$Strategy(MSTR)$ MSTR essentially functions like a closed-end fund, and most of them use about one-third leverage. The typical approach to buying CEFs is twofold: first, when you believe the underlying assets have bottomed, and second, when the share price trades at a significant discount to the net asset value per share. That's essentially what the figures below indicate. Last week, MSTR hit a 43% discount to its assets at the $81 price level, which is quite extreme. Purchasing at a discount means you're acquiring more assets per share than the current price reflects, offering a higher level of protection. Even if the asset value declines, you own them at a much lower cost. Currently, the discount implies you own the assets at roughly 27% be
$Strategy(MSTR)$ These articles questioning MNAV are cracking me up. As if the structural risk of buying an unhedged commodity suddenly appeared and people are surprised by the impact when BTC falls. There is amplified risk on both sides. Isn't that the point of the model. Good grief. You would expect intelligent individuals to be smart. Or is there something more manipulative behind the intent of these content authors? Hard for me to believe they are not that intelligent.
$Strategy(MSTR)$ 's current downward pressure stems from predictable portfolio rebalancing activities and cyclical capital rotations. When these transitional phases conclude, the asset may demonstrate its fundamental strengths. Maintaining constructive perspective helps navigate temporary volatility.