On the afternoon of the 10th, President Trump announced a 100% tariff on Chinese goods on Truth Social. This news instantly ignited panic in global financial markets.

In the subsequent 24 hours, the cryptocurrency market experienced the largest liquidation event in history, with over $19 billion in leveraged positions forcibly closed. Bitcoin plummeted rapidly from $117,000, briefly falling below $102,000, with a daily drop exceeding 12%.

The US stock market was not spared either. At the close on October 10th, the S&P 500 fell 2.71%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 878 points, and the Nasdaq Composite fell 3.58%, all marking the largest single-day declines since April.

However, the real disaster zone was those DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) companies that hold crypto assets as treasury reserves.

MicroStrategy, as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, saw its stock price similarly affected; the situation was even more pronounced for other crypto asset reserve companies. According to after-hours trading data, investors continue to sell.

For these companies simultaneously exposed to dual risks in both the crypto and stock markets, has the worst moment passed?

Why Did DAT Companies Fall Harder?

DAT companies first face a direct impact on their balance sheets. Taking MicroStrategy as an example, the company holds approximately 639,835 Bitcoins. A 12% drop in Bitcoin's price means its asset value evaporated by nearly $10 billion instantly.

This loss must be recorded as an "unrealized loss" under accounting standards. Although it's not a real loss until sold, the number on the financial report is real.

As an investor, you see a company's core assets rapidly depreciating. There's also a multiplier effect concerning market confidence.

In early 2025, the premium to Net Asset Value (NAV) for MicroStrategy stock was as high as 2 times, but by the end of September, it had compressed to 1.44 times; it's currently around 1.2.

For other companies, the mNAV is almost all reverting towards 1, with some already falling below 1. These numerical changes reflect a brutal reality: market confidence in the DAT model is wavering during extreme market conditions.

In a bull market, investors are willing to give these companies a premium, with the narrative being pioneers of crypto innovation. But when the market turns, the same story becomes an unnecessary risk exposure.

Non-Bitcoin cryptocurrencies suffered significant technical damage in this leveraged crash, with some even instantly crashing to zero; even large-cap altcoins were cut in half or more due to insufficient liquidity.

Stocks of companies holding these assets became the preferred short-selling targets as market sentiment deteriorated.

When panic strikes, investors need to reduce positions quickly. While the Bitcoin market trades 24/7, large sell orders significantly impact the price. In contrast, selling stocks like MSTR or COIN on Nasdaq is much easier.

Selling tens of billions of dollars worth of gold won't disrupt the market, but selling $70 billion worth of Bitcoin could cause a price crash and trigger massive liquidations; this liquidity difference makes DAT company stocks a conduit for rapid capital withdrawal.

Worse, many institutional investors have strict risk control limits. When volatility exceeds a certain threshold, they must reduce positions, willingly or not. And DAT companies are precisely among the assets with the highest volatility.

To use an inappropriate analogy, if ordinary tech companies are sitting in one boat, then DAT companies are like having two boats tied together—one sailing the waves of the stock market, the other struggling in the storm of the crypto market.

When both sides encounter severe weather simultaneously, the impact they endure isn't additive; it's multiplicative.

Who Suffered Most, Who Held Up Best?

Looking at the list of DAT company declines from the previous trading day, a clear pattern emerges: the smaller the company, the harder it fell.

Forward Industries fell 15.32%, with an mNAV of only 0.053. BTCS Inc. fell 12.70%, Helius Medical Tech fell 12.91%.

These small companies with market caps under $100 million could hardly find any buyers in the panic. In contrast, MicroStrategy, despite being the largest Bitcoin holder, fell only 4.84%.

The logic behind this is simple: liquidity.

When panic strikes, the bid-ask spread for small-cap stocks widens dramatically, and a moderately large sell order can crash the price.

In this list, Tesla stands out. It fell 5.06%, almost the smallest decline, but its mNAV is a whopping 985.96. This number means the market values Tesla at nearly 1000 times the value of the Bitcoin it holds.

Because Tesla is not essentially a DAT company; hoarding Bitcoin is just a side business. Investors buy Tesla based on its electric vehicle-related business, with Bitcoin's price fluctuations having minimal impact on its valuation; the same logic applies to Coinbase, which fell 7.75%, but as an exchange, it has real fee income.

In contrast, the situation is entirely different for pure DAT companies.

MicroStrategy's mNAV is only 1.28 times, trading almost at the value of its Bitcoin holdings. Galaxy Digital's mNAV is 5.49 times, MARA Holdings is 1.29 times. The market's valuation of these companies is basically their crypto asset value plus a small premium. When the crypto market crashes, they have no other business to cushion the blow.

When a company's market capitalization is almost equal to the value of its crypto assets (mNAV close to 1), it means the market believes this company has no additional value beyond hoarding coins.

Bitmine's mNAV is 0.98, American Bitcoin hasn't disclosed but is estimated to be low too. These companies have effectively become Bitcoin ETFs disguised as publicly listed companies.

The question is, now that genuine Bitcoin ETFs are available, why would investors choose to hold indirectly through these companies?

This might explain why these low mNAV companies fell even more during the panic. They bear both the risk of crypto assets and the risk of the stock market, without offering any additional value.

US stock markets will open in a few hours. After the weekend cooling-off period, will market sentiment improve? Will those small DAT companies that fell over 10% continue to be sold off, or will bargain-hunting funds step in?

From the data, companies with mNAV below 1 might present oversold opportunities, but they could also be value traps. After all, when a business model itself is questioned, being cheap isn't necessarily a reason to buy.