Beyond Bitcoin Holdings: How DDC Represents the Next Phase of Digital Asset Treasuries

(Sponsored Content — Paid for by DDC Enterprise Limited. Informational only; not investment advice.)

With U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs now providing low-fee, liquid exposure to Bitcoin (BTC-USD), a basic question has come into focus: if investors can buy IBIT or FBTC in one click, what is the case for owning a Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) stock instead?

The answer defines the DAT 2.0 era. To justify their existence, DATs must offer structural advantages that passive ETFs and direct Bitcoin ownership do not: differentiated sources of return, strategic flexibility, operational substance, or access to opportunities unavailable in a passive vehicle. The question is no longer just “How much Bitcoin does this company hold?” but “What can this company do with its balance sheet, capital structure, and operating platform that an ETF cannot?”

Why the First Generation Is Under Pressure

The original DAT playbook was straightforward: issue equity at a premium to net asset value (NAV), use the proceeds to buy Bitcoin on the open market, and let rising prices and widening premiums do the rest.

That model has met its first stress test. As recent coverage highlights, a meaningful share of DAT companies now trade at or below the market value of their crypto holdings, with premiums compressing or disappearing altogether (Forbes, October 2025). At the same time, U.S. regulators have increased scrutiny of companies that rapidly pivoted to “crypto treasury” narratives, including outreach to more than 200 issuers regarding disclosure and potential Investment Company Act implications (National Law Review, 2025).

Spot Bitcoin ETFs, meanwhile, offer transparent, single-asset exposure, tight tracking, and deep liquidity. In this environment, a DAT that merely “buys and holds Bitcoin” risks becoming an over-complicated substitute for an ETF—trading structurally at a discount to NAV rather than a premium. To merit attention, DATs now have to solve a harder problem.

Seven Ways DATs Are Evolving Beyond ETFs

A more mature DAT landscape is beginning to take shape, with several distinct strategic models emerging. None are mutually exclusive, and the most credible platforms increasingly combine more than one.

Hybrid Operating Companies. These firms pair a real operating business with a digital asset treasury, generating cash flow that is not solely dependent on capital markets. DDC Enterprise (DDC) is one such example. Its DayDayCook food and consumer platform operates across Asia with a content-to-commerce model and positive cash flow. Recent filings and press releases show first-half 2025 revenue growth and improved profitability, alongside disciplined Bitcoin accumulation—including a 25 BTC purchase following the October market sell-off. (Business Wire, October 2025) This structure allows accumulation during dislocations, instead of forced selling.

Yield-Driven Treasuries. Some DATs are generating income from their holdings rather than relying purely on price appreciation. Metaplanet (MTPLF) has become a prominent example, using cash-secured Bitcoin options to create recurring income and support operations. Passive spot ETFs, by contrast, are structurally constrained from running active derivatives books in the same way. This model represents a direction DDC may adapt toward as the market evolves.

Strategic Consolidators. When DATs trade below 1.0x market cap-to-NAV, they can become acquisition targets for other platforms. The announcement of Strive’s all-stock agreement to acquire Semler Scientific (SMLR), creating a combined holder of more than 10,900 BTC, is an early template for using equity as a consolidating currency.

Multi-Asset Treasuries. New vehicles seek exposure to assets not yet available via mainstream ETFs. China Renaissance’s planned U.S.-listed BNB-focused treasury, for example, targets a token with no SEC-approved spot ETF (CoinDesk, August 2025).

Capital-Structure Engineers. Strategy Inc. (MSTR) (formerly MicroStrategy) has built a Bitcoin-backed “capital stack” of preferreds and converts—STRK, STRF, and STRD—offering differentiated yield and risk profiles linked to the same Bitcoin treasury (Barron’s, September 2025).

Cross-Border Capital Strategists. Some DATs tap equity and credit markets across regions, reducing reliance on a single investor base. DDC’s financing rounds have combined U.S. and Asia-based institutional participation, underscoring how cross-border reach can support treasury strategies through short term market softness (Business Wire, October 2025).

Application-Layer Builders. A smaller but important category involves companies aiming to leverage their treasury and user base to build blockchain applications—tokenized loyalty, payments, or supply-chain tools. Operating DATs with real distribution—rather than shell entities—are better positioned to test these models.

In practice, few DATs fit neatly into a single category. DDC, for example, currently exhibits aspects of the hybrid operating model and the cross-border capital strategist approach. Over time, as the sector develops, it could expand into other areas—such as structured yield generation or application-layer integration—reflecting the adaptability expected of DAT 2.0 participants.

This diversity of models reflects how the DAT market is maturing from a single-playbook approach to a spectrum of strategies—of which DDC offers one evolving example.

Five Domains Where DATs Must Differentiate

Across these models, the market is converging on five areas that separate credible DAT 2.0 platforms from simple leveraged trackers.

Operational cash generation. Self-funded accumulation during drawdowns is a core advantage over vehicles that depend purely on new inflows. Hybrid operators like DDC can add to treasuries through earnings, not just issuance (SEC filings, H1 2025).

Regulatory positioning. Legal and regulatory commentators have noted that under the Investment Company Act, companies with more than roughly 40 percent of assets in investment securities could face additional classification or disclosure requirements. This threshold has become an industry talking point as DAT balance sheets expand. Future guidance may shape how DATs—including those with operating components—structure and report their digital-asset holdings.

Strategic flexibility. The ability to buy back shares, pursue accretive M&A, structure yield products, or deploy applications provides levers for value creation beyond “number of BTC.” ETFs, by design, do not operate businesses or transact strategically.

Capital-structure innovation. Structured securities—preferreds, converts, revenue-linked notes—allow different investor segments to engage with the same underlying treasury at different risk levels (Barron’s, September 2025).

Governance and expertise. As the space matures, investors are scrutinizing treasury strategy, counterparty risk, and disclosure. Advisory structures like DDC’s Bitcoin Visionary Council—including external figures such as Dave Chapman and Yat Siu—and the appointment of specialized advisors reflect a broader move toward institutional practices (Business Wire, September 2025).

DDC as a Blueprint for the Next Generation of Digital Asset Treasuries

DDC sheds light on what the next generation of Digital Asset Treasuries may look like—where multiple models converge rather than compete.

The company combines:

• A growing, cash-generating food and consumer platform.
• A systematic Bitcoin accumulation strategy, including purchases during recent market softness.
• Cross-border capital relationships with both U.S. and Asia-based institutions. An emerging governance and advisory layer aligned with institutional standards.

DDC doesn’t represent the entire future of the DAT sector, but it does offer a clear view of how the blueprint could evolve: hybrid businesses with real operations, robust governance, and a treasury model designed to endure beyond market cycles.

A Sector Still Sorting Itself Out

If we treat 2025 as the first true breakout year for corporate Bitcoin treasuries, the current market is still in its early innings. Some companies might be acquired, some might pivot, and some might spend extended periods trading at discounts to their holdings.

The investor’s question is shifting from “DAT or ETF?” to “Which specific DAT strategy, if any, justifies its complexity and risk versus a spot ETF?” The emerging answer favors platforms with real operations, transparent governance, and multiple levers for value creation—rather than those reliant on a single trade.

DDC is one example of this direction of travel. It should be evaluated on that basis: not as a simple substitute for a Bitcoin ETF, but as a hybrid operating and treasury platform whose structure may, if executed well, offer a different balance of risk and potential return than either a pure-play DAT or a passive fund.

Disclosure: This article is sponsored by DDC Enterprise Limited. All figures are based on publicly available information as of the date of publication and are for illustrative purposes only. This is not investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.