Bitcoin treasuries report zero forced liquidations during 54% drop

Bitcoin lost more than half its value between October 2025 and mid-2026. The corporate treasuries that had stacked hundreds of thousands of coins didn’t blink.

During a 54% drawdown that dragged Bitcoin from its all-time high above $126,000 down to lows around $57,800 to $60,000, not one major Bitcoin treasury firm was forced to liquidate its holdings.

How the biggest holders stayed standing

Strategy, the company formerly known as MicroStrategy that essentially pioneered the corporate Bitcoin treasury playbook, offers the clearest case study. The firm holds hundreds of thousands of BTC on its balance sheet. Even with Bitcoin trading at less than half its peak, Strategy’s CEO stated that the company’s effective liquidation price sits at zero.

That sounds like bravado until you look at the math. Strategy reportedly maintains cash reserves of roughly $6.7 billion, nearly identical to its convertible debt obligations of approximately $6.75 billion. In other words, the company could theoretically pay off every dollar it owes without touching a single satoshi.

The broader cohort of large treasury holders followed a similar pattern. While some firms faced collateral maintenance calls during the early months of 2026, the major players navigated those pressures without triggering margin-driven liquidations. The distinction matters: collateral calls are uncomfortable conversations with lenders, but they’re not the same as having your position unwound against your will at the worst possible price.

Smaller players told a different story

Not every company with Bitcoin on its balance sheet had the same luxury. Smaller treasury adopters, the firms without billions in cash cushions, experienced genuine stress during the downturn. Some executed voluntary sales to cover dividend obligations or fund operations.

The 50 largest Bitcoin treasury companies saw their combined market capitalizations crater from approximately $150 billion in mid-2025 to roughly $67 billion by late August 2026. That’s a 55% decline in aggregate market value, tracking almost perfectly with Bitcoin’s own drawdown.

By early September 2026, Bitcoin had recovered to the $78,000 to $80,000 range, providing some breathing room for corporate holders whose balance sheets had been under sustained pressure for months.

Why the crypto liquidation cascade never came

Previous Bitcoin bear markets featured spectacular blowups. Celsius, Three Arrows Capital, and a parade of overleveraged entities collapsed during the 2022 drawdown, creating cascading liquidations that deepened the sell-off and shattered confidence in institutional crypto management.

This cycle broke that pattern, at least among corporate treasury holders. Treasury companies generally hold Bitcoin outright on their balance sheets, funded through equity raises or convertible notes with long maturities. They’re not running leveraged perpetual futures positions that can be liquidated in minutes.

Derivatives traders, by contrast, did experience visible liquidations throughout the drawdown. The crypto futures market saw the usual cascade of long positions getting wiped out as Bitcoin fell through successive support levels. But those liquidations stayed contained within the trading ecosystem and did not spill over into corporate treasury selling.

What this stress test means going forward

For institutional investors evaluating Bitcoin treasury companies as an investment thesis, the 2025-2026 drawdown provided the most rigorous test the model has faced. A 54% decline is not a garden-variety correction. The fact that major holders survived without forced selling validates the core premise: that properly structured corporate Bitcoin holdings can withstand severe volatility.

The combined market cap decline from $150 billion to $67 billion among the top 50 treasury companies also serves as a reminder that surviving a drawdown and thriving through one are very different things. Strategy’s stock may not have faced a forced liquidation event, but shareholders who bought near the top still watched more than half their investment evaporate on paper.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.