Michael Saylor's bitcoin treasury model
Model Saylor's bitcoin-as-corporate-treasury thesis: allocate a company's cash and treasury reserves between bitcoin and cash, then compound both sleeves at your own return scenarios.
Put your numbers through the rule
The source establishes the rule. The values below belong to you, and the output is JMM's deterministic calculation.
Every field recalculates immediately. Changed values can be copied into a shareable URL.
- Bitcoin sleeve
- $50,283,930
- Cash sleeve
- $31,154,548
- Gain over all-cash
- $19,129,381
- Bitcoin share of ending value
- 61.7%
The treasury compounds at the return scenarios you enter. Volatility and drawdown risk are separate inputs this model does not invent.
Bitcoin sleeve
- Allocation
- 50.0%
- Entered return
- 15.0%
- Ending value
- $50,283,930
Cash sleeve
- Allocation
- 50.0%
- Entered return
- 4.5%
- Ending value
- $31,154,548
What the source says, and what the calculator adds
What changes the answer
The thesis is a bet on return, not a hedge
Allocating the treasury to bitcoin only helps shareholders if the entered bitcoin return beats the cash yield net of volatility costs. The model shows that comparison in dollars.
Dilution is the hidden counterparty
Saylor funds purchases partly with equity and convertible issuance; the model holds shares constant and therefore shows only half the picture.
A treasury is where a company keeps the money it cannot afford to lose. This puts it in the most volatile major asset there is.
Corporate treasury exists to make payroll and cover a bad quarter. Judged against that job, an allocation to an asset that has repeatedly fallen 70% is not a conservative reserve policy, whatever the long-run return turns out to be. Saylor’s defence is that cash is a guaranteed loss to inflation and bitcoin is not, and the first half of that is true. The model above prices the second half at whatever return you enter, which is the honest way to hold the argument: it is a directional bet on one asset, funded partly by issuing shares, and it should be argued as a bet rather than as prudence. JMM’s position is that the strategy has been vindicated by price and never by reasoning, and that the two are easy to confuse while the price is up.
Not the calculator’s limits. The rule’s.
The model holds shares constant and the real strategy does not
Purchases have been funded substantially by issuing equity and convertible debt. Per-share outcomes depend on the price at which those shares were sold, which is a second bet stacked on the first and sits entirely outside this calculator.
Volatility is a cost even when the return is positive
A reserve asset that can halve is unavailable at the moment you most need reserves. An annualised return says nothing about whether the company could have drawn on the treasury during the drawdown.
What this model does not know
- The model is an allocation calculator, not a forecast for bitcoin or MicroStrategy.
- Volatility, drawdowns, margin calls, and convertible-debt dilution are not modeled.
- The treasury is treated as static: no purchases, sales, or funding events over the horizon.
Before you use the result
Does Saylor recommend this for every company?
The cited filings commit MicroStrategy to the policy and quote Saylor arguing bitcoin is superior to cash. They do not extend the recommendation to other companies, and neither does this page.
Is 15% a Saylor forecast?
No. It is an editable first-load scenario. The calculator compounds whatever return you enter.
The next question this page cannot answer
- Calculator Max drawdown calculator
The recovery arithmetic on a treasury asset with equity-like volatility, applied to the drawdown you enter.
Open → - Calculator Margin interest calculator
The leverage half of the strategy, priced: where a financed position is called and what the call costs.
Open → - Guide Investor Claims: What the Big Names Got Right (and Wrong)
The standard JMM applies to claims like this one, and the record of the ones already testable.
Open →