Matt Cole retweeted
Bitcoin has dropped roughly $10,000 since $SATS started trading last month. The fact that this fixed-rate preferred remains well above its IPO price suggests that distribution is reaching investors who specifically seek high yield and are not motivated to sell merely to purchase Bitcoin at the now-lower price. It's working.
24
42
758
45,138
Matt Cole retweeted
Welcome Back To The Hurdle Rate
Episode 81: Why Your Savings Keep Shrinking
In this week’s Hurdle Rate, the crew breaks down a whipsaw week, record AI capital raising, and why the $BTC to gold chart still looks bullish. They also discuss escaping the fiat mindset, the Bitcoin k run, and how Digital Credit like $SATA and $SATS stacks up against the S&P 500.
Here’s the latest with @ColeMacro, @PunterJeff, @Werkman, and @TimKotzman.
Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
01:21 - A Whipsaw Week For Markets
04:22 - Confusion Has Never Been Higher
07:55 - Everyone Needs Capital
10:55 - Escaping The Fiat Mindset
20:27 - The Paraguay Bank Run
25:28 - Valuing The Future, Not Today
28:04 - Built For Institutional Mandates
32:07 - Digital Credit Vs. The S&P
36:25 - The Thanksgiving Pitch
45:05 - Rethinking Bitcoin Yield
52:51 - Art Over Algorithms
Episode 81: Why Your Savings Keep Shrinking
In this week’s Hurdle Rate, the crew breaks down a whipsaw week, record AI capital raising, and why the $BTC to gold chart still looks bullish. They also discuss escaping the fiat mindset, the Bitcoin k run, and how Digital Credit like $SATA and $SATS stacks up against the S&P 500.
Here’s the latest with @ColeMacro, @PunterJeff, @Werkman, and @TimKotzman.
Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
01:21 - A Whipsaw Week For Markets
04:22 - Confusion Has Never Been Higher
07:55 - Everyone Needs Capital
10:55 - Escaping The Fiat Mindset
20:27 - The Paraguay Bank Run
25:28 - Valuing The Future, Not Today
28:04 - Built For Institutional Mandates
32:07 - Digital Credit Vs. The S&P
36:25 - The Thanksgiving Pitch
45:05 - Rethinking Bitcoin Yield
52:51 - Art Over Algorithms
10
28
155
88,651
Matt Cole retweeted
There has been a lot of discussion online recently about the importance, or lack of importance, of Bitcoin per Share and BTC Yield (growth in BTC per Share). I want to take a few minutes to share my perspective here.
Trigger Warning: Long Post
BTC Yield is a critical metric, and there is a reason it is front and center for the companies operating in this space.
When you look at a company and its management team, you need to ask yourself what metrics are in place to guide their actions day to day. The metrics established are called KPIs, or Key Performance Indicators. These metrics are intentionally selected because management has the ability to influence the outcome.
It takes some of the unknowns out of the equation, BTC price for instance, and focuses the efforts of a management team on taking the best actions they can at this precise moment to drive long-term value for their shareholders.
So why is BTC Yield so important?
To answer this, let’s not just talk philosophically about exposure to BTC. Let’s think through some of the actual activities tied to managing these companies (can’t cover all of them, but you’ll get the point).
For starters, let’s focus on common equity. What actions can a management team take to drive BTC Yield?
The first, and most understood, would be issuing common equity when the market cap of the common equity is valued higher than the fair market value of the Bitcoin on the balance sheet.
When this happens, the common equity is trading at a premium to the BTC value. If you raise capital at those levels and deploy that capital 100% into BTC, you capture that premium as an increase in BTC per Share. That increase results in a positive BTC Yield. The higher the premium, the more significant the yield is. This focuses management attention on fostering expanding multiples when possible and ensuring their activities don’t stifle growth by being too aggressive.
The impact of this transaction is immediate. You are increasing BTC per Share while also increasing the asset value supporting each share. You are building a higher base value from which future returns can compound.
This is critical.
The next activity that can generate positive BTC Yield is buying back common equity.
