Bitcoin’s Rally May Restart Treasury Buying as Tight Liquidity Looms

Corporate Bitcoin treasury buying appears to have cooled in Q3, with several companies slowing purchases after the 2025 funding boom faded. Analysts speaking to Cointelegraph say that a stronger rally later in 2026—and into 2027—could restart the trend, but with a much higher bar for which companies attract capital.

In the meantime, demand may still be supported by other channels, particularly spot Bitcoin ETF flows. However, those inflows can turn quickly, suggesting investors shouldn’t treat any single demand source as permanent.

Key takeaways

• Strategy added just 1,666 BTC net in Q3, down sharply from 83,901 BTC net in Q2, according to company filings cited by Bitwise’s Ryan Rasmussen.
• Other public companies added 5,617 BTC net in Q3 versus 45,725 BTC in Q2, reflecting a broad slowdown in treasury accumulation.
• Analysts expect corporate buying to pick up again if a rally helps treasury companies regain share-price premiums and reduce dilution pressure.
• Coinbase-like “indiscriminate” treasury expansion from the 2025 boom looks less likely; investors are now pricing treasuries on funding costs, balance-sheet discipline, and Bitcoin exposure per share.
• Spot Bitcoin ETF demand may help offset weak corporate buying, but recent ETF flows have already shown the bid can reverse.

Q3 treasury buying slowed after the 2025 boom

According to Rasmussen, speaking to Cointelegraph, Q3 saw a broad slowdown in Bitcoin treasury purchases. Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings increased by a net 1,666 BTC in Q3, falling far short of the 83,901 BTC net addition recorded in Q2. Rasmussen also cited figures provided for “other public companies,” which added 5,617 BTC net in Q3 compared with 45,725 BTC in the prior quarter.

That shift matters because treasury buying didn’t just represent incremental accumulation—it had been a primary driver of the 2025 corporate Bitcoin narrative. As those efforts intensified in the earlier period, companies were often able to fund new acquisitions by issuing shares at a premium to the value of their Bitcoin holdings.

Premiums are back on investors’ radar—selectivity is replacing the rush

While Rasmussen suggested a re-acceleration of corporate Bitcoin purchases could begin as early as this year, Bitfinex derivatives head Jag Kooner emphasized the conditions required for a revival. In his view, renewed buying would likely require treasury companies to regain premiums relative to the value of their Bitcoin holdings.

The mechanism is straightforward: when shares trade at a premium, a company can issue equity and acquire more Bitcoin without diluting existing shareholders’ Bitcoin exposure per share as severely. During the 2025 treasury boom, this model became popular—yet it weakened as premiums narrowed or disappeared.

Kooner said that once equity premiums collapsed, “shareholders have seen premiums collapse and some companies sell into weakness.” He added that investors are now assessing these businesses differently, focusing on “funding costs, balance-sheet discipline and bitcoin per share.”

“A rally could therefore restart buying, particularly among companies with credible financing structures but a return to last year’s indiscriminate capital raising looks unlikely.”

Fewer treasuries remain as smaller players exit

Bitwise’s October market report, as referenced by Rasmussen, also pointed to a decline in the number of Bitcoin treasuries in Q3. The reduction was reportedly driven by smaller companies abandoning their treasury strategies.

Rasmussen said that a dozen companies that entered during the 2025 treasury boom sold their entire holdings mostly to repay debt or return cash to shareholders after stock premiums evaporated. Kooner expects that if buying resumes, capital would initially concentrate among established players—those with scale, more liquid securities, and a track record investors consider “credible.”

Importantly, Rasmussen argued that many large corporate buyers outside Strategy were increasingly adding Bitcoin using cash flow from existing business operations rather than issuing stock to fund purchases. He characterized that as “a smaller source of demand,” but also “a healthier one,” because it doesn’t rely on equity market conditions staying favorable.

Kooner also cautioned against extrapolating too fast from a market rebound: a broader resurgence of new treasury companies would likely arrive later in a rally, once premiums widen again. In his framing, that timing itself would be a warning sign, because it would imply the strategy is once again being driven by funding optics rather than durable balance-sheet fundamentals.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted this dynamic in cases where treasury firms exited or scaled back after selling remaining Bitcoin holdings (for example, Sequans exiting its Bitcoin treasury strategy).

ETF flows may help—but they aren’t a guaranteed backstop

Even if corporate treasury buying does not return to boom levels, Rasmussen pointed to other demand factors. He cited $6.4 billion in spot Bitcoin net inflow in Q3, arguing that corporate purchases are only one part of the broader demand picture.

Kooner agreed that ETF demand could support a recovery for a period. However, he warned that some ETF-related activity can reflect basis trades that may unwind quickly, meaning it’s less “price-insensitive” than long-term accumulation through corporate balance sheets.

Without corporate buying, he argued, the market loses a type of bid that doesn’t depend as directly on macro conditions. He suggested that in that scenario, price could become more dependent on allocators who rebalance based on changing conditions.

Recent flows illustrate the risk of relying too heavily on ETF demand. According to SoSoValue data cited by Cointelegraph, US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded around $229 million in net outflows last week, marking their second consecutive week of net withdrawals (Cointelegraph’s coverage of weekly ETF flows).

For investors, the practical implication is that the “bid” landscape can shift quickly. If corporate buying remains muted, ETF flows—and their volatility—may exert more influence on day-to-day price behavior.

Looking ahead, readers should watch whether treasury companies can bring funding premiums back into view and whether equity issuance becomes less dilutive again. At the same time, ETF flow direction will remain a key tell for how resilient spot demand is—especially if corporate accumulation stays selective rather than sweeping.