Crypto companies are raising capital again, but investors are increasingly selective, with premiums disappearing across several sectors of the industry.
Digital Asset Treasuries Face Deep Discounts
The crypto treasury model has largely lost its early advantage, according to a report by DWF Ventures. Out of the 20 largest digital asset treasury (DAT) companies by assets under management, only four currently trade above an mNAV of 1: Bit Digital, Strive, Hyperliquid Strategies, and BitMine.
This marks a significant shift from the model pioneered by MicroStrategy in 2020. When shares trade below net asset value, raising equity can become dilutive to existing shareholders and undermine the core financing mechanism that previously allowed firms to accumulate crypto without dilution.
Kalshi and Blockchain.com Pursue Capital
Prediction market platform Kalshi is reportedly in advanced talks to raise approximately $1 billion at a $40 billion valuation, nearly twice its valuation from May. Existing investors Sequoia Capital and Wellington Management are in talks to lead the round, alongside potential participation from Tiger Global Management and Dragoneer Investment Group.
Meanwhile, Blockchain.com is preparing for an initial public offering (IPO) aiming to raise about $500 million. The exchange and wallet provider is seeking a valuation between $4 billion and $6 billion, well below the $14 billion valuation it reached during the previous crypto boom.
Bitget CEO Addresses $388 Million Security Breach
Bitget CEO Gracy Chen stated she is not very optimistic about recovering funds from the exchange's recent security breach, which was updated from an initial $352 million loss to $388 million. Chen pointed to the 2025 Bybit hack as a reference, noting that Bybit froze only about 3.5% of the roughly $1.5 billion stolen in that attack.
During the Bitget incident, NEAR Intents blocked more than $50 million and froze about $500,000, while Tether and Circle blacklisted a wallet to freeze $318,013 in USDT and USDC. Chen also stated that North Korea may be responsible for the hack based on matching IP addresses, though it has not been proven. Following the breach, Bitget resumed withdrawals in stages.
