What Is mNAV?

In short

• mNAV is a multiple, not a dollar amount. It divides what the market pays for a Bitcoin treasury company by what that company's Bitcoin is worth. Above 1.0 is a premium; below 1.0 is a discount.
• One company has several defensible mNAVs. Strategy (MSTR) is 0.70× on the plainest reading and 1.08× on the fullest, from the same data. The spread is the balance sheet, not an error. (as at 17 Oct 2026, mNAV.com engine)
• Which number you are looking at depends on two choices: the share count (issued or fully diluted) and how much of the capital structure you fold in (gross, enterprise value, or net assets). Every honest mNAV states both.

mNAV — short for multiple of net asset value — is the ratio of a Bitcoin treasury company's market value to the value of the Bitcoin it holds. An mNAV of 1.0 means the equity trades in line with the Bitcoin behind it. Above 1.0, the market is paying a premium for the company wrapped around the stack. Below 1.0, you can buy the company's Bitcoin for less than the Bitcoin costs.

It is the first number anyone reaches for when valuing a treasury company, because it collapses a complicated balance sheet into one question: are you paying more or less than the Bitcoin is worth?

That is the easy part. The hard part — and the part most published mNAV figures skip — is that the question has more than one correct answer, and the answers do not agree with each other. This page gives you the definition, the formula, and then the thing you actually need: how to tell which mNAV you are looking at.

mNAV across the treasury cohort, right now

Before the definitions, the spread. Every company below holds Bitcoin on its balance sheet. Some trade at a premium to it, some at a discount, and the range between them is wider than newcomers expect.

Nothing on that table is a forecast. It is the market's current answer, recomputed continuously, to the question this page is about.

The formula

At its simplest:

mNAV = Market Cap / Bitcoin NAV

Two dollar amounts, one ratio. The work is entirely in computing the two inputs, so take them one at a time.

Bitcoin NAV — the denominator

Bitcoin NAV = Bitcoin Held × BTC Price

Bitcoin Held is the running total of every disclosed purchase minus every disclosed sale, to the last disclosed transaction — not to the day. A company can announce a purchase before it is booked here, so the figure always carries its own as-at date. BTC Price is the stored daily close, converted into the company's reporting currency where the company does not report in dollars. It is the input that moves fastest and matters most — every mNAV on this page is a function of it, and our live Bitcoin power-law chart is where to watch it.

Not every bitcoin an issuer holds is treasury bitcoin. Where a company states in its own filings that part of its stack is operating inventory or customer-facing float — a rewards programme, a custodian's or exchange's stock held for customers, an ATM's till — that part is excluded here. Fold's Q2-2026 balance sheet is the clean case: two separate lines, "Digital assets - rewards treasury" at 77 BTC and "Digital assets - investment treasury" at 194 BTC, and the 77 is matched by a customer rewards liability denominated in bitcoin. It is owed, not owned. We publish 194. The test is the accounting-policy note, not the word "inventory" in a press release — Cipher Mining's own 10-Q says it holds "646 bitcoin in inventory" while measuring every one of them as a fair-value intangible, so Cipher's number does not move at all.

Nothing else goes in. Bitcoin NAV is deliberately a single-asset number — the value of the stack, and only the stack. Mining rigs, software revenue, brand and goodwill are all excluded by construction. That is the point: it gives you a clean floor to measure the equity against.

Market Cap — the numerator

Market Cap = Share Price × Shares Outstanding

Simple in form, and the first place two honest analysts diverge — because shares outstanding is not one number.

The first fork: issued or fully diluted?

Every listed company has two share counts, and a Bitcoin treasury company has a wider gap between them than almost any other kind of business.

• Issued (or basic) shares are the ones that exist today.
• Fully diluted shares add the ones that could come into existence: convertible notes if they convert, warrants and options if exercised, and the equity an at-the-market (ATM) programme is authorised to issue.

For a conventional operating company the gap is a rounding error. For a treasury company it is structural, because the entire playbook — issue equity above NAV, buy more Bitcoin, raise Bitcoin-per-share — runs on the instruments that dilution accounts for. Measuring against issued shares alone flatters exactly the companies leaning hardest on convertibles and ATMs.

