mining firms, tech start-ups, and non-tech corporates that quietly mention Bitcoin in filings. In total, Bitcoin treasury accumulation has broadened beyond early adopters into many corporate balance sheets.
According to blockchain analytics, there are now hundreds of corporations (public and private) that hold Bitcoin reserves. As of mid-2025, Kraken reported roughly 1,950 corporations worldwide holding BTC. That represents a steady rise from 2020–2021 levels. BitcoinTreasuries.net (an industry tracker) noted that 26 new companies added Bitcoin to their books in June 2025 alone, bringing the total number of companies holding Bitcoin to around 250 by early July 2025. This “quiet” proliferation reflects the success of early adopters: many firms cite inflation hedging, portfolio diversification, and digital scarcity as reasons to park cash in Bitcoin. Corporate treasury managers value Bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million coins (never to be increased) and its round-the-clock liquidity, arguing that it protects cash against currency devaluation. For example, an oil services firm might view 1% of its cash in BTC as insurance against sharp spikes in inflation or currency volatility.
Major Corporate Ethereum Holders
While Bitcoin has the longest record of corporate adoption, Ethereum (ETH) is now seeing a similar wave of interest – but for somewhat different reasons. Ethereum is not just a store of value; it powers a global network of smart contracts, decentralized finance and tokenized assets. That versatility means companies can earn yield by staking ETH, in addition to any price appreciation. Beginning in 2024 and accelerating in 2025, dozens of companies have reoriented to build “Ethereum treasuries,” akin to the earlier Bitcoin treasury movement.
The world’s largest Ethereum treasury company is BitMine Immersion Technologies (NYSE American: BMNR). BitMine is a U.S.-listed firm that historically operated Bitcoin mining hardware. In 2024 it pivoted heavily into Ethereum. As of mid-2025, BitMine had accumulated well over 1.1 million ETH – by some estimates around 1.15–1.2 million ETH – worth roughly $4.9–$5.5 billion. A Fundstrat report notes that BitMine “has aggressively accumulated 1.2 million ETH since the beginning of July, and its treasury is now worth almost $5.5 billion”. BitMine’s leaders have pursued massive equity and debt raises to fund these purchases, including plans to raise up to $20 billion to expand its Ethereum holdings. In short, BitMine has copied the MicroStrategy playbook but for ETH: it is issuing stock and convertible debt, then buying Ether. Unlike Bitcoin, however, the company then stakes most of this ETH on the network. BitMine reports its stake yields as a secondary income stream beyond price gains. According to a crypto news site, ETH now makes up “more than 90%” of BitMine’s digital assets. The result is that BitMine has essentially become a publicly traded Ethereum fund, advertising itself as a corporate treasury of ETH.
Another leading company is SharpLink Gaming, Inc. (NASDAQ: SBET), a U.S. gaming and technology firm founded by ConsenSys co-founder Joseph Lubin. In early 2025, SharpLink announced that Ethereum is now its primary treasury asset. By Q2 2025 SharpLink had raised over $2.6 billion through stock offerings and direct placements specifically to buy ETH. Its Q2 2025 report states that SharpLink “acquired and now own[s] 728,804 ETH”. That is roughly $2.2–2.5 billion worth of ETH (at mid-2025 prices). SharpLink has staked nearly 100% of its ETH to validate the network, generating ongoing staking rewards (cumulative ~1,326 ETH by mid-2025). The company’s executives explicitly describe SharpLink as “one of the world’s largest and most trusted corporate holders of ETH”. Like BitMine, SharpLink positions itself as offering investors exposure to Ethereum’s upside; SharpLink’s filings emphasize that ETH is “the core trust commodity of the next-generation financial system” and that staking yields are a strategic advantage. In sum, SharpLink’s strategy is to aggressively buy ETH with fresh capital, stake it for yield, and thereby compound value for shareholders.
