2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
43 päivää sitten
‧2 t 17 min
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 30.7. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 8.6. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 5.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 5.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 30.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.7.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
·6 t sittenJust a little cold water in the blood regarding MSTR and everything else. The debate right now is too emotion-driven and people are not thinking analytically. When MSTR falls, the narrative quickly becomes: "the model is broken", "dilution is destroying us", "STRC is a problem", "they will have to sell BTC to pay dividend". But one needs to separate things. MSTR is not Bitcoin 1:1. It is a stock with Bitcoin exposure, capital structure, mNAV, debt, preference shares, software business, and investor sentiment. Therefore, MSTR can easily fall more than BTC in the short term. It is not proof that the case is dead. This is precisely the volatility one pays for when choosing MSTR instead of pure BTC. The most important concept is mNAV. When the market is optimistic, it pays a premium over the value of Strategy's Bitcoin holdings. When the market is nervous, the premium falls. This means that MSTR can underperform BTC in periods, even though the company still owns the same Bitcoin holdings. It is short-term pricing, not necessarily fundamental destruction. Dilution is also misunderstood. Yes, Strategy issues shares and other instruments. But dilution is only negative if the value per share falls. If the company issues capital above NAV and uses the money to buy more Bitcoin, it can actually increase the BTC value per share. That is the whole point of the model. The real question is therefore not: "will there be more shares?" The real question is: "does BTC per share and NAV per share increase over time?" - YES! If the answer is yes, then the issuances are not classic destructive dilution. It is capital allocation. STRC and the preference shares must, of course, be taken seriously. They create ongoing obligations. But it is not automatically a sign of weakness. It is part of Strategy's attempt to build a capital structure around Bitcoin, where different investors can choose different risk: some want MSTR with high upside, others want more bond-like/dividend-like exposure. The problem only truly arises if three things happen simultaneously: Bitcoin falls or goes sideways for a long time, mNAV continues to compress, and capital markets close for Strategy. This is a possible risk scenario, but it is not the same as the company being in trouble because mNAV falls from week to week. Too much emphasis is also placed on small BTC sales. A sale of 32 BTC out of a holding of over 800,000 BTC changes nothing fundamentally. It can create sentiment noise because the market reacts to the signal, but economically it is almost nothing. If Strategy started selling thousands of BTC and stopped accumulating, that would be a different discussion. That is not what we are seeing. In the short term, MSTR is very much about psychology. If BTC falls 5 %, MSTR can fall 10–20 %, because investors also price in lower mNAV, lower risk appetite, and fear of the capital structure. But it also works the other way. When BTC rises, and the market again wants to pay a premium for Strategy's model, MSTR can rise much faster than BTC. That is why one cannot assess MSTR based on a single day's price drop or a single week's sentiment. The long-term case is quite simple: If Bitcoin over the next 5–10 years becomes a much larger asset, and Strategy continues to accumulate BTC in a way where BTC per share grows, then the MSTR case is still intact. If Bitcoin, on the other hand, goes sideways for many years, mNAV remains low, and capital raises become expensive, then the case becomes weaker. That is the real debate. Not whether MSTR falls 20 % in a month. Not whether 32 BTC are sold. Not whether mNAV goes from 1.22 to 1.18. That is exclusively noise, volatility, and speculative emotions. The big variable is Bitcoin over time. Historically, Bitcoin has had violent corrections, but still made higher long-term bottoms. Power law models precisely show that Bitcoin over many years has moved in an ascending channel, even though it has had extreme drawdowns along the way. If that structure continues, Strategy is in a strong position because they own the largest corporate holding of BTC in the world. But one must be honest: MSTR is not for people who cannot handle volatility. It is not a stable stock. It is a leveraged Bitcoin/capital market strategy packaged into a publicly listed company. It can provide massive upside, but it can also fall sharply when the market becomes nervous. My point is simply: Do not confuse volatility with bankruptcy risk or short-term mNAV compression with a broken long-term case. If one believes in Bitcoin towards 2028–2029, then it is crucial to keep an eye on: 1. BTC per share 2. NAV per share 3. mNAV over time 4. debt and preference obligations 5. whether capital raises occur above or below NAV 6. whether Strategy continues to accumulate BTC That is where the analysis lies. Everything else is short-term noise.
·2 t sittenMoneyman, the most interesting question is how MSTR handles the situation if mNAV goes below 1.0. Currently about 1.17 and it has fallen from just over 3 during the biggest hype. Should MSTR issue more common shares to be able to pay dividends on the preferred shares or sell BTC.
·21 t sittenBtc is down 1.4%, but strategy down -6%. Any explanation ?🤨
·6 t sittenYes, bear markets can be brutal. I haven't even seen a bitcoin bull market ever, so I'm excited to see if I ever get to see it 😂·2 t sittenProfit is profit! One can always be wise after the event. But it's clear that it would have been more fun to sell at 126,000. I - like everyone else - wish I had bought at any time from bitcoin's beginning until 2020 or in the bear market 2022
·1 päivä sittenDoes anyone among you have a reasonable formula for the relationship between BTC and its price?