Take Strategy (MSTR). As at its last filed cap table, 351,668,784 shares were issued and 384,250,534 were fully diluted — a 9.3% gap. Run the same share price and the same Bitcoin through both, and:

| Basis | Market cap | mNAV (gross) | |---|---|---| | Issued | $48.12B | 0.70× | | Fully diluted | $52.58B | 0.76× |

The difference comes from nothing but the choice of denominator on the share count. A reader who takes an issued-share mNAV from one source and a diluted one from another has two different numbers for the same company on the same day, and no way to tell why.

mNAV.com computes both and leads with the issued-share figure, with the fully-diluted number shown alongside it. That is a deliberate choice of a single consistent basis for the headline rather than a judgement that dilution does not matter — it plainly does, which is why the diluted figure sits next to it on every company page. Read them together: the issued number is what the market is pricing today, the diluted number is what it is pricing if every convertible, warrant and authorised ATM share comes into existence.

The second fork: how much of the balance sheet counts?

The share count decides the numerator's size. The second choice decides what the ratio is measuring at all — and it is the bigger of the two.

A Bitcoin treasury company is rarely just equity and Bitcoin. Strategy carries debt, several series of perpetual preferred stock, and cash. Those claims sit between the shareholder and the Bitcoin, and there are three defensible ways to handle them.

1 · Gross (marketCap) — the engine default.

mNAV = Market Cap / Bitcoin NAV

The cleanest read of equity value against Bitcoin. It ignores the capital structure entirely, which is a feature when you want to compare like with like and a bug when one company is levered and the other is not.

2 · Net mNAV, enterprise-value basis (enterpriseValue)

mNAV = Enterprise Value / Bitcoin NAV
where  Enterprise Value = Market Cap + Debt + (Preferred − Convertible Preferred) − Cash

Preferred enters at its filed liquidation preference, and convertible preferred is excluded — it is treated as equity, because that is what it becomes. This asks what it would cost to buy the whole company — equity plus the claims ahead of it, less the cash you would inherit — and compares that to the Bitcoin. It is the treatment an equity analyst arriving from any other sector already recognises, and it is the one that makes two companies with the same market cap but different debt loads comparable.

3 · Net assets (netAssets)

mNAV = Market Cap / (Bitcoin NAV + Cash − Debt − Preferred)

Here the netting happens in the denominator instead: the non-Bitcoin balance sheet is folded into the asset base, and the ratio becomes equity value against the residual claim. It is the complement to the enterprise-value view, not a competitor to it.

These two net treatments are not equivalent and will not agree. One adds the senior claims to the top; the other subtracts them from the bottom. Both are arithmetically sound and they answer slightly different questions, which is precisely why mNAV.com names all three rather than crowning one. When a figure is published without its method, it is not a definition — it is a number.

Worked example: Strategy, three methods, one day

This is the section that does the work. Same company, same inputs, each dated. Six numbers.

The inputs

| Input | Value | As at | |---|---|---| | Bitcoin held | 848,250 BTC | 11 Oct 2026 | | BTC price (daily close) | $81,472 | 17 Oct 2026 | | Share price (MSTR close) | $137 | 17 Oct 2026 | | Issued shares | 351,668,784 | 10 May 2026 | | Fully diluted shares | 384,250,534 | 10 May 2026 | | Cash | $1.71B | 30 Jun 2026 | | Debt | $6.71B | 30 Jun 2026 | | Preferred (liquidation preference) | $15.46B | 30 Jun 2026 |

Bitcoin NAV = 848,250 BTC × $81,472 = $69.11B

The six answers

| Method | Issued shares | Fully diluted | |---|---|---| | Gross (marketCap) | 0.70× | 0.76× | | Net, enterprise-value basis | 0.99× | 1.06× | | Net assets | 0.99× | 1.08× |

If you want one number: it is the enterprise-value, issued-share cell. That is what this site publishes as Strategy's headline mNAV, because Strategy's own configuration designates the enterprise-value method and the headline runs on issued shares. Other companies in the cohort designate gross. The headline always follows the company's designated method, and the page always says which.

Now read the corners. On the plainest reading Strategy's equity is worth 30% less than its Bitcoin. On the fullest, 8% more. Not one number in that table is wrong.

The gross-to-enterprise-value jump is the largest single move — 30 points on the issued-share basis — and it is not a rounding artefact. It is the preferred stock and debt appearing in the numerator. Anyone quoting Strategy at its gross figure is quoting a company with no capital structure. Anyone quoting the enterprise-value figure is quoting the cost of the whole thing.