A newer entrant is The Ether Machine (ETHM), a special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC) in the process of merging with a crypto business. The Ether Machine was created as a joint venture by The Ether Reserve LLC and NASDAQ-listed Dynamix SPAC. Its stated goal is to become “an Ethereum yield and infrastructure company.” The company’s press releases and filings make clear it aims to accumulate ETH on a gigantic scale and list on NASDAQ. In July 2025, The Ether Reserve (a subsidiary of The Ether Machine) announced it had purchased 15,000 ETH for $56.9 million, bringing its total ETH committed to 334,757. (It still had hundreds of millions of dollars left to deploy.) This already put The Ether Machine’s holdings on par with or exceeding the ~234,000 ETH held by the Ethereum Foundation. The SPAC plans to raise roughly $1.6 billion more via its public listing and buy until it holds an estimated 5% of all ETH in circulation. The key point is that The Ether Machine is not merely speculating: it intends to build an “institutional-grade ETH treasury” that actively stakes ETH and provides Ethereum infrastructure. Its SEC filings say it will be “anchored by one of the largest on-chain ETH positions of any public entity”. In effect, this SPAC has assembled a stock of ETH ($1.3+ billion worth so far) as its core asset, echoing how MicroStrategy used corporate cash to buy BTC.
Beyond these headline cases, several other public companies have large ETH holdings or strategies. Bit Digital, Inc. (NASDAQ: BTBT), formerly a Bitcoin miner, completely flipped its strategy in 2025: it sold all its BTC (about $172 million worth) and used the proceeds to purchase “over 100,000 ETH,” according to its filings. Bit Digital’s management has declared that Ethereum is now the centerpiece of its balance sheet, and it plans to continue buying ETH with new equity offerings. Another example is BTCS, Inc. (NASDAQ: BTCS), one of the oldest public crypto firms. In mid-2025 BTCS announced buying about 1,000 ETH (bringing its total to ~13,500 ETH) as part of building an Ethereum infrastructure business (validators, staking, etc.). These moves highlight a broader pattern: firms traditionally linked to crypto hardware or brokerage are pivoting to emphasize Ethereum and staking yield.
As of mid-2025, corporate Ethereum holdings have reached substantial scale. StrategicETHReserve.xyz, a blockchain data tracker, estimates that by August 2025 corporate “treasury companies” held about 3.04 million ETH (roughly $13 billion at then-current prices) across 64 firms. Of that 3.04M, SharpLink’s and BitMine’s treasuries alone make up a majority. (For perspective, 3.04M ETH is about 2.63% of the total 115.5M ETH supply.) This corporate ETH of ~2.6–3.0 million coins dwarfs what companies held just a year earlier. The rush began in early 2025 and accelerated in mid-2025: one data point shows institutional Ethereum holdings surged by 127.7% in July 2025 alone. The aggressive buying has already created supply pressure; analysts note these purchases exceeded new ETH issuance, exerting “deflationary pressure” on the market.
In concrete terms, data from mid-2025 show BitMine Immersion (green bar) as the largest corporate ETH holder (~833K ETH), followed by SharpLink Gaming (~522K ETH) and The Ether Machine (~346K ETH). These top three alone account for over 1.7 million ETH, more than half of all ETH held by businesses. In contrast, public companies with Bitcoin treasuries (MicroStrategy, Tesla, etc.) generally hold much smaller shares of Bitcoin supply. The figure illustrates that corporate Ethereum treasury holdings are concentrated in a few specialized “treasury companies.”
The rise of Ethereum treasuries has introduced strategies quite unlike those seen with Bitcoin. A fundamental difference is yield generation. Because Ethereum runs on proof-of-stake, coin holders can stake ETH (or Ethereum-based liquid staking tokens) to earn rewards around 2–3% per year. Companies like SharpLink and BitMine explicitly stake most of their ETH to generate this income. For example, SharpLink reports staking 95–100% of its ETH and collecting over 1,300 ETH in cumulative rewards in a few months. BitMine likewise notes that staking yields provide an “accrued coupon” in addition to speculative upside. This contrasts with Bitcoin holders: Bitcoin pays no dividend or yield. When a Bitcoin company like Strategy buys BTC, the only returns come from price appreciation. (Some Bitcoin businesses run the Lightning Network to earn fees, but corporate treasuries rarely use that.)