·2 päivää sitten@Marckzepper 500 USD within 6 months.
18 t sitten18 t sittenIn 5 years its going to be in bear market and less than 1k.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
43 päivää sitten
‧2 t 17 min
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·6 t sittenJust a little cold water in the blood regarding MSTR and everything else. The debate right now is too emotion-driven and people are not thinking analytically. When MSTR falls, the narrative quickly becomes: "the model is broken", "dilution is destroying us", "STRC is a problem", "they will have to sell BTC to pay dividend". But one needs to separate things. MSTR is not Bitcoin 1:1. It is a stock with Bitcoin exposure, capital structure, mNAV, debt, preference shares, software business, and investor sentiment. Therefore, MSTR can easily fall more than BTC in the short term. It is not proof that the case is dead. This is precisely the volatility one pays for when choosing MSTR instead of pure BTC. The most important concept is mNAV. When the market is optimistic, it pays a premium over the value of Strategy's Bitcoin holdings. When the market is nervous, the premium falls. This means that MSTR can underperform BTC in periods, even though the company still owns the same Bitcoin holdings. It is short-term pricing, not necessarily fundamental destruction. Dilution is also misunderstood. Yes, Strategy issues shares and other instruments. But dilution is only negative if the value per share falls. If the company issues capital above NAV and uses the money to buy more Bitcoin, it can actually increase the BTC value per share. That is the whole point of the model. The real question is therefore not: "will there be more shares?" The real question is: "does BTC per share and NAV per share increase over time?" - YES! If the answer is yes, then the issuances are not classic destructive dilution. It is capital allocation. STRC and the preference shares must, of course, be taken seriously. They create ongoing obligations. But it is not automatically a sign of weakness. It is part of Strategy's attempt to build a capital structure around Bitcoin, where different investors can choose different risk: some want MSTR with high upside, others want more bond-like/dividend-like exposure. The problem only truly arises if three things happen simultaneously: Bitcoin falls or goes sideways for a long time, mNAV continues to compress, and capital markets close for Strategy. This is a possible risk scenario, but it is not the same as the company being in trouble because mNAV falls from week to week. Too much emphasis is also placed on small BTC sales. A sale of 32 BTC out of a holding of over 800,000 BTC changes nothing fundamentally. It can create sentiment noise because the market reacts to the signal, but economically it is almost nothing. If Strategy started selling thousands of BTC and stopped accumulating, that would be a different discussion. That is not what we are seeing. In the short term, MSTR is very much about psychology. If BTC falls 5 %, MSTR can fall 10–20 %, because investors also price in lower mNAV, lower risk appetite, and fear of the capital structure. But it also works the other way. When BTC rises, and the market again wants to pay a premium for Strategy's model, MSTR can rise much faster than BTC. That is why one cannot assess MSTR based on a single day's price drop or a single week's sentiment. The long-term case is quite simple: If Bitcoin over the next 5–10 years becomes a much larger asset, and Strategy continues to accumulate BTC in a way where BTC per share grows, then the MSTR case is still intact. If Bitcoin, on the other hand, goes sideways for many years, mNAV remains low, and capital raises become expensive, then the case becomes weaker. That is the real debate. Not whether MSTR falls 20 % in a month. Not whether 32 BTC are sold. Not whether mNAV goes from 1.22 to 1.18. That is exclusively noise, volatility, and speculative emotions. The big variable is Bitcoin over time. Historically, Bitcoin has had violent corrections, but still made higher long-term bottoms. Power law models precisely show that Bitcoin over many years has moved in an ascending channel, even though it has had extreme drawdowns along the way. If that structure continues, Strategy is in a strong position because they own the largest corporate holding of BTC in the world. But one must be honest: MSTR is not for people who cannot handle volatility. It is not a stable stock. It is a leveraged Bitcoin/capital market strategy packaged into a publicly listed company. It can provide massive upside, but it can also fall sharply when the market becomes nervous. My point is simply: Do not confuse volatility with bankruptcy risk or short-term mNAV compression with a broken long-term case. If one believes in Bitcoin towards 2028–2029, then it is crucial to keep an eye on: 1. BTC per share 2. NAV per share 3. mNAV over time 4. debt and preference obligations 5. whether capital raises occur above or below NAV 6. whether Strategy continues to accumulate BTC That is where the analysis lies. Everything else is short-term noise.·2 t sittenMoneyman, the most interesting question is how MSTR handles the situation if mNAV goes below 1.0. Currently about 1.17 and it has fallen from just over 3 during the biggest hype. Should MSTR issue more common shares to be able to pay dividends on the preferred shares or sell BTC.