This one has more nuance, but let’s start simple.
Assume a company has excess cash on the balance sheet and decides to buy back stock, taking into account no other factors. Would this generate positive BTC Yield?
Yes.
The company would have the same amount of BTC and fewer shares outstanding. However, assets would also be leaving the treasury in the form of cash. So while BTC per Share increases, you are not building the asset base in the same way you are when issuing common equity at a premium and bringing incremental capital onto the balance sheet.
Could it still be the right decision?
Certainly. But, as with all things, there is nuance.
The main thing that needs to be understood with buybacks is that the capital has to come from somewhere.
It could come from cash balances, Bitcoin sales, capital raised through other securities, debt facilities, or somewhere else entirely. Each choice has trade-offs.
Cash balances are simple, but they deplete your cash runway. Selling Bitcoin is simple, but whether the transaction is accretive (and how accretive it is) to BTC Yield depends on where the common equity is trading relative to the fair market value of the BTC being sold.
Using capital raised from other securities could also make sense, but then you have to consider that you now have multiple groups of shareholders with different interests.
So how do you balance that?
Take the issuance of digital credit, for example.
Could a company simply take some of the proceeds from a preferred issuance and continuously funnel that capital into common stock buybacks?
Sure.
But that likely is not sustainable over the long term, and it does not fit the broader mandate of driving long-term value across the capital structure. It would be eroding the treasury asset coverage of the dividends by taking on more obligations but adding fewer assets to the balance sheet. You can see how that would impact credit quality over time.
Credit investors want to know that the balance sheet supporting their dividends is strong. If you consistently funnel capital raised from credit investors into common stock buybacks, you may be creating value for the common while simultaneously reducing value for the credit investors.
So who gets prioritized?
You cannot be algorithmic here, because doing so effectively tells one group of investors that you will always act against their interests.
You need to strike a balance.
That is the nuance. And I do not think it is widely understood or appreciated in daily discourse.
Management teams are constantly seeking the right balance to keep the value proposition strong for all shareholders and to keep the engine running optimally, valuing both common and preferred.
So back to why BTC Yield is important.
BTC Yield guides the daily actions and decisions that drive the long term result.
When looking at BTC Yield in a dual-security model, you have to understand that there are two components that can drive value over the long term.
The first is what we have already discussed, consistently building the asset value behind the common shares.
This is the base that all future returns build from.
Using BTC Yield as a guiding KPI helps keep common stock issuance aligned with the objective of building that value over time.
If the Yield is negative, you are moving backward on a BTC per Share basis. If it is neutral, you are scaling without building immediate foundational value (many times scaling is important and may be the right decision in a neutral manner). If it is slightly positive, you are building that base, but at a slower pace. And if the premium is significant, you can accelerate that value delivery through issuing fewer shares for the assets acquired.
It is a sliding scale.
Managing the capital markets well, and utilizing strong data and analytics, helps teams identify the right moments to accelerate and the right moments to show restraint with a focus on the long term.
Once you have considered how to build the foundation and consistently move it higher, you then have to consider how to generate excess returns on top of that foundation.
That is where Amplification comes in.
The issuance of digital credit products can also increase BTC Yield when the proceeds are used to acquire BTC, because you are adding Bitcoin without issuing common shares.
But the capital is not free. You are introducing dividend obligations and a cost of capital, which means the BTC Yield generated from that transaction has to be considered alongside the obligations created to produce it.
That is where the second value driver comes in.
Amplification.
First, you build a growing asset base per share. Then you amplify that base to capture excess returns when Bitcoin’s performance outpaces the cost of capital.
One creates immediate value through the premium capture in the transaction. The other creates deferred value that is realized as the underlying asset performs relative to the cost of the capital used to acquire it. One builds today, the other delivers the long term value creation.
When it works, it can be extremely powerful.
It is the combination of these two things that creates the value proposition for structured finance companies capitalized on Bitcoin.
But throughout this journey, you have to remain focused on balance.
There is no single right answer at all times. The correct decision is nuanced and changes with the markets each and every day.
