Public companies net bought 166,984 BTC in the first half of 2025. Miners produced 81,153 BTC. Do the math. That's over two times the new supply absorbed by a single cohort. We didn't need a whitepaper to see this—just BTCTreasuries raw data and a calculator.
Let me rewind. I've been running quant strategies since 2017. Back then, I arbitraged EOS and TRX across Poloniex and Bittrex, executing 500 micro-trades a week. Speed was everything. But the fundamental truth hasn't changed: if buying pressure exceeds new supply, price follows—unless something breaks.
Context
BTCTreasuries is a public tracker of Bitcoin held by publicly traded companies. It's not perfect—it misses private funds, family offices, and OTC desks. But for macro flow analysis, it's the best window we have. The H1 2025 update shows that listed entities added 166,984 BTC to their balance sheets between January and June. Meanwhile, the Bitcoin network unlocked only 81,153 new coins via mining rewards (post-halving, block reward at 3.125 BTC). The delta: +85,831 BTC absorbed beyond new issuance.
This isn't a feel-good narrative. It's a structural shift in who holds the supply. In 2020, I manually audited Uniswap V2 contracts to find reentrancy edges. I learned that code that works under low load fails under extreme stress. Markets are no different. The current stress test is whether demand can keep exceeding supply after the halving cuts new issuance in half.
Core Analysis: The Flow Imbalance
Break it down. Miners need to sell to cover costs—electricity, hardware, salaries. Historically, they sold roughly 80-100% of their newly mined coins within months. But in H1 2025, public companies bought more than twice the entire miner output. That means miner selling pressure was not only absorbed but also exceeded. The excess buying soaked up coins from existing holders, reducing liquid supply.
I ran a simple model during the 2021 NFT floor sweep: if inflow > outflow, price floor rises. Same logic applies here. The net absorption rate is 2.06x the new supply rate. That's a bullish supply-demand imbalance, but it's fragile. Public companies are not diamond hands—they have CEOs, earnings calls, and margin calls. In the chaos of the sprint, speed wasn't the only factor; it was also knowing when to exit. These companies might exit too.
Contrarian Angle: The Blind Spots
Here's what the headline misses. Net buy is gross buys minus gross sells. If a few whales sold billions in OTC to those same companies, the gross flow could be far larger than the net. That means more coins changed hands, but the net absorption looks small relative to total volume. We don't see that in BTCTreasuries.
Also, the data only covers publicly traded entities. It excludes private companies like Block.one, family offices, and ETFs. The actual institutional buying could be 3-4x higher. That would amplify the thesis. But it could also mean the data is a lagging indicator—by the time it's published, the buying may have already peaked.
Liquidity isn't infinite. Miners can adjust: they can hedge forward, borrow against coins, or reduce sell pressure by using Bitcoin as collateral. If they do, the net supply to the market shrinks further. But if Bitcoin price corrects 20%, those miners face margin calls and forced liquidation. That's the risk.
Takeaway: Actionable Levels
This data confirms that the post-halving supply squeeze is real. But markets price in expectations. The real test comes in Q3 2025 earnings reports. Watch MicroStrategy, Marathon, and Riot. If their net buys drop below 40,000 BTC per quarter, the absorption rate falls below miner output. That's the sell signal.
For now, the trajectory is clear: as long as public companies continue to accumulate at this pace, the floor is rising. But never trust a single data point. Cross-check with Bitwise's institutional flows and Coinbase Premium Index. If those diverge, BTCTreasuries becomes a lagging indicator.
We didn't build a career on hope. We built it on flows. And right now, the flows say: buy the dip, but respect the exit.