lyhalfway

Recently analyzed the historical data of MSTR. If we purely look at the mNAV corresponding to Market Cap, during non-crypto bull market periods, MSTR's premium has maintained an mNAV between 0.8 and 1.2 for an extended time (Figure 1). Here, the mNAV corresponding to Market Cap refers purely to the market capitalization of DAT, excluding the valuation of financing instruments like convertible bonds and STRC. Currently, the 1.2 mNAV on MSTR's official website dashboard includes the mNAV corresponding to the EV of all the above. In other words, if we only look at DAT's core business, the non-bull market average of market-cap mNAV is 0.8-1.2. A higher premium requires additional value-added EV to drive it. For MSTR, that means financing toolkits like STRC.Similarly, for BMNR, due to its single financing instrument and its derivative businesses (staking, moonshot) not yet generating substantial scaled revenue, Market Cap is approximately equal to EV. The mNAV corresponding to Market Cap fell below 1 in December '25 and has fluctuated between 0.9 and 1 for a period of 5 months (Figure 2), which is also a kind of normal average. I believe this is not an undervaluation, but rather the market's valuation level for DAT during a non-crypto bull market cycle. For BMNR to achieve a higher premium, assets like MAVAN, staking infrastructure, and moonshot investments must transition from narratives into trackable EV, which would then drive the premium above 1.2.Of course, the above analysis is based on non-crypto bull market sentiment. If BTC/ETH both break new highs, FOMO sentiment could drive DAT's premium even higher (e.g., MSTR's peak could reach 3+), but this is unpredictable in the short term and thus not within the analytical framework.$ Strategy(MSTR.US)$ BitMine Immersion Tech(BMNR.US)

PLTR's earnings report continued its streak of beating expectations for 10 consecutive quarters, with strong growth in US customers and the launch of AI FDE on the product side, achieving a peak in revenue per employee in the US market. There's nothing to worry about fundamentally. I'd like to discuss the phenomenon I've observed from the perspective of institutional holdings and capital rotation:Starting from Q1, PLTR's institutional holding ratio stabilized after nearly five years of growth and saw a significant decline in Q2. This coincided with the suppression of software stock valuations since early '26 and the continuous surge in AI hardware like storage. The decline in PLTR's institutional holdings also represents active funds reducing their weight and allocation to the software sector. In terms of trading volume, last year TSLA, NVDA, and PLTR were regulars in the top 5 for trading volume. Now, the top trading volume spots have become Micron and SanDisk. If the market was still skeptical in Q1, then by Q2 institutions had already started to FOMO. At the same time, as the market capitalization of the storage hardware sector grew, it also increased the companies' weight in the Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500. During the next index rebalancing, this will bring more passive index-following capital inflows. Once this sector trend is established, it won't be easily reversed. Against this backdrop, even the best performance by individual software stocks is placed in a challenging context. This is the awkward current situation for software stocks.However, PLTR is different from ordinary software stocks. PLTR has unique irreplaceability. Even with the current sector rotation, I have no doubt about PLTR's potential to surge towards a trillion-dollar market cap in the future. Karp once said in the 2024 shareholder letter: "All of the value in the market is going to go to chips and what we call the Ontology." Hardware still needs software to land in commercial scenarios to realize broader business value. In the wave of AI, I believe the two are spiraling upwards. This is the logic behind why I remain bullish on PLTR.$ Palantir Tech(PLTR.US)

BTC is gradually stabilizing around 80000, with data showing real buying support. However, ETH has been unable to break through 2.4k and has been hovering around 2.3k for so long. Why is this? My view:1. The current market is in a phase of "bottom repair + policy expectations," where funds prefer BTC during this stage.2. ETH's positive catalysts rely more on "second-order confirmation." CLARITY benefits ETH more than BTC, but there is no formal markup schedule yet. The market will first treat CLARITY as a "crypto overall positive" and prioritize BTC.During the bear-to-bull market transition, BTC usually rises first, while ETH often lags. ETH's catch-up rally requires two conditions:- BTC must not fall back and must maintain a high-level sideways consolidation.- The market shifts from "buying the safest crypto beta" to "buying higher beta / assets with higher utility."The market is not yet trading "actual utility post-approval," but only trading "increased probability of approval."BTC gets reduced regulatory risk from CLARITY.ETH gets clearer application boundaries for stablecoins, DeFi, RWA, tokenization, and staking from CLARITY.The latter has greater value but is also more complex, hence slower pricing.$ IShares Ethereum Trust ETF(ETHA.US)$ BitMine Immersion Tech(BMNR.US)$ Strategy(MSTR.US)

The text of the Clarity Act regarding "staked yield" has been released, prohibiting stablecoins from directly generating interest, but allowing activities to generate yield.It is highly likely that the Banking Committee bill will be reviewed in the second week of May. If passed smoothly, the next step is to merge it with the version passed by the Agriculture Committee in January, followed by votes in the House and Senate, and then sent to the White House for legislation in August.The legislative agenda and timeline are very tight, but this is how bipartisan legislation works; it always gets dragged to the last must-pass moment.$ Coinbase(COIN.US)$ Circle(CRCL.US)$ Strategy(MSTR.US)$ BitMine Immersion Tech(BMNR.US)

$ iShares Expanded Tech Software Sector ETF(IGV.US) I think IGV has bottomed out. Earnings season is coming soon, and the actual business impact of Anthropic's products will be proven by the earnings.$ Microsoft(MSFT.US)$ Palantir Tech(PLTR.US)$ CloudFlare(NET.US)

Emotional summary from LongbridgeSkill, this time it's $ Microsoft(MSFT.US)

The ETH/BTC ratio has almost unknowingly rebounded to its recent high in January. Since the war in the Middle East began, it has been more resilient to negative news and risen more on positive news, already outperforming BTC.$ IShares Ethereum Trust ETF(ETHA.US)$ iShares Staked Ethereum ETF(ETHB.US)

After this round of financing, OpenAI is valued at 840 billion, SpaceX at 1.5 trillion, and Anthropic at 380 billion. If they all IPO this year, an IPO typically releases 5~10% of the floating shares. Calculated this way, the total fundraising scale would be between 110 billion and 150 billion. This scale is unlikely to cause a liquidity crisis.However, the potential danger lies in the passive portfolio rebalancing by institutions after listing. These three companies are considered must-haves in their respective fields. For institutions to rebalance and hold them, they will inevitably need to reduce holdings in other stocks. The commercial aerospace sector where SpaceX operates is not large and can attract incremental funds, so it's unlikely to siphon off other companies in the same sector. But the AI software sector where OpenAI and Anthropic operate is already very large. With limited incremental funds, it can only rob Peter to pay Paul. Software stocks may continue to be impacted.Of course, the cycle of this passive rebalancing is not that fast; it might only become apparent 3 to 6 months after listing. What needs to be considered is which companies are more likely to become the potential targets of siphoning after the OpenAI/Anthropic IPOs.$ iShares Expanded Tech Software Sector ETF(IGV.US)

Observations on Crypto Compliance Regulation