Management teams have to constantly evaluate the right execution path to position the company for maximum value delivery over time.
Taking short-term actions, or reacting emotionally to market sentiment, can alter that positioning and miss maximal value capture as the thesis ultimately plays out.
Long-term thinking outperforms short term reactions.
And, as with all things, it is critical that you consider all shareholders and protect their interests.
If a company were to be aggressive with the common ATM when it does not deliver value, common shareholders may not be pleased and seek to move capital elsewhere.
If you focus only on simple short term ways to drive value for the common equity, that capital is likely being pulled from somewhere else, potentially creating credit-negative actions that preferred investors may not like. Digital credit is the engine that drives amplification, capital feeling mistreated and leaving lessens the ability to deliver on the amplification mandate.
If you abuse any portion of your capital structure, liquidity can eventually be put in jeopardy.
It goes back to the old saying, “Capital flows to where it is treated best.”
That should be the goal of these teams.
Create the best long-term value delivery environment for capital, and make capital want to remain inside your ecosystem.
BTC Yield helps guide the right actions. It focuses execution, encourages strategic rather than reactive decision-making, and helps management understand whether the capital allocation decisions being made are enhancing or detracting from the overall vision.
But BTC Yield does not exist in isolation.
Liquidity matters. Risk management matters. The obligations created across the capital structure matter. And the interests of every class of shareholder matter.
The job of management is to balance all of those things together.
Build the base. Amplify it intelligently. Protect the capital structure. Preserve liquidity. Be bold. And make decisions that position the company to deliver maximum value over the long term.
Build a vision. Set the right KPIs. Align incentives. Execute efficiently. Minimize value leakage along the path to total returns.
Deliver for your shareholders.
Trigger Warning: Long Post
BTC Yield is a critical metric, and there is a reason it is front and center for the companies operating in this space.
When you look at a company and its management team, you need to ask yourself what metrics are in place to guide their actions day to day. The metrics established are called KPIs, or Key Performance Indicators. These metrics are intentionally selected because management has the ability to influence the outcome.
It takes some of the unknowns out of the equation, BTC price for instance, and focuses the efforts of a management team on taking the best actions they can at this precise moment to drive long-term value for their shareholders.
So why is BTC Yield so important?
To answer this, let’s not just talk philosophically about exposure to BTC. Let’s think through some of the actual activities tied to managing these companies (can’t cover all of them, but you’ll get the point).
For starters, let’s focus on common equity. What actions can a management team take to drive BTC Yield?
The first, and most understood, would be issuing common equity when the market cap of the common equity is valued higher than the fair market value of the Bitcoin on the balance sheet.
When this happens, the common equity is trading at a premium to the BTC value. If you raise capital at those levels and deploy that capital 100% into BTC, you capture that premium as an increase in BTC per Share. That increase results in a positive BTC Yield. The higher the premium, the more significant the yield is. This focuses management attention on fostering expanding multiples when possible and ensuring their activities don’t stifle growth by being too aggressive.
The impact of this transaction is immediate. You are increasing BTC per Share while also increasing the asset value supporting each share. You are building a higher base value from which future returns can compound.
This is critical.
The next activity that can generate positive BTC Yield is buying back common equity.
This one has more nuance, but let’s start simple.
Assume a company has excess cash on the balance sheet and decides to buy back stock, taking into account no other factors. Would this generate positive BTC Yield?
Yes.
The company would have the same amount of BTC and fewer shares outstanding. However, assets would also be leaving the treasury in the form of cash. So while BTC per Share increases, you are not building the asset base in the same way you are when issuing common equity at a premium and bringing incremental capital onto the balance sheet.
Could it still be the right decision?
Certainly. But, as with all things, there is nuance.
The main thing that needs to be understood with buybacks is that the capital has to come from somewhere.
It could come from cash balances, Bitcoin sales, capital raised through other securities, debt facilities, or somewhere else entirely. Each choice has trade-offs.
