FG Nexus sold Ethereum for $32.7 million to direct the funds towards buying back its own shares after their price collapsed by 94% in just four months. This highlights the deepening NAV crisis, the net asset value, among companies holding cryptocurrency on their balance sheets.
This sale continued the October move by ETHZilla, which then sold ETH for $40 million. All this increases pressure on the sector managing crypto assets worth more than $42.7 billion. The wave of forced sales exposes the weaknesses of the corporate “crypto treasury” model, when company shares trade below the value of their balance sheet assets.
Crypto treasury companies save shares by selling assets
FG Nexus reported that in October it sold 10,922 ETH to support a share buyback program for $200 million. The company started buying back shares after their price dropped sharply and fell below NAV, the calculated value of crypto assets per share.
As of Wednesday, FG Nexus had 40,005 ETH and $37 million in cash, while debt rose to $11.9 million.
The company bought back 3.4 million shares at about $3.45 each, which is about 8% of the total number of shares. Management emphasized that the buyback was at a discount to NAV, which by mid-November reached $3.94 per share.
However, this strategy required about $10 million in debt and led to the sale of 21% of ETH reserves compared to September.
FG Nexus is not the only company with digital assets on its balance sheet that has taken this path. ETHZilla announced at the end of October the sale of ETH for about $40 million to finance a share buyback. Since October 24, the company has acquired 600,000 shares for almost $12 million, trying to reduce a persistent 30% discount to NAV.
When DAT company shares trade below the value of its crypto assets (mNAV falls below 1.0), shareholders start to pressure management: they need to “unlock hidden value.” The most direct way is a share buyback. But to buy back shares, you need cash. If the company does not have enough cash reserves, it has no choice but to sell some crypto to fund the program.
At Metaplanet, a DAT company betting on accumulating bitcoin, mNAV fell to 0.99, but then recovered to 1.03. At the same time, its shares fell by 70% from the June highs, showing the scale of tension in the sector.
The situation is complicated by the use of perpetual preferred equity. These are instruments that mix fixed dividends and crypto exposure. This makes the capital structure even more fragile in the current market conditions.
Leveraged structures increase pressure on the market
In 2025, DAT companies placed $42.7 billion in crypto assets, of which $22.6 billion was just in the third quarter. Growth accelerated as bitcoin broke through $126,000 in October — this created a “growth feeds growth” effect and fueled valuations.
But the subsequent pullback exposed weaknesses in capital structures that relied on leverage and market access.
The share of such treasury companies in the total crypto market capitalization is small, only 0.83%. But asset concentration makes them visible precisely during downturns.
See also: The TNSR token of the Tensor NFT marketplace on Solana rose by 152%
Leverage through convertible notes, PIPE deals, and perpetual preferreds increases pressure when the market falls. When prices drop or the discount to NAV widens, these structures force companies to sell even more.
Liquidity in the market sharply deteriorated as prices fell. Bitcoin order book depth in the 1% range dropped from $20 million to $14 million — a decrease of 33%, making the market much more sensitive to any sales.
According to analysts, forced asset sales by treasury companies could reach $4–6 billion if 10–15% of their positions are liquidated. This could even exceed the November outflow from ETF, which amounted to $2.33 billion.
Systemic risks are rising
Corporate crypto purchases have stopped: confidence has dropped, there is less free capital, and companies that previously created stable demand are now selling themselves. This breaks the previous “positive cycle.”
Shares of MicroStrategy fell by 60% amid bitcoin volatility. Even with a strong balance sheet, the company remains hostage to the correlation between the BTC price and its own capitalization.
Small treasury firms are under even more pressure, especially those holding less liquid assets. Several companies with large exposure to Solana suffered a NAV drop of about 40% as position concentration amplified losses.
Insufficient diversification and weak trading volumes in alternative tokens only add vulnerabilities to the entire sector.
Retail investors have also increased pressure: many started exiting early, reducing demand even before institutions began liquidations. In November, the situation worsened with $4 billion in outflows from ETF and decreased activity from market makers — volatility soared.
See also: Japan approved a $110 billion stimulus: what does it mean for bitcoin?
All this is reminiscent of crashes in other markets, where leverage accelerated the fall, as in the mortgage REIT crisis in 2008.
The developing crisis calls into question the sustainability of the “crypto treasury” model during prolonged downturns. To avoid self-reinforcing sell-offs that could destabilize the entire market, the sector may need stricter risk management and a clear regulatory framework.
In the coming weeks, it will become clear whether these companies can hold onto their crypto assets without new forced sales. The sector’s ability to weather the turbulence or face a model overhaul depends on this.
