Original author: Zhou, ChainCatcher

Over the past month (August 1st–31st), the crypto market saw a significant divergence. Bitcoin (BTC) retreated after reaching a monthly high, closing down 6.15% for the month. Ethereum (ETH) continued its strong performance, rising 19.84%. Solana (SOL) and Binance Coin (BNB) rose 17.85% and 9.79%, respectively. Overall, a structural market trend emerged, with cautious sentiment towards the end of the month.

In contrast, related stocks in the secondary market have come under more concentrated pressure. MicroStrategy (MSTR), which focuses on Bitcoin holdings, fell 16.78% in August, significantly weaker than BTC itself. Ethereum treasuries and related stocks generally experienced a deep correction.

Why the on-chain pulse cannot bring about the valuation elasticity of the stock side - this is pushing the "currency-stock linkage" to a crossroads that requires recalibration.

August portrait: From dislocation to simultaneous decline, the stock market is more fragile

August wasn't a one-sided bull market. BTC surged higher during the month before retreating, ultimately closing lower. While ETH, SOL, and BNB all saw monthly gains, they all followed a pattern of rising first and then falling—an overall trend more like a simultaneous rise and decline.

The stock market is more sensitive. Simply put, two factors are at play: first, the shrinking valuation premium (the gap between stock prices and net asset value is narrowing, or even declining), and second, rising financing expectations (the market is concerned about further issuance of additional bonds and convertible bonds). The same fluctuations on the chain are amplified when transmitted to stock prices, naturally leading to deeper drawdowns.

Institutional sentiment has also cooled, further compressing valuation expectations. According to Barron's, Monness, Crespi, Hardt analyst Gus Galá downgraded MSTR from Neutral to Sell in April and maintained the rating on August 21st, with a target price of $175. He cited Bitcoin's high volatility and cyclicality, the company's balance sheet fragility caused by its highly leveraged cryptocurrency purchases, and the potential for a decline in the approximately 1.34 times net asset value premium. For many institutions, rather than shouldering the uncertainty of corporate governance and dilution, it's better to invest directly in spot trading or hold shares through compliant funds. Cryptocurrency stocks naturally lose their premium in such a comparison.

Crossroads: Repair the linkage or shut down early?

The direction of the market shift isn't determined by price itself, but by whether transmission efficiency can be restored. Over the past month, friction has emerged almost simultaneously across the three links of treasury, financing, and operations.

First, let's look at treasury transmission. Take SharpLink (SBET) as an example. It has been continuously updating its Ethereum holdings for the past month, simultaneously implementing additional issuances at the market (ATM) to replenish its holdings, and signaling that it will consider repurchases if its stock price falls below its net asset value. As of the end of August, it ranked as the second-largest Ethereum treasury company. However, its stock price has not risen in tandem with ETH, and even closed lower in August, with its total market capitalization falling below the value of its ETH holdings. The market is more concerned with how holdings are held and how they are managed than with how much is held. Larger balances are no longer able to generate valuation premiums.

Secondly, financing is backfiring on stock prices. The narrative that once linked market capitalization to price, relying on the "issuing shares to buy coins" model, is collapsing. Take ETH Z, for example. Although the company disclosed over $349 million in ETH reserves, its stock price plummeted due to concerns about dilution stemming from its massive share issuance plan. This demonstrates that financing, rather than driving up stock prices, has become a source of suppression.

Finally, there's the issue of operational performance. Profit pressure on mining institutions and sluggish exchange growth have weakened the correlation between stock prices and coin prices. According to Coinbase's second-quarter financial report, trading revenue was only approximately $764 million, a nearly 40% decline from the previous quarter. Overall revenue fell from $2.034 billion in the first quarter to $1.497 billion, a 26.4% decrease from the previous quarter. This suggests that despite the rise in BTC and ETH, exchanges' operational performance has not improved in tandem, making it difficult to drive stock price increases.

The cumulative effect of all this is a late-cycle scare . The short- and medium-term momentum in cryptocurrency prices is beginning to swell and recede, blunting its sharpness. Equities are even more fragile—with premiums receding, financing fatigue, and lagging operational flexibility—often "gasping" before the cryptocurrency market, and premature stalling has become a common phenomenon.

Repair or decoupling: three small things to look at

Therefore, even if these companies continue to purchase BTC/ETH at this time, their marginal returns are more likely to quickly approach "net value," rather than the "premium on top of net value" seen in the past. This is the core of the crossroads: should we rely on mechanisms to repair transmission, or accept a longer period of structural decoupling?

To judge the direction, you don’t need to bet on grand narratives, just focus on these three small things:

1. Look at the mNAV discount: Can it converge within 3–4 weeks, or even return to the premium range?

2. Look at financing actions: whether it shifts from high-frequency ATM/convertible bonds to a more restrained pace, supplemented by repurchases/lock-ups to "anchor" the net asset value per share.

3. Look at operating indicators: on-chain fees/transactions rebound, marginal reduction in mining companies' cash costs, and an increase in the proportion of non-trading income such as exchange derivatives/custody.

If two of the three items are met, the story of linkage will have a sequel; otherwise, the "decoupling" will be pinned, and the elasticity penalty borne by the cryptocurrency stocks during the drawdown period will be heavier.

Conclusion

Overall, the "synchronized cooling" in late August wasn't a fluke, but rather a public stress test. Investors now face a choice: continue betting on companies that can deliver on their promises, or bypass them and return to native assets and more transparent allocation tools? For the industry, this is a paradigm reassessment: are crypto-equities a bridge to mainstream capital, or the first phantom to fizzle out in the next market cycle? A crossroads is at hand, and time will not be infinitely forgiving.