Cash balances are simple, but they deplete your cash runway. Selling Bitcoin is simple, but whether the transaction is accretive (and how accretive it is) to BTC Yield depends on where the common equity is trading relative to the fair market value of the BTC being sold.
Using capital raised from other securities could also make sense, but then you have to consider that you now have multiple groups of shareholders with different interests.
So how do you balance that?
Take the issuance of digital credit, for example.
Could a company simply take some of the proceeds from a preferred issuance and continuously funnel that capital into common stock buybacks?
Sure.
But that likely is not sustainable over the long term, and it does not fit the broader mandate of driving long-term value across the capital structure. It would be eroding the treasury asset coverage of the dividends by taking on more obligations but adding fewer assets to the balance sheet. You can see how that would impact credit quality over time.
Credit investors want to know that the balance sheet supporting their dividends is strong. If you consistently funnel capital raised from credit investors into common stock buybacks, you may be creating value for the common while simultaneously reducing value for the credit investors.
So who gets prioritized?
You cannot be algorithmic here, because doing so effectively tells one group of investors that you will always act against their interests.
You need to strike a balance.
That is the nuance. And I do not think it is widely understood or appreciated in daily discourse.
Management teams are constantly seeking the right balance to keep the value proposition strong for all shareholders and to keep the engine running optimally, valuing both common and preferred.
So back to why BTC Yield is important.
BTC Yield guides the daily actions and decisions that drive the long term result.
When looking at BTC Yield in a dual-security model, you have to understand that there are two components that can drive value over the long term.
The first is what we have already discussed, consistently building the asset value behind the common shares.
This is the base that all future returns build from.
Using BTC Yield as a guiding KPI helps keep common stock issuance aligned with the objective of building that value over time.
If the Yield is negative, you are moving backward on a BTC per Share basis. If it is neutral, you are scaling without building immediate foundational value (many times scaling is important and may be the right decision in a neutral manner). If it is slightly positive, you are building that base, but at a slower pace. And if the premium is significant, you can accelerate that value delivery through issuing fewer shares for the assets acquired.
It is a sliding scale.
Managing the capital markets well, and utilizing strong data and analytics, helps teams identify the right moments to accelerate and the right moments to show restraint with a focus on the long term.
Once you have considered how to build the foundation and consistently move it higher, you then have to consider how to generate excess returns on top of that foundation.
That is where Amplification comes in.
The issuance of digital credit products can also increase BTC Yield when the proceeds are used to acquire BTC, because you are adding Bitcoin without issuing common shares.
But the capital is not free. You are introducing dividend obligations and a cost of capital, which means the BTC Yield generated from that transaction has to be considered alongside the obligations created to produce it.
That is where the second value driver comes in.
Amplification.
First, you build a growing asset base per share. Then you amplify that base to capture excess returns when Bitcoin’s performance outpaces the cost of capital.
One creates immediate value through the premium capture in the transaction. The other creates deferred value that is realized as the underlying asset performs relative to the cost of the capital used to acquire it. One builds today, the other delivers the long term value creation.
When it works, it can be extremely powerful.
It is the combination of these two things that creates the value proposition for structured finance companies capitalized on Bitcoin.
But throughout this journey, you have to remain focused on balance.
There is no single right answer at all times. The correct decision is nuanced and changes with the markets each and every day.
Management teams have to constantly evaluate the right execution path to position the company for maximum value delivery over time.
Taking short-term actions, or reacting emotionally to market sentiment, can alter that positioning and miss maximal value capture as the thesis ultimately plays out.
Long-term thinking outperforms short term reactions.
And, as with all things, it is critical that you consider all shareholders and protect their interests.
If a company were to be aggressive with the common ATM when it does not deliver value, common shareholders may not be pleased and seek to move capital elsewhere.
If you focus only on simple short term ways to drive value for the common equity, that capital is likely being pulled from somewhere else, potentially creating credit-negative actions that preferred investors may not like. Digital credit is the engine that drives amplification, capital feeling mistreated and leaving lessens the ability to deliver on the amplification mandate.
