mNAV has become the go-to valuation shorthand for bitcoin treasury stocks — but a growing number of analysts are warning it oversimplifies the story.
The rise of mNAV in bitcoin finance
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.
How mNAV works
A basic mNAV calculation involves:
- Estimating the market value of the company’s BTC stack using current prices.
- Calculating enterprise value: market cap + debt – cash equivalents.
- Dividing EV by BTC holdings to get the multiple.
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.
How to read mNAV: premium, parity, discount
Once calculated, mNAV gives a sense of how markets are valuing a firm’s bitcoin exposure:
- mNAV > 1:
The stock trades at a premium to the value of its bitcoin. Investors may be assigning extra value for capital market access, future BTC accumulation potential, or an operating business. - mNAV ≈ 1:
The firm trades at a price close to the value of its BTC holdings. This suggests it’s being valued like a direct bitcoin proxy, with little added or subtracted for other factors. - mNAV
The stock trades at a discount to its BTC holdings — a sign investors aren’t willing to pay even full price for the coins on the balance sheet. This can raise concerns about execution or capital structure, but some value investors see it as a buying opportunity.
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.
Understanding the variants: basic, diluted, and EV mNAV
Some dashboards, e.g., BitcoinTreasuries.net, now show multiple mNAV variants:
- mNAV Basic
A simple ratio using the current market cap and BTC holdings, with no adjustments for future share dilution. - mNAV Diluted
Adjusts for convertible notes and other instruments by increasing the share count. This gives a more conservative view of what shareholders “really” own. - mNAV EV
Uses enterprise value instead of market cap to incorporate debt and other liabilities. This version is especially useful when a firm, such as Strategy, has issued long-dated convertibles and holds substantial liabilities.
As of Nov. 30, Strategy’s reported values were:
- mNAV Basic: 0.856
- mNAV Diluted: 0.954
- mNAV EV: 1.105
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.
Why it matters
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.
The NYDIG critique
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.
The road ahead
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?”
