JPMorgan research report: Is selling BTC by Strategy just a short-term issue, while permissioned chains are the biggest threat?

In early July 2026, Strategy completed a widely watched transaction—selling 3,588 bitcoins to raise about $216 million in cash. This was the largest single Bitcoin sale in the company’s history, and it also broke the long-standing “buy-only, never sell” principle it had adhered to. At one point, the market viewed it as a key risk factor for Bitcoin’s price.

However, in a report released on July 9, a team of analysts led by JPMorgan Chase Managing Director Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou reached a very different conclusion. The report argues that Strategy’s selloff is a short-term issue, while the true long-term structural risks Bitcoin faces come from another direction—an expansion of permissioned blockchains.

As of July 10, 2026, according to Gate market data, Bitcoin was trading at $64,034. Market sentiment has recovered somewhat after absorbing the shock of Strategy’s selloff, but deeper discussions about Bitcoin’s long-term value proposition have only just begun.

Why Strategy’s sale of 3,588 bitcoins is only a short-term issue

Strategy’s plan to monetize its bitcoins authorizes the company to sell up to $1.25 billion worth of BTC to replenish cash reserves, pay preferred stock dividends, and optimize its capital structure. The 3,588 BTC sold in this round is about 0.4% of its total holdings of 843,775 BTC. After the sale, the company still holds about 84.4万 BTC and $2.55 billion in cash reserves.

JPMorgan Chase believes that sales like this may indeed increase selling pressure in the short term, but they are not enough to constitute a fundamental threat to Bitcoin. In terms of scale, the $216 million selloff represents only a limited share of Bitcoin’s average daily trading volume; in terms of motivation, this is a financial operation to pay preferred stock dividends rather than a repudiation of the company’s strategic direction.

More importantly, JPMorgan Chase points out that Strategy’s selling policy introduces “bidirectional capital-flow risk” to the market—meaning it could involve both buying and selling—but this risk is, in essence, “avoidable.” By contrast, another layer of risk is neither short-term nor something that any individual actor can control.

Why permissioned blockchain expansion constitutes a structural risk for Bitcoin

The core argument in JPMorgan Chase’s report is this: the biggest long-term threat to Bitcoin does not come from an institution’s reduction in holdings, but from the very way traditional financial institutions adopt blockchain technology. If key financial activities—such as tokenization, payments, and settlement—ultimately take place mainly on permissioned private blockchains rather than public permissionless networks, the entire crypto ecosystem will face “structural devaluation.”

The transmission path of this structural devaluation is clear: funds do not flow into native tokens on public chains; institutional capital bypasses public chains and moves to private infrastructure; on-chain transaction volume slows down; and ultimately, the overall vitality of the crypto ecosystem declines—while Bitcoin, as the benchmark asset in the crypto ecosystem, will inevitably be dragged down as well.

JPMorgan Chase analysts were blunt: “In our view, the more important risk comes from the continued way blockchains are adopted in traditional finance, bypassing public permissionless networks.” This is not a critique of Strategy, but a systemic warning about the industry’s development direction.

Why institutions are more inclined toward permissioned blockchains than public chains

In the report, JPMorgan Chase analyzes in detail the underlying logic behind institutional preferences for permissioned blockchains. Permissioned blockchains better meet the operational needs of traditional financial institutions across multiple dimensions: privacy protection, controlled KYC/AML compliance, clear governance mechanisms, higher transaction throughput, a clear legal accountability framework, and regulatory certainty.

These advantages are not mere theoretical speculation; they have already been validated in practice. JPMorgan Chase’s own Kinexys platform—a permissioned blockchain network—has processed more than $4 trillion in transactions to date, with average daily transaction volume exceeding $7 billion. This is not a pilot project; it is mature institutional infrastructure for large-scale transfer of real funds in an environment fully independent of the public blockchain ecosystem.

When a Wall Street giant’s own permissioned chain is already carrying tens of billions of dollars’ worth of real transactions, the question of where institutional capital flows is no longer an open question.

Why the Bank for International Settlements and regulators stand on the side of permissioned chains

JPMorgan Chase’s view is not an isolated case. The report cites the stance of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS)—BIS has explicitly warned that permissionless public blockchains should not be used as systemically important financial infrastructure.

In its 2026 annual economic report, BIS further noted that public permissionless blockchains (such as Bitcoin and Ethereum) have difficulty meeting the requirements of systemically important financial infrastructure for scalability, legal accountability, and settlement finality. Instead, BIS advocates building a “single ledger” architecture, bringing tokenized central bank money, commercial bank deposits, and various types of assets under a regulated framework.