If you abuse any portion of your capital structure, liquidity can eventually be put in jeopardy.
It goes back to the old saying, “Capital flows to where it is treated best.”
That should be the goal of these teams.
Create the best long-term value delivery environment for capital, and make capital want to remain inside your ecosystem.
BTC Yield helps guide the right actions. It focuses execution, encourages strategic rather than reactive decision-making, and helps management understand whether the capital allocation decisions being made are enhancing or detracting from the overall vision.
But BTC Yield does not exist in isolation.
Liquidity matters. Risk management matters. The obligations created across the capital structure matter. And the interests of every class of shareholder matter.
The job of management is to balance all of those things together.
Build the base. Amplify it intelligently. Protect the capital structure. Preserve liquidity. Be bold. And make decisions that position the company to deliver maximum value over the long term.
Build a vision. Set the right KPIs. Align incentives. Execute efficiently. Minimize value leakage along the path to total returns.
Deliver for your shareholders.
45
28
290
28,233
Matt Cole retweeted
Strategy has acquired 1,036 $BTC and repurchased $188M of $STRC. As of 11/8/26, we hold 850,364 BTC and $4.9B of USD Assets. $MSTR strategy.com/press/strategy…
710
1,253
12,021
605,852
See our 8-k for additional information: sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archiv…
0
2
51
5,324
Matt Cole retweeted
Bitcoin is about to begin the next phase of the most significant bull market of all time.
256
248
3,673
142,322
The day DOGE ended was the day to stop believing the myth that future returns of Bitcoin will be less than historical returns.
At that moment, the debt crisis became terminal.
The below chart captures well where I believe we are with Bitcoin & where we go from here.
At that moment, the debt crisis became terminal.
The below chart captures well where I believe we are with Bitcoin & where we go from here.
David Friedberg explains why the day DOGE ended was the day that China won
"There was a moment after the [2024] election when there was this idea of DOGE, this idea that government spending would be reduced, which I believe fundamentally would have affected the cost of living. ay. I do think it is the fundamental driver on the cost of living is government spending. The more the government spends, the more expensive things get. I believe that."
"We can go through the analysis on what happened in France. Government spending as a percent of GDP is one metric. How many people are employed or depend on government checks is another metric. But if the government's involved in more of the economy, things get more expensive."
"When DOGE was coming around, the idea of DOGE, the idea of government efficiency, the idea of making sure that every dollar spent by the government has a positive ROI for the people was a great idea."
"We visited D.C. in March of 2025, and we visited Elon and we talked about DOGE and he was struggling. It was pretty clear he was struggling not just internally, but with Congress and with the public perception of what was being done there."
"I came away from that visit in March of 2025, where I also met with multiple members of Congress on that visit, Republicans and Democrats who did not give a sh*t about improving government spending efficiency, did not care about the total government spending as a percent of GDP. It was not a priority."
"On June 5th of 2025, Elon left and it was the end of DOGE. I said, 'China just won' because to me at that moment, this administration ended that effort was the day that it was clear that we were going to have a runaway cost of living and a challenge for progress for the majority of Americans."
"The end result of that is voting in more of these socialist principles, socialist policies, socialist politicians."
52
73
714
45,515
Matt Cole retweeted
Calling all RIAs, Family Offices, Emerging Managers:
Your clients are going to ask about $STRC, $SATA and $SATS.
"I don't know" is not a strategy.
Read the free primer ->
The Digital Credit Report
hydrawealthadvisors.com/research/
Your clients are going to ask about $STRC, $SATA and $SATS.
"I don't know" is not a strategy.
Read the free primer ->
The Digital Credit Report
hydrawealthadvisors.com/research/
11
24
132
12,823
Matt Cole retweeted
It's official.
The crowd is the most scared they've been in 8 months... despite Bitcoin looking incredibly resilient in this broad market sell-off.
Bullish.
The crowd is the most scared they've been in 8 months... despite Bitcoin looking incredibly resilient in this broad market sell-off.
Bullish.