Another distinction is that Ethereum companies are coupling treasury management with building infrastructure. The Ether Machine plans to become an institutional validator infrastructure provider alongside growing its ETH reserve. SharpLink partnered with ConsenSys and boasts Ethereum co-founder Lubin as chairman, emphasizing ecosystem development. Even Bit Digital now talks about providing staking services. In contrast, most Bitcoin treasury companies simply hold and occasionally liquidate. For example, Strategy leverages its BTC to issue new corporate bonds (it recently issued the “STRC” preferred stock backed by its BTC holdings). But Strategy does not run miners or nodes as part of its Bitcoin playbook.
In summary, corporate Ethereum strategies tend to blend treasury accumulation, staking yield, and network participation, whereas Bitcoin strategies have been mostly about treasury accumulation alone. Companies shifting from Bitcoin to Ethereum often cite this difference explicitly: ETH’s expected utility growth (DeFi, NFTs, tokenization, AI on chain) and yield make it a dual-purpose asset. For instance, Fundstrat analyst Tom Lee proclaimed Ethereum the “biggest macro trade” of the decade, noting that stablecoins and financial projects are predominantly on ETH. That kind of bullish thesis underpins the aggressive ETH buys. Bitcoin companies instead emphasize Bitcoin’s fixed supply and 24/7 liquidity as a hedge (as noted below).
Strategic Differences: Bitcoin vs. Ethereum Treasuries
The divergent approaches stem in part from how the two networks are viewed. Bitcoin, with its capped supply and strong brand as “digital gold,” is typically treated by corporates as a store-of-value hedge. Treasury managers who buy BTC often do so to protect cash from inflation or currency risk. For example, the cointelegraph analysis of corporate Bitcoin buyers notes that companies adopt BTC to “hedge against inflation, fiat devaluation and macroeconomic shocks,” since Bitcoin’s fixed 21 million supply makes it an attractive scarce asset during inflationary periods. This narrative is similar to why central banks hold gold. As one report explains, firms incorporate Bitcoin to diversify their balance sheets “as a non-correlated asset that enhances portfolio resilience against macroeconomic shocks”. Indeed, many companies first added Bitcoin during past waves of high inflation (2021–2022). MicroStrategy’s CEO Michael Saylor frequently says he prefers Bitcoin to cash or bonds because of its scarcity. Tesla’s acquisition in 2021 was explicitly described as a hedge against volatile cash flows and the perceived devaluation of cash. These statements align with the familiar thesis: Bitcoin as a portable, liquid, non-sovereign asset to park corporate reserves.
In contrast, corporations eyeing Ethereum articulate a broader thesis. They still acknowledge inflation concerns, but they also highlight ETH’s utility. Ethereum underpins the multi-billion dollar DeFi ecosystem, serves as the backbone for stablecoins, tokenization of real-world assets, and (increasingly) NFTs and Web3 infrastructure. Companies say they are buying ETH not just to hold, but to be part of Ethereum’s economic layer. SharpLink, for instance, says Ethereum will be the “trust layer for the decentralized economy” and emphasizes that staking ETH “secures Ethereum’s network” while generating yield. The staking yield (often ~2.9% annual) is repeatedly cited as a key differentiator: it is an ongoing return not available from Bitcoin, attracting asset managers seeking yield. BitMine’s filings talk about ETH generating a “coupon” on top of price returns.
Another strategic difference is fundraising to buy crypto. MicroStrategy famously used its share price and debt to buy BTC; Ethereum treasury companies are doing similar equity raises. BitMine and SharpLink both launched large stock offerings and directed the proceeds entirely into ETH. The Ether Machine’s SPAC is effectively a capital raise to buy ETH. By contrast, almost no Bitcoin-only treasury company is doing major new equity raises solely for crypto. Strategy is the exception (it raised debt called STRC to buy more BTC), but many Bitcoin believers simply use excess cash flows or occasional bond issues. Ethereum companies have treated equity issuance as integral to the strategy. For example, SharpLink’s early 2025 $2.6B raise specifically fueled its ETH purchases. This difference leads to structural distinctions in corporate finance: Ethereum-focused firms often carry convertible notes or direct offerings tied to ETH price, whereas Bitcoin holders usually use credit lines or old-fashioned debt.
