Strategy has emerged as the overwhelmingly dominant force in corporate bitcoin accumulation, purchasing approximately 45,000 BTC over the past month while all other treasury companies combined acquired only around 1,000 BTC during the same period. This stark disparity has effectively concentrated corporate bitcoin ownership within a single firm. The trend raises questions about the original premise that institutional treasury buying would broaden ownership of the asset across multiple companies.
Strategy currently controls roughly 76% of all bitcoin held by corporate treasury firms, a level of concentration that analysts describe as a notable risk within the trade. The corporate bitcoin treasury model was initially promoted as a way to distribute institutional exposure to the asset more widely. Instead, the market has consolidated sharply around one dominant player.
A significant price decline has played a central role in stalling the broader corporate-buying movement. Bitcoin traded above $110,000 in mid-2025 but has since fallen to below $70,000, leaving many companies that purchased the asset at higher prices deeply underwater on their positions. The drop has made it difficult for smaller treasury firms to justify continued accumulation or to attract new capital for that purpose.
Despite the challenging price environment, Strategy has continued to add to its holdings and has also been building a substantial cash reserve to meet its financial obligations. The company’s ability to keep buying while competitors have pulled back has further widened the gap between it and the rest of the corporate treasury field. This approach sets Strategy apart as both the largest holder and the most active buyer among institutional treasury participants.
The growing concentration around a single firm introduces risks that were not central to the original narrative surrounding corporate bitcoin adoption. If Strategy were to face financial pressure or alter its accumulation strategy, the impact on overall corporate bitcoin demand could be significant. The situation underscores how the corporate treasury model has evolved in ways that differ considerably from early expectations of broad institutional participation.
Originally reported by CoinDesk.