27
28
365
11,785
When you zoom out, the fundamental and technical picture for Bitcoin has never been more bullish.
62
108
1,188
40,958
DIVIDEND SEASON FOR $SATS BEGINS TODAY
- Investors who own $SATS by market close today receive *ALL* accrued dividends since its IPO
- Daily dividends begin every business day thereafter
- $SATS pays a perpetual fixed-rate effective yield north of 15% when purchased under $100
- Investors who own $SATS by market close today receive *ALL* accrued dividends since its IPO
- Daily dividends begin every business day thereafter
- $SATS pays a perpetual fixed-rate effective yield north of 15% when purchased under $100
First $SATS Record Date is tomorrow.
$SATS holders who have purchased by today will qualify for the $0.871 dividend on all brokerages that apply T+1 settlement.
17
66
552
34,683
Matt Cole retweeted
True
After DOGE, Elon came to a conclusion most people missed.
He tried to reform the state from the inside. He failed. And he said it plainly: the government can't fix its own deficit. Nobody in power actually wants to cut. The machine protects itself.
So he drew the only logical conclusion. If the state can't be reformed, there are only two ways this ends.
Either global bankruptcy. Debt keeps compounding, interest payments eat the budget, and the system collapses under its own weight.
Or robots. AI and robotics grow the economy so fast that the debt becomes manageable, and abundance makes the old fights over scarcity irrelevant.
Here's the part almost nobody sees.
For two centuries, capitalism has had a marketing problem. Its gains are real but slow and invisible. 2% growth a year doesn't feel like anything. Your life gets better over 30 years and you never connect it to the system that did it. Meanwhile, the left's promises feel immediate and concrete: a check, a subsidy, a benefit. That's why the left wins on promises even when it can't deliver them. Capitalism produces the wealth, socialism takes the credit.
Robots break that asymmetry.
When productivity doubles in a few years instead of a few decades, people will see it. Things get cheaper, services get better, opportunities appear, in real time. For the first time in history, people will connect capitalism and their rising standard of living directly, almost instantly. The causal chain becomes visible.
And that changes everything politically.
So there are two scenarios.
Scenario one: we stay in the current inertia. No breakthrough, or a breakthrough we regulate to death. The debt wins. Living standards stagnate, then fall. A frustrated electorate turns to whoever promises the most, and that pushes toward a hard collectivist left. But collectivism fails, as it always does. And when it fails, the most organized, most disciplined collectivist force left standing isn't the old left. It's radical Islamism. Bankruptcy, then communism, then something worse.
Scenario two: robots win. Abundance arrives, and it arrives visibly. The link between free enterprise and prosperity becomes obvious to everyone. And this is the key point: it becomes obvious to everyone, including the minorities the left was counting on. Because their long-term incentive is the same as everyone else's. A kid in the suburbs gains infinitely more from a booming, abundant West than from a bankrupt state handing out promises it can't keep. Abundance is the most powerful integration machine ever built.
That's the Western renaissance.
The West doesn't need to win the culture war by arguing. It needs to win it by delivering. And for the first time, it has the technology to deliver fast enough for people to notice.
The race isn't left vs right anymore. It's robots vs bankruptcy.
5,731
9,490
89,797
8,583,149
Matt Cole retweeted
Tl;Dr:
$SATA has performed exceptionally well in a rising yield environment across the entire world of credit
$SATA has performed exceptionally well in a rising yield environment across the entire world of credit
SATA grew from $200M to over $1.4B in notional outstanding in under a year. Since IPO, its yield closed with a 13% handle or lower on 97.2% of trading days. That remains true today with an effective yield of 13.31%.
Over the same period, the 10-year Treasury yield rose 82 bps. 9 bps and CCC yields rose 525 bps.
We judge our Digital Credit products by both the demand they attracted and what their yields are doing relative to that of traditional bond market yields.
We believe the yields investors can earn outside of Digital Credit is critical when assessing the most accretive way to support our products, with the goal of maximally & responsibly amplifying Bitcoin exposure for our common equity investors over the long run.
4
13
181
9,102