Metaplanet’s chief executive Simon Gerovich pushed back against criticisms from anonymous accounts alleging that the company misrepresented its Bitcoin treasury strategy and disclosures. Critics on X argued that Metaplanet delayed or withheld price-sensitive information about large BTC purchases and options trades funded with shareholder capital, and that losses from its derivatives program were not fully disclosed. In a detailed public post on X, Gerovich contends that the company has consistently reported all Bitcoin purchases, option strategies and borrowings, and that readers have misinterpreted the financial statements rather than uncovering any misconduct.

Key takeaways

Metaplanet disclosed four Bitcoin purchases in September 2025 totaling 11,832 BTC (1,009 on Sept. 1; 136 on Sept. 8; 5,419 on Sept. 22; 5,268 on Sept. 30), with the company asserting prompt disclosure for each move.
The firm’s public dashboard corroborates the September buys, and Bitcointreasuries.net also lists the transactions along with related announcements and filings.
Gerovich said selling put options and put spreads were designed to acquire BTC below spot and monetize volatility for shareholders, rather than betting on short-term price swings.
Metaplanet reported fiscal 2025 revenue of 8.9 billion yen (about $58 million), up roughly 738% year over year, but posted a net loss near $680 million due to a decline in the value of its Bitcoin holdings.
As the debate around Bitcoin treasury strategies grows, Metaplanet’s disclosures and borrowing activities—including a credit facility set up in late 2025—remain under scrutiny by investors and regulators alike.
Beyond Metaplanet, the sector faces broader questions about the sustainability of BTC-heavy treasuries, with peers such as Strategy posting large quarterly losses despite signaling a long-term outlook.

Tickers mentioned: $BTC

Sentiment: Neutral

Market context: The controversy surrounding Metaplanet’s Bitcoin treasury approach unfolds as crypto markets experience liquidity shifts and ongoing scrutiny of corporate crypto holdings. The sector’s dynamics are further colored by notable market moves and annual results from other BTC holders, including Strategy, which reported a $12.4 billion net loss in Q4 2025 as Bitcoin declined, highlighting the tension between revenue opportunities from BTC-related activities and material impairment risks tied to price swings.

Why it matters

For investors tracking crypto-native treasuries, Metaplanet’s disclosures illuminate how such firms balance disclosure requirements with the volatility of digital assets. The company’s strategy—using option structures to monetize volatility while seeking BTC below spot via puts—shows a deliberate approach to acquiring exposure without entirely relying on directional bets. The earnings mix, where revenue from Bitcoin-related activities rose substantially while the balance sheet reflected non-cash losses tied to price movements, underscores a broader accounting challenge: treating asset impairments as business costs can mask underlying revenue growth and cash-generation potential.

From a governance standpoint, the incident underscores the importance of transparent, timely disclosures as markets increasingly scrutinize how corporate treasuries operate in real time. The availability of data on Metaplanet’s public analytics dashboard and third-party trackers adds a layer of accountability, but it also raises questions about the sufficiency of disclosures for complex derivatives programs and loan facilities tied to crypto assets. The sector’s trajectory will hinge on how well such disclosures align with investor expectations and how regulators interpret leverage and protections within crypto-backed borrowings.

For builders and users in the crypto space, this episode reinforces the need for robust risk management and clear accounting treatment for digital assets. As platforms experiment with diversified revenue streams tied to BTC, including options income and structured borrowings, maintaining clarity around valuation, impairment, and liquidity is essential to sustain investor confidence during periods of price volatility.

What to watch next

Updates to Metaplanet’s disclosures page detailing borrowing terms, collateral, and facility conditions following the October 2025 credit line.
New BTC purchase or sale disclosures that align with the September timeline and any subsequent months, including any changes to the company’s public dashboard.
Additional commentary from Metaplanet’s leadership on X and any subsequent investor communications clarifying accounting treatment of asset impairments.
Public trackers like Bitcointreasuries.net updating holdings in response to new disclosures or market moves.
Regulatory or market developments affecting crypto-treasury strategies, including any updates to lending terms or disclosure requirements for listed BTC-holding vehicles.