At the same time, SWIFT’s blockchain-based shared ledger has entered the development stage, with plans to go live for real-time transactions within the year. CBDC projects such as the digital euro and digital renminbi (CBDC) are also continuing to advance. The expansion of these regulated channels is strengthening—at the institutional level—the path advantages of permissioned infrastructure.

Which direction is the tokenization and RWA market evolving toward

Tokenization of real-world assets (RWA) is the best lens for observing this trend. JPMorgan Chase’s report states that the RWA tokenization market size is currently close to $50 billion, and a substantial portion of activity is based on Ethereum.

But JPMorgan Chase believes this is closer to an “early experimentation stage” rather than the market’s final structural outcome. As technology matures, core functions such as issuance, custody, settlement, and asset lifecycle management may gradually move to private or permissioned infrastructure that meets requirements for identity verification, confidentiality, and operational resilience, while public chains would take on more of the role of distribution and limited secondary trading.

Tokenized deposits are the clearest example. As a digital claim on bank deposit balances, tokenized deposits remain within bank regulation and deposit insurance frameworks. If such deposits are widely promoted in a “non-transferable” form that regulators favor, it could produce a tangible substitution effect for stablecoins in institutional payment scenarios directed at the general public. JPMorgan Chase has cited cases involving DTCC and Securitize as evidence supporting this trend.

Is a reversal possible in the public-vs-private chain debate?

JPMorgan Chase does not treat the expansion of permissioned chains as an irreversible certainty. The report proposes three reverse scenarios that could invalidate the arguments above.

First is a hybrid model becoming mainstream—public chains and permissioned chains each playing different roles, coexisting in the ecosystem. Second is that stablecoin adoption rises significantly under more friendly regulatory rules (such as the U.S. “Clarity Act”). Third is that Bitcoin continues to play the role of “digital gold,” operating as a depreciation-hedging tool independently of other crypto asset segments.

However, JPMorgan Chase also points out that even if the “Clarity Act” is passed this year, the bigger beneficiaries are likely to be deposit tokens issued by banks rather than stablecoins aimed at the general public—potentially further reinforcing permissioned chains’ competitive advantages. This assessment suggests that there remains a high degree of uncertainty about the ultimate direction of institutional change.

Summary

The value of JPMorgan Chase’s research note lies in shifting market attention from short-term events to a deeper structural issue. Strategy’s sale of 3,588 bitcoins, raising $216 million—while notable—looks to analysts like only ripples on the surface. What truly deserves attention is the direction of the undercurrent beneath the surface: tokenization, payments, and settlement are slowly but steadily moving toward permissioned infrastructure rather than public blockchain networks.

If this trend continues, Bitcoin will not face sell pressure from any single institution, but rather a decline in the vitality of the entire ecosystem—worsening liquidity, reduced capital flows, and slower on-chain transaction activity. This is not a problem of price fluctuations; it is a problem of the value proposition.

Of course, the route debate is far from over. The possibility of a hybrid model, changes in the regulatory environment, and Bitcoin’s unique positioning as digital gold could all change the final outcome. In any case, this competition between public chains and permissioned chains has gone beyond discussion of Bitcoin prices and become a core issue that will shape the crypto industry’s next decade.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is JPMorgan Chase’s biggest long-term structural threat to Bitcoin?

According to the report led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou at JPMorgan Chase, the biggest long-term structural threat is that institutions and banks adopt private permissioned blockchains rather than public networks. If tokenization, payments, and settlement activities ultimately land on permissioned chains, the crypto ecosystem will face structural devaluation such as deteriorating liquidity and reduced capital flows, ultimately dragging down Bitcoin.

Why is Strategy’s Bitcoin selloff not considered the main threat?

Strategy sold 3,588 bitcoins (about $216 million) in early July, which is a short-term financial operation mainly used to pay preferred stock dividends. The sale size is only about 0.4% of its total holdings, and the company still holds about 84.4万 BTC. JPMorgan Chase believes sales like this may create short-term pressure, but it is not the main structural threat facing Bitcoin.

What is a permissioned blockchain? How is it different from a public chain?

A permissioned blockchain (Permissioned Blockchain) refers to a blockchain network where only authorized participants can connect to and validate transactions. Unlike public permissionless blockchains (such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, where anyone can participate), permissioned chains have advantages in privacy protection, KYC/AML compliance, governance mechanisms, throughput, and regulatory certainty, so they are more favored by traditional financial institutions.

Under what circumstances could JPMorgan Chase’s “permissioned chain threat” argument be invalidated?

JPMorgan Chase proposes three scenarios that could invalidate the argument: a hybrid model in which both public and permissioned chains coexist becomes mainstream; friendly regulation (such as the passage of the “Clarity Act”) drives widespread stablecoin adoption; and Bitcoin continues to play the role of “digital gold” by providing a hedging function that remains insulated from other crypto sectors.