Two disclosures that belong with every net figure

Preferred is taken at par, not marked to market. The engine reads the liquidation preference as filed — $15.46B for Strategy — rather than the traded value of the preferred series. When the preferreds trade below par, a mark-to-market net mNAV would be lower than the one published here. It is a deliberate choice for consistency and auditability, and it is not the same thing as "net of preferred at market".

The two net treatments are non-equivalent. Stated again because it is the single most common misreading: enterprise-value and net-assets mNAV are different measurements, not two roundings of one measurement.

mNAV vs NAV

They are related and constantly confused.

NAV — here, Bitcoin NAV — is a dollar amount: the market value of the Bitcoin the company holds. mNAV is a multiple: the company's market value divided by that NAV.

"Multiple" is the operative word, and it is the correct expansion of the abbreviation. mNAV is multiple of net asset value, not "modified net asset value" — a misreading that circulates widely, rather than a different metric.

Change any input and watch the multiple move. Bitcoin NAV = BTC held × BTC price; mNAV = Market Cap ÷ Bitcoin NAV.

How to read the number: mNAV premium and mNAV discount

• mNAV = 1.0 — the equity trades exactly at the value of the Bitcoin. You are paying Bitcoin price for Bitcoin exposure, with the company thrown in at zero.
• mNAV > 1.0 — an mNAV premium. The market is paying for something beyond the stack: the ability to keep raising capital above NAV and convert it into Bitcoin-per-share, an operating business, index inclusion, or simply being the most liquid way for a given pool of capital to get exposure.
• mNAV < 1.0 — an mNAV discount. The Bitcoin is available inside the wrapper for less than it costs outside it. That can reflect leverage the market dislikes, governance concerns, a closed capital-raising window, or just a cohort out of favour.

The premium is not decoration. It is the raw material of the playbook: a company trading above 1.0 can issue equity and buy Bitcoin at a rate that leaves every existing holder with more Bitcoin per share than before. That is what accretive issuance means, and it is why treasury company management teams watch this number as closely as their shareholders do. Below 1.0 the mechanism runs in reverse, and the conversation turns to buybacks, asset sales, or waiting.

Why the premium has to be earned, repeatedly

There is a reason a premium is not the natural resting state. Owning Bitcoin directly costs you nothing to hold. Owning it through a company costs you the company: salaries, listing and audit fees, interest on the debt, dividends on the preferred. Those run every quarter whether or not the Bitcoin does anything. So a treasury company is a worse way to hold Bitcoin than holding Bitcoin — a slowly leaking wrapper — unless it is doing something that more than covers the leak.

The thing that covers it is growth in Bitcoin per share. A company that converts its premium into more Bitcoin behind every share is giving holders something spot cannot: a position that compounds in Bitcoin terms, not just in price terms. A company that is not doing that is charging its holders an operating expense for the privilege of owning an asset they could hold for free.

This is why the premium is best read as a claim about the future that the company has to keep proving. It rests on a demonstrated record of raising Bitcoin per share, and the record is the evidence — which is why BTC Yield and Bitcoin-per-share sit beside mNAV on every company page here rather than being an afterthought. Where that record is absent or has stalled, a discount is the market pricing the wrapper's running cost rather than punishing the Bitcoin. And when the capital-raising window closes — as it tends to when Bitcoin is falling — the mechanism the premium was paying for is switched off.

Where CEBE fits

mNAV compares equity value to Bitcoin value. It does not tell you what the Bitcoin is worth to the common shareholder specifically, after the claims sitting ahead of them.

CEBE — Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure — does. It is the work of Bobby Tierney, whose framework asks a question mNAV does not: once the debt and the preferred are stripped out, how much Bitcoin economically belongs to the common shareholder, and at what Bitcoin price does the common's claim go to zero? Where mNAV tells you whether you are paying a premium, Tierney's CEBE tells you what you are paying it for. The full methodology is set out at cebetracker.io/framework.

CEBE is live on Strategy at /mnav/strategy, the company where the capital structure makes the difference largest. Rolling it out across the cohort is in progress.

What mNAV does not tell you

A single ratio earns its keep by leaving things out.