Risk management and accounting also differ. Companies like Strategy are comfortable with extreme volatility – Strategy’s recent Q2 2025 results noted a $13.2 billion unrealized gain on BTC. Bitcoin firms generally treat price swings as secondary, focusing on “holding” long-term. Ethereum companies, while also long-term, have to deal with staking derivatives (like liquid staking tokens) and their accounting quirks (e.g. SharpLink reported a large non-cash impairment on liquid-staked ETH in Q2 2025). The dual nature of ETH (price plus yield) means these firms must manage validator risks, re-staking protocols, and DeFi exposures – all new operational concerns. Some Ethereum treasuries explicitly integrate DeFi or NFT strategies; for example, GameSquare Holdings (Nasdaq: GAME) has announced ETH staking and an NFT-based platform, mixing corporate treasuries with product development. Bitcoin companies have not ventured far into DeFi, since Bitcoin’s scripting is limited.
One more difference is public perception and investor base. MicroStrategy and Tesla built their BTC stakes under the media spotlight. Many Bitcoin investors are retail traders or Bitcoin “whales,” so those companies get a lot of crypto press coverage. By contrast, SharpLink, BitMine and Ether Machine have marketed themselves heavily to stock market investors who want crypto exposure. For example, SharpLink’s leadership proudly includes Ethereum founders and it pushed its stock listing as “the easiest way for investors to get Ethereum exposure”. BitMine targeted listings on both NYSE and an issued convertible debt. These Ethereum treasury stocks surged dramatically in 2025 as the market recognized their ETH holdings (BitMine’s stock was up over 1,300% in a short span). The focus has partly shifted from crypto enthusiasts to the broader capital markets. That said, Ethereum treasury companies have also sometimes downplayed volatility and emphasized institutional credibility (e.g. through professional custodians and S-1 filings). Bitcoin treasury companies, having started earlier, took a “digital gold” tone in corporate communications, whereas the new Ethereum players often tout “industry-first ETH IRA products” or “DeFi bridges for institutional treasurers.” These stylistic differences reflect the two communities they address.
Macroeconomic and Regulatory Context
The strategies above did not arise in a vacuum. A range of macroeconomic and regulatory factors have been highly influential.
On the macroeconomic side, the past few years have been unusually favorable to the case for crypto. Many companies point to inflation and monetary policy as drivers. From 2020 through 2022, global fiscal and monetary stimulus drove inflation rates to multi-decade highs in major economies. In that environment, holding cash or low-yield bonds became unattractive. Digital currencies like Bitcoin (and to an extent Ethereum via its ETH2 burn-and-stake model) are often viewed as imperfect hedges against fiat debasement. Corporate treasury officers cite the persistence of inflation uncertainty as justification for “non-correlated” assets. Low nominal interest rates (even as they began rising in 2023–24) also played a role: with bond yields low, corporate finance teams had cheap capital to experiment. For example, MicroStrategy took advantage of low interest rates to issue debt for BTC.
At the same time, Ethereum’s use cases have been turbocharged by other macro trends. The growth of decentralized finance (DeFi) and tokenized real-world assets has been stoked by institutions seeking alternative markets. Notably, large banks and fintechs have started pilots on Ethereum: a Cointelegraph report notes that Wall Street firms like JPMorgan and Robinhood are building Ethereum-based token products, propelled in part by clearer regulations (for example, the U.S. “Genius Act” and the Fed’s Project Hamilton initiative). These moves reinforce the narrative that Ethereum is a long-term infrastructure play, not just a speculative token. In July 2025, crypto strategist Thomas Lee called ETH “the biggest macro trade” of the next decade, specifically because “AI creates a token economy on the blockchain” and stablecoin regulations are maturing. That echoes what corporate ETH treasurers say: they expect tokens, AI-driven smart contracts, and stablecoins (mostly built on Ethereum) to increasingly dominate finance. In other words, some firms see Ethereum as a way to participate in broader technology and finance trends, beyond mere currency.
