#美联储恢复降息进程 BitMEX Research recently published a report specifically breaking down MicroStrategy's new debt instrument called "Stretch". This thing has a scale of about 3 billion dollars, and the design concept is quite interesting—the core idea is to find a way to prevent the Bitcoin market from experiencing a liquidity crunch due to their operations.

Let me explain how this tool works. Stretch adjusts the dividend rate every month to stabilize the price, which is currently at 10.5%. The strategy has left a backdoor: the dividend rate can be cut by up to 25 basis points each month. Just calculate, even if they keep cutting down to zero over the next three and a half years, the money they have to pay will gradually decrease. This kind of "soft landing" design directly blocks the "death spiral" of having to sell coins to pay off debts when the price drops. The conclusion of BitMEX Research is very clear: don't worry about them suddenly crashing the market.

Why is this thing considered stable? Mainly for two reasons.

From a financial perspective, the ability to flexibly adjust the dividend rate is crucial. Regardless of how $BTC price fluctuates or if the liquidity suddenly tightens, MicroStrategy can control the pace of cash outflows by adjusting the dividend rate. Traditional companies that use debt leverage to purchase assets are most afraid of sudden market changes, which can lead to overwhelming repayment pressure. The Stretch mechanism is designed to provide a buffer.

The asset aspect is even more amazing. What is the biggest pitfall of traditional collateralized lending? When the price falls below a certain line, it leads to forced liquidation, triggering a chain reaction. However, Stretch's repayment obligation has nothing to do with how much Bitcoin they are holding. In other words, no matter how much the coin price plummets, it will not trigger the "must sell coin" mechanism. Michael Saylor's move completely separates position risk from financing risk.

Looking at it from a broader perspective, this matter is quite significant for the entire industry.

First of all, this has taught a lesson to other listed companies: it turns out that configuring Bitcoin can be played this way. It's not just about buying and waiting for the price to rise, but rather it can be designed to hedge risks through financial instruments.

Secondly, it weakened the direct impact of $BTC volatility on corporate financial reports. In the past, when companies bought Bitcoin, their financial statements rode the roller coaster with the coin price, putting immense pressure on the board and shareholders. Now, with tools like Stretch, at least in terms of fund management, they can have a sense of security.

Finally, this may attract a wave of traditional enterprises to enter the market. Previously, many companies were hesitant to touch Bitcoin, not because they were pessimistic, but because they were afraid of not being able to control the risks. Now that there are mature cases laid out, the threshold has been lowered.

In the end, MicroStrategy's move is quite clever. While everyone is still focusing on the daily candlestick fluctuations, they are already using financial engineering methods to build a moat for long-term holdings. If the Stretch model really works, it might change the game rules for institutions allocating Bitcoin—from passively taking hits to actively managing risks. A research institution at a leading exchange has even released a report for analysis, which is enough to illustrate the impact of this matter.

Of course, any innovative tool needs time to be validated. But at least from a design logic perspective, Stretch is indeed trying to solve a real problem: how to allow institutions to hold $BTC without constantly worrying about market fluctuations dragging them down. This direction is worth continuing to observe.