• It says nothing about the quality of the capital structure. Gross mNAV in particular treats a debt-free company and a heavily levered one identically. That is what the enterprise-value method is for.
• It says nothing about the cost of the premium. A company at 1.5× is being valued at a 50% premium; whether that premium is cheap or dear depends on how fast it can convert the premium into Bitcoin-per-share, which mNAV does not measure.
• It is only as current as its slowest input. Share price and Bitcoin price move by the second; cap tables and balance sheets update on their filing cycles. A live mNAV therefore always carries at least one figure dated to the last disclosure — which is why every input in the worked example above shows its own as-at date.
• It does not value an operating business. For a company with meaningful non-Bitcoin revenue, mNAV is one input among several rather than the answer.

FAQ

What does mNAV mean? mNAV means multiple of net asset value: how many times over the market is valuing a Bitcoin treasury company relative to the Bitcoin on its balance sheet. At 1.0 the equity and the Bitcoin are worth the same. At 1.5 the market is paying one and a half times the Bitcoin. At 0.8 you can buy the Bitcoin inside the company for 80 cents on the dollar.

What does mNAV stand for? Multiple of net asset value. It is a multiple — the company's market value divided by the value of its Bitcoin — not a dollar amount. "Modified net asset value" is a common misreading, not a different metric.

Is mNAV a standard finance term? No. It is not a general-purpose valuation metric and you will not find it in a finance textbook or applied to a conventional company. It emerged with the current Bitcoin treasury company cohort and is specific to it. What it is built from is standard — market capitalisation, enterprise value, net asset value — but the ratio itself exists because a new kind of company needed a way to answer one question: is this equity worth more or less than the Bitcoin behind it? Outside that cohort the question does not arise, so neither does the metric.

What is an mNAV premium, and an mNAV discount? An mNAV premium is any reading above 1.0: the company's equity is worth more than the Bitcoin it holds, because the market is paying for the platform around the stack — its access to capital, its ability to keep raising Bitcoin-per-share, and any operating business attached. An mNAV discount is any reading below 1.0: the shares trade for less than the Bitcoin behind them, which can reflect leverage the market dislikes, governance concerns, or a closed window for raising capital.

How is mNAV calculated? At its simplest, market capitalisation divided by Bitcoin NAV, where Bitcoin NAV is Bitcoin held multiplied by the Bitcoin price. It can also be calculated on an enterprise-value basis, which adds debt and non-convertible preferred stock and subtracts cash from the numerator, or on a net-assets basis, which nets those items out of the denominator instead. The worked example above runs all three end to end, and the calculator lets you change any input.

Why does the same company have more than one mNAV? Two choices produce the spread: the share count (issued or fully diluted) and the method (gross, enterprise value, or net assets). Strategy currently spans 0.70× to 1.08× across those six combinations on identical underlying data. None of them is wrong; they answer different questions.

Which mNAV should I use? Gross for a like-for-like comparison across companies with different balance sheets. Enterprise-value basis when you want the cost of acquiring the whole company against its Bitcoin. Net assets when you want the equity's residual claim. Whichever you use, state it — an mNAV without its method is not comparable to anything.

What's the difference between mNAV and NAV? NAV is the dollar value of the Bitcoin treasury. mNAV is the ratio of the company's market value to that NAV. One is a level, the other is a multiple.

Is mNAV shown on an issued or fully-diluted basis? mNAV.com computes both and leads with the issued-share figure, showing the fully-diluted number alongside it. The diluted figure matters — the convertibles, warrants and ATM equity it accounts for are the same instruments a treasury company uses to grow its Bitcoin position — so read the pair, not one of them.

How does mNAV treat preferred stock? Preferred is taken at its filed liquidation preference rather than marked to market. It appears in the numerator under the enterprise-value method and in the denominator under the net-assets method, and is absent from the gross method entirely.

Why would a company trade above its Bitcoin NAV? Because the market expects it to keep converting that premium into Bitcoin-per-share. A company trading above 1.0 can issue equity and buy Bitcoin in a way that leaves existing holders with more Bitcoin each than before — accretive issuance. The premium is the mechanism, not just the verdict.

Does a high mNAV mean a company is overvalued? Not on its own. A premium is a claim about future Bitcoin-per-share growth. Whether the claim is worth paying for depends on the company's capital access and how efficiently it converts raises into Bitcoin — neither of which mNAV measures.

Live mNAV for every company tracked here is in the mNAV terminal.