As the Bitcoin market pullback deepens, Strategy’s latest round of Bitcoin accumulation has become a point of contention among market participants. According to Odaily, citing CoinDesk, the company added 1,550 BTC, but its self-defined BTC Yield metric declined over the same period. That change prompted a public exchange between Michael Saylor and Bitcoin supporter Matthew Kratter over whether the transaction diluted shareholder value.
The debate centers on Strategy’s BTC Yield, a metric the company uses to measure “Bitcoin per share.” The latest data show that Strategy’s BTC Yield fell from 13.0% on June 1 to 12.8% on June 8. During the same period, the company’s Bitcoin holdings increased from 843,706 BTC to 845,256 BTC, while its assumed diluted shares outstanding rose from 382.756 million to 384.180 million. BTC Gain YTD also declined from 87,754 BTC to 86,328 BTC.
Matthew Kratter argued that these figures show a dilutive effect when viewed through the lens of Bitcoin per share. His point was not that Strategy failed to increase its total Bitcoin holdings, but that the increase in assumed diluted shares changed the per-share calculation. Under that framework, the decline in BTC Yield and BTC Gain YTD became the basis for his criticism of the financing.
Michael Saylor pushed back against that interpretation. He said BTC Yield is only one KPI for measuring “Bitcoin per share” and cannot fully capture changes in shareholder value. Saylor emphasized that the same transaction also added about $100 million in cash reserves, raising the company’s dollar reserves to roughly $1 billion. From the perspective of the overall balance sheet, he described the operation as accretive.
The dispute comes as Bitcoin’s pullback has intensified discussion around Strategy’s capital strategy and measurement framework. The disagreement over how to interpret the company’s metrics has drawn further comments from market participants. Some accused the company of “adjusting evaluation standards to fit the narrative,” while short sellers argued that changing KPIs when a key metric turns unfavorable is a common corporate behavior. At the center of the debate is whether Strategy’s Bitcoin purchases should be judged primarily by BTC per share, or by a broader view that also includes cash reserves and the company’s overall balance sheet.