Financial market conditions also influenced crypto strategies. The cryptocurrency market generally recovered strongly in 2024–2025 after a slump in 2022–early 2023. As prices climbed, corporate balance-sheet allocations that had been passive became more profitable. For instance, Strategy’s unrealized Bitcoin gains soared by early 2025 (the July 2025 report cites a $13.2 billion YTD gain on BTC). Rising crypto prices can create a feedback loop: profitable marks bolster the willingness to buy more. This partly explains why Ethereum accumulation accelerated once ETH prices broke above key levels in mid-2025.
On the regulatory side, the environment has become somewhat more accommodating, especially in the United States. For Bitcoin, progress was uneven: in 2021 the SEC approved spot Bitcoin ETFs, giving institutional investors easy exposure and legitimizing Bitcoin as an asset class. Corporations indirectly benefit as ETFs’ inflows and publicity raise general acceptance. For Ethereum, the regulatory breakthrough came in 2024 when the SEC approved Ethereum spot ETFs (BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust and others). Those approvals implied the SEC would not treat ETH itself as a security in the context of spot trading, alleviating a major legal risk. The launching of ETH ETFs (which saw inflows in 2024) has been cited as a catalyst for corporate treasurers to consider ETH. In addition, U.S. lawmakers passed the GENIUS Act in mid-2025, a bipartisan stablecoin law that sets strong reserve and transparency standards for dollar-backed crypto. While this law is about stablecoins, it signals that U.S. policy is now explicitly supporting crypto-finance infrastructure. Firm regulation of stablecoins is crucial because stablecoins (like USDC, USDT) are primarily issued on Ethereum. Clear rules encourage firms to use Ethereum-based finance without fear of sudden legal change.
Internationally, the picture is mixed but increasingly clear. The European Union implemented its Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation in 2023, creating a harmonized framework for crypto-asset service providers. MiCA’s rules (on transparency, custody, stablecoins, etc.) may give European companies more confidence to engage with crypto, including Ether-based finance. Likewise, some Asian jurisdictions (e.g. Singapore) have friendly crypto regimes. Conversely, China’s ban on crypto in 2021 effectively ruled out Chinese companies as holders (though some Chinese mining and hardware firms that are internationally listed have ETH holdings via foreign ADRs). Overall, the trend in 2024–2025 is toward regulatory clarity. Many companies cite the reduction in “uncertainty” as freeing them to allocate reserves. An AInvest analysis specifically notes that “improved regulatory clarity, including the Genius Act in the U.S. and favorable SEC signals, has reduced institutional hesitation”. In short, corporate treasurers today operate in a world where crypto assets have recognized legal status in major markets, making them more comfortable placing corporate capital into Bitcoin or Ethereum.
Other macro factors play roles too. One is the dollar’s status and geopolitics. Some non-U.S. firms and smaller economies are pushing crypto as a hedge against dollar volatility or financial sanctions. For example, several countries now hold Bitcoin in national reserves (Ukraine ~46,000 BTC, El Salvador ~5,954 BTC). While not corporations, these moves bolster the narrative of crypto as an alternative reserve. Oil companies in Texas and the UAE (some of which have put Bitcoin on their balance sheets) are influenced by regional currency stability concerns. So far, no major U.S. corporate (outside of Treasuries) has adopted crypto for hedging; but such considerations creep in, especially for internationally exposed firms.