Sources & verification

Metaplanet analytics page: https://metaplanet.jp/en/analytics
Bitcointreasuries.net listing: http://bitcointreasuries.net
X post by Metaplanet on September purchases: https://x.com/Metaplanet/status/1962340921049309536
Gerovich’s explanatory post: https://x.com/gerovich/status/2024646152877133907
September BTC purchases previously disclosed: https://x.com/tenb1/status/2024099604044890455
Metaplanet revenue and impairment discussion: https://cointelegraph.com/news/metaplanet-revenue-jumps-738-percent-bitcoin-generates-95-percent-revenue
Impairment-related revenue context: https://cointelegraph.com/news/metaplanet-raises-revenue-forecast-bitcoin-impairment
Bitcoin-backed borrowings and disclosures: https://metaplanet.jp/en/shareholders/disclosures
Related coverage of BTC treasury strategies and performance: https://cointelegraph.com/news/strategy-reports-12b-loss-q4-2025
Big questions on macro and gold references: https://cointelegraph.com/magazine/china-stockpiling-gold-yaun-global-reserve-us-dollar/

Metaplanet defends Bitcoin treasury strategy amid investor scrutiny

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) sits at the center of Metaplanet’s corporate strategy, a fact that has drawn sharp questions from observers about disclosure timeliness, asset valuation and the company’s approach to risk management. In a detailed post on X, Simon Gerovich laid out the sequence of events that led to September 2025’s Bitcoin purchases and the accompanying derivative strategies designed to generate income while controlling entry points for BTC exposure. He emphasized that the company’s real-time dashboard and public disclosures provide a transparent view of the purchases, option strategies and borrowing activity that underpin the treasury program.

According to Metaplanet, the September buys were executed in four distinct transactions: 1,009 BTC on Sept. 1; 136 BTC on Sept. 8; 5,419 BTC on Sept. 22; and 5,268 BTC on Sept. 30. The total of these maneuvers equates to 11,832 BTC acquired over the month, a figure the company asserts was promptly disclosed. The public dashboard, which is accessible to investors and researchers alike, corroborates these entry points and offers a transparent ledger of the company’s Bitcoin holdings and related activity. The Bitcointreasuries.net tracker, which aggregates corporate BTC holdings and their disclosures, also reflects these transactions and the accompanying public announcements.

Gerovich defended the use of put options and put spreads as a mechanism to acquire BTC at levels below the spot price while monetizing volatility in a way that benefits shareholders, rather than speculating on sprint-to-the-close price moves. The approach, he argued, is aligned with a risk-managed treasury strategy that seeks to build a long-term Bitcoin position through measured, disclosed steps rather than abrupt, undisclosed trades. He further highlighted that the company has historically disclosed all relevant purchases, borrowings and option strategies, urging readers to examine the financial statements with this context in mind.

Beyond operational disclosures, Metaplanet’s 2025 financial results painted a mixed picture. The company reported revenue of 8.9 billion yen (roughly $58 million), a surge of about 738% year over year, reflecting the strength of its Bitcoin-related activities. Yet the firm also recorded a net loss of approximately $680 million, attributed to the marked impairment in the value of its Bitcoin holdings as prices slumped. Gerovich contended that non-cash impairment charges are an accounting consequence of asset valuation rather than a reflection of trading missteps or misalignment with the treasury plan. In other words, the revenue line demonstrates activity and monetization potential, while the impairment line reflects the price-driven realities of holding a volatile asset.

Metaplanet has not shied away from highlighting the non-cash nature of certain losses, arguing that the accounting treatment of digital assets does not imply strategic failure. The company underlined that it established a credit facility in October 2025 and disclosed subsequent drawdowns in November and December, including information on borrowing amounts, collateral and general terms on its disclosures page. The lender’s identity and specific rates were kept confidential at the counterparty’s request, Gerovich noted, but he stressed that the borrowing terms were favorable and that the balance sheet remained strong despite Bitcoin’s movements.

The broader industry backdrop adds another layer of context to Metaplanet’s defenses. A cluster of Bitcoin treasury plays has come under scrutiny as investors weigh the sustainability of long-term BTC-based financing strategies. Strategy, historically the largest corporate holder of BTC, reported a substantial quarterly loss in late 2025 as Bitcoin’s price deteriorated, even as the company emphasized a longer horizon and a robust capital structure. This juxtaposition—strong revenue streams from BTC activities against sizable impairments in asset values—helps explain why market participants are closely scrutinizing disclosure practices, risk controls and governance around crypto treasuries.

As Metaplanet continues to publish data and respond to scrutiny, the industry will likely watch not only for new purchases or borrowings but also for the consistency and clarity of its accounting disclosures. The balance between revenue growth from Bitcoin-derived activities and the non-cash losses tied to asset valuations will remain a focal point for investors evaluating the viability of BTC-heavy treasury models in a volatile market environment.