Bitcoin Treasury Firm Faces 2028 Refinancing Test

Overview

A prominent corporate Bitcoin treasury has retained its position in a major equity index, yet analysts warn that 2028 could determine the firm’s long-term viability. The company’s shares have experienced steep volatility recently, and fresh analysis highlights concentrated callable debt, limited cash-flow generation and rising leverage as key vulnerabilities.

Although the firm avoided index exclusion in the most recent rebalance, a review by a global index provider is scheduled for January. Market participants are now weighing how a confluence of factors — structural debt timing, market liquidity and macro conditions in 2025–2028 — could influence outcomes for both the company and the wider Bitcoin market.

Key findings from recent analysis

Independent research identifies three interrelated pressures that elevate risk for the company:

• Large volumes of convertible bond call options concentrated in 2028, creating material refinancing obligations.
• An operational model that has prioritized Bitcoin accumulation over cash-generating assets, limiting internal sources of repayment.
• Leverage that has increased more rapidly than the firm’s Bitcoin holdings, raising its bankruptcy threshold over recent years.

Concentrated call dates and redemption pressure

The most striking single factor is the concentration of callable convertible instruments maturing or presenting early-call features in 2028. Analysis estimates total call option exposure at roughly $6.4 billion. If bondholders exercise these options and the issuer cannot refinance on favorable terms, the company may be forced to liquidate a substantial portion of its Bitcoin holdings.

Under one modeled scenario, a refinancing failure could compel the sale of about 71,000 BTC at an assumed price near $90,000. Such a sale would represent a meaningful share of daily spot turnover — market estimates place that at roughly 20–30% of typical daily trading volume — and could materially pressure market prices, generating downward feedback into the firm’s balance sheet and equity valuation.

Limited cash flow as a structural vulnerability

The company has predominantly deployed capital to accumulate Bitcoin rather than invest in operating assets that produce steady cash flows. That strategy amplifies refinancing risk: when large debt repayments are due, the firm lacks recurring operational cash to service obligations without asset disposals.

Credit analysts emphasize that corporate balance sheets with diversified, cash-generating assets typically have more options during debt events. By contrast, a treasury model concentrated in an unhedged digital asset position is more exposed to market-driven valuation shocks.

Leverage dynamics and the rising bankruptcy threshold

Debt growth has outpaced the pace of additional Bitcoin accumulation, moving the company’s bankruptcy threshold higher over time. Recent estimates show the threshold rising from approximately $12,000 per BTC in 2023 to $18,000 in 2024, and reaching near $23,000 in 2025 — a level that would require a roughly 73% price decline from current market levels to breach.

While a $23,000 trigger point still implies a severe market drawdown, the trend is the key takeaway: leverage expansion without commensurate asset accumulation or cash-flow generation increases systemic fragility. Convertible securities, preferred equity issuances and automated trading programs were central to this leverage increase beginning in 2024, creating a feedback loop where rising Bitcoin prices enabled further purchases financed by debt instruments.

Market context in 2025

The wider market environment in 2025 has also shifted in ways that influence refinancing prospects and liquidity:

• Institutional adoption: Spot Bitcoin ETFs and other institutional channels have increased tradability and demand, but flows can be episodic and concentrated.
• Macro backdrop: Interest-rate expectations and central bank positioning continue to shape credit conditions. Higher-for-longer rate assumptions can raise refinancing costs for corporates issuing debt.
• Regulatory scrutiny: Index classification debates and regulatory reviews of corporate treasury models have heightened governance expectations for firms that hold significant crypto treasuries.

These variables mean that refinancing conditions in 2028 may look very different from those available in 2024–2025. A benign 2025–2027 macro and market path could enable orderly refinancings; conversely, adverse shocks could compress options.

Index inclusion, classification and governance concerns

Index inclusion matters for liquidity and investor perception. The company retained its slot in a major equity index during the recent rebalancing, a move that preserved a portion of passive and benchmarked investor demand.

However, a scheduled review by a global index provider in January could prompt renewed debate about whether a buy-and-hold Bitcoin treasury model aligns with the economic characteristics of the company’s listed peers. Some market observers argue that a concentrated digital-asset treasury resembles an investment fund more than a conventional operating enterprise, which can create classification and governance questions for index compilers and institutional allocators.

Potential market outcomes toward 2028

Analysts outline three broad scenarios for how events might unfold between 2025 and 2028:

• Orderly refinancing: Favorable credit markets and constructive asset prices enable the firm to refinance callable instruments or repurchase debt at manageable costs. Balance-sheet adjustments and potential equity raises reduce forced-sale risk.
• Partial restructuring and targeted sales: The company secures partial financing but must liquidate a portion of Bitcoin holdings to meet obligations. Sales pressure is significant but absorbed by market depth; price volatility increases but systemic contagion is limited.
• Refinancing failure and large-scale liquidation: If creditors exercise call options en masse and refinancing is unavailable or prohibitively expensive, the firm may be forced into sales sized to cover redemptions. This could depress prices, impair collateral values and strain other leveraged players, amplifying market-wide volatility.

Why 2028 is the pivotal year

The concentration of call features in 2028 makes that calendar year the focal point for stress testing. Call schedules compress obligations into a relatively short window, reducing the company’s flexibility to stagger redemptions or tap favorable market windows.

Market dynamics are nonlinear in this context: a relatively small financing shortfall can cascade into larger asset sales, price declines and margin calls across related counterparties. That nonlinearity is why analysts characterize 2028 as the “make-or-break” moment for the business model in question.

What investors and market participants should monitor

Stakeholders can track several measurable indicators to assess evolving risks:

• Convertible bond and preferred equity schedules, including call provisions and potential acceleration clauses.
• Quarterly disclosures of Bitcoin holdings and any pledged collateral tied to credit facilities.
• Daily and weekly spot liquidity metrics: trading volume, order-book depth and market impact estimates for large sales.
• Derivatives market signals: open interest on futures, basis spreads and funding rates for crypto and related assets.
• Macro indicators that affect credit markets: interest-rate trajectories, swap spreads and corporate credit spreads.
• Index provider statements or governance updates that could change passive demand profiles.

Implications for broader crypto market structure

Even if a single corporate treasury is the immediate subject, the implications are broader:

• Large, concentrated sell orders can temporarily overwhelm liquidity and exacerbate volatility, affecting other market participants including funds and retail holders.
• Refinancing stress around noncash-generating corporate treasuries could prompt a reassessment of governance best practices for firms holding significant digital-asset reserves.
• Market participants and service providers — from custodians to lending platforms — may revisit stress-testing assumptions and collateral frameworks to account for concentrated redemption events.

Conclusion

Retaining index inclusion has bought time, but it has not eliminated the structural timing risk embedded in a concentrated 2028 callable exposure. The firm’s strategy of prioritizing Bitcoin accumulation over cash-generating assets leaves it more dependent on refinancing markets and on prevailing liquidity conditions.

For market participants, the takeaway through 2025–2028 is to monitor both on-chain and off-chain indicators: callable debt schedules, disclosure of pledged assets, market depth and macro credit conditions. Together these data points will help signal whether the company can navigate the concentrated debt waves in 2028 or whether the broader market could absorb forced adjustments.

As institutional frameworks and product suites for crypto mature in 2025, market resilience is improving, but concentration risks remain. The period leading up to 2028 will be a live stress-test for corporate treasury models that rely principally on a single volatile asset rather than diversified, cash-generating operations.

Disclaimer: This post is a compilation of publicly available information.
MEXC does not verify or guarantee the accuracy of third-party content.
Readers should conduct their own research before making any investment or participation decisions.