Another macroeconomic trend is technology adoption and investor sentiment. Large asset managers and tech companies endorsing crypto can sway corporate behavior. For instance, when Ark Invest and SoftBank announced stakes in crypto-mining firms, they signaled confidence to others. When corporate financiers like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan began offering Bitcoin products to wealthy clients, corporate boards took notice. Conversely, news of regulatory crackdowns or Bitcoin mining restrictions (like environmental concerns in Europe) have in the past dampened enthusiasm. As of 2025, the debate on Bitcoin’s energy use still lingers; some environmental, social and governance (ESG)-focused firms hesitate to hold PoW crypto. This partly explains why so far, most corporate Bitcoin holders are either pure-play crypto companies (like miners) or tech-oriented firms, rather than conservative industrial giants.
Finally, accounting and tax rules influence strategy. For example, U.S. accounting rules treat crypto as an indefinite-lived intangible asset, which can force write-downs. MicroStrategy overcame this by advocating new standards, and regulators have signaled possible relief (e.g. a proposed SEC safe harbor). If accounting rules become more crypto-friendly, more companies could jump in. Tax policies also matter; if capital gains on crypto are taxed favorably, treasurers may be more inclined to realize gains. Many firms keep BTC or ETH for years, so tax rates are not yet a deal-breaker, but these considerations are part of treasury planning.
In sum, the current macro and regulatory backdrop is relatively constructive for corporate crypto. Low interest rates (at least in early 2020s), inflationary anxiety, rising crypto prices, and supportive (or at least clarified) regulations have created an environment where holding crypto is seen as an ordinary strategic decision rather than a fringe gamble. However, companies remain mindful of risk. Many treasurers reserve only a small percentage of cash for crypto and stress that allocations can be adjusted as conditions change. For instance, after 2022’s crypto winter some firms temporarily halted new purchases. Thus, while the recent momentum is strong, these corporate strategies remain sensitive to the broader economy and policy shifts.
Looking Ahead
The corporate crypto treasury trend is still in its early days. Both Bitcoin and Ethereum strategies are evolving. For Bitcoin, the question is whether other corporates will follow Strategy’s lead or whether firms will reintegrate some crypto back into operations. Tesla’s partial rollback on acceptance of BTC illustrates the caution that can creep in. On the other hand, MicroStrategy announced plans for new instruments (like debt tied to BTC) that could further entrench Bitcoin as a core treasury asset. If Bitcoin prices reach new all-time highs, more companies may quietly join the bandwagon.
For Ethereum, the pace of adoption may accelerate even more. Many firms have just started; a corporate ETF or mutual fund specifically for ETH could emerge. Traditional financial companies (banks, asset managers) are beginning to embrace crypto – Citi predicted in 2024 that Ether could eventually surpass Bitcoin in market cap due to its utility. If true, that would attract more corporate players. In the short term, price volatility remains a risk: Ethereum’s value fluctuated sharply around its 2024 Shanghai upgrade and the later crypto events. Treasurers have to manage that volatility while staking, but so far high rewards have justified the approach.
One wild card is regulation. For example, if the U.S. or EU were to impose strict capital requirements on crypto holdings, or crack down on staking, it could slow the corporate rush. Conversely, if major jurisdictions legalize Bitcoin as corporate currency or ease tax on crypto gains, that would light the fuse. Companies are watching such signals closely. For instance, Japan’s regulator recently allowed its banks to own crypto, hinting at further mainstreaming.
At the macro level, future interest rate trends, inflation, and the next recession or recovery will influence how attractive crypto remains. If inflation remains stubborn, more firms may look for hedges. If economic growth returns and stock markets perform strongly, some companies might prefer traditional investments.
In any case, corporate crypto treasuries are now big enough to matter. MicroStrategy’s 628,791 BTC alone accounts for about 3% of all Bitcoin ever mined; corporate Ethereum holdings of ~3 million ETH are about 2.5% of supply. These are non-trivial fractions for single-class assets. The strategies of these corporate holders, and how they respond to market cycles, will therefore have spillover effects on cryptocurrency markets at large. For readers of crypto media and investors alike, it is important to understand that this is no longer a niche phenomenon: mainstream balance sheets are embracing crypto in a structurally different way than they did even a few years ago.