- ·21 t sittenBtc is down 1.4%, but strategy down -6%. Any explanation ?🤨·6 t sittenYes, bear markets can be brutal. I haven't even seen a bitcoin bull market ever, so I'm excited to see if I ever get to see it 😂·2 t sittenProfit is profit! One can always be wise after the event. But it's clear that it would have been more fun to sell at 126,000. I - like everyone else - wish I had bought at any time from bitcoin's beginning until 2020 or in the bear market 2022
- ·1 päivä sittenDoes anyone among you have a reasonable formula for the relationship between BTC and its price?
- ·2 päivää sitten@Marckzepper 500 USD within 6 months.18 t sitten18 t sittenIn 5 years its going to be in bear market and less than 1k.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 30.7. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 8.6. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 5.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 5.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 30.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.7.2025 |
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
43 päivää sitten
‧2 t 17 min
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 30.7. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 8.6. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 5.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 5.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 30.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.7.2025 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
- ·6 t sittenJust a little cold water in the blood regarding MSTR and everything else. The debate right now is too emotion-driven and people are not thinking analytically. When MSTR falls, the narrative quickly becomes: "the model is broken", "dilution is destroying us", "STRC is a problem", "they will have to sell BTC to pay dividend". But one needs to separate things. MSTR is not Bitcoin 1:1. It is a stock with Bitcoin exposure, capital structure, mNAV, debt, preference shares, software business, and investor sentiment. Therefore, MSTR can easily fall more than BTC in the short term. It is not proof that the case is dead. This is precisely the volatility one pays for when choosing MSTR instead of pure BTC. The most important concept is mNAV. When the market is optimistic, it pays a premium over the value of Strategy's Bitcoin holdings. When the market is nervous, the premium falls. This means that MSTR can underperform BTC in periods, even though the company still owns the same Bitcoin holdings. It is short-term pricing, not necessarily fundamental destruction. Dilution is also misunderstood. Yes, Strategy issues shares and other instruments. But dilution is only negative if the value per share falls. If the company issues capital above NAV and uses the money to buy more Bitcoin, it can actually increase the BTC value per share. That is the whole point of the model. The real question is therefore not: "will there be more shares?" The real question is: "does BTC per share and NAV per share increase over time?" - YES! If the answer is yes, then the issuances are not classic destructive dilution. It is capital allocation. STRC and the preference shares must, of course, be taken seriously. They create ongoing obligations. But it is not automatically a sign of weakness. It is part of Strategy's attempt to build a capital structure around Bitcoin, where different investors can choose different risk: some want MSTR with high upside, others want more bond-like/dividend-like exposure. The problem only truly arises if three things happen simultaneously: Bitcoin falls or goes sideways for a long time, mNAV continues to compress, and capital markets close for Strategy. This is a possible risk scenario, but it is not the same as the company being in trouble because mNAV falls from week to week. Too much emphasis is also placed on small BTC sales. A sale of 32 BTC out of a holding of over 800,000 BTC changes nothing fundamentally. It can create sentiment noise because the market reacts to the signal, but economically it is almost nothing. If Strategy started selling thousands of BTC and stopped accumulating, that would be a different discussion. That is not what we are seeing. In the short term, MSTR is very much about psychology. If BTC falls 5 %, MSTR can fall 10–20 %, because investors also price in lower mNAV, lower risk appetite, and fear of the capital structure. But it also works the other way. When BTC rises, and the market again wants to pay a premium for Strategy's model, MSTR can rise much faster than BTC. That is why one cannot assess MSTR based on a single day's price drop or a single week's sentiment. The long-term case is quite simple: If Bitcoin over the next 5–10 years becomes a much larger asset, and Strategy continues to accumulate BTC in a way where BTC per share grows, then the MSTR case is still intact. If Bitcoin, on the other hand, goes sideways for many years, mNAV remains low, and capital raises become expensive, then the case becomes weaker. That is the real debate. Not whether MSTR falls 20 % in a month. Not whether 32 BTC are sold. Not whether mNAV goes from 1.22 to 1.18. That is exclusively noise, volatility, and speculative emotions. The big variable is Bitcoin over time. Historically, Bitcoin has had violent corrections, but still made higher long-term bottoms. Power law models precisely show that Bitcoin over many years has moved in an ascending channel, even though it has had extreme drawdowns along the way. If that structure continues, Strategy is in a strong position because they own the largest corporate holding of BTC in the world. But one must be honest: MSTR is not for people who cannot handle volatility. It is not a stable stock. It is a leveraged Bitcoin/capital market strategy packaged into a publicly listed company. It can provide massive upside, but it can also fall sharply when the market becomes nervous. My point is simply: Do not confuse volatility with bankruptcy risk or short-term mNAV compression with a broken long-term case. If one believes in Bitcoin towards 2028–2029, then it is crucial to keep an eye on: 1. BTC per share 2. NAV per share 3. mNAV over time 4. debt and preference obligations 5. whether capital raises occur above or below NAV 6. whether Strategy continues to accumulate BTC That is where the analysis lies. Everything else is short-term noise.·2 t sittenMoneyman, the most interesting question is how MSTR handles the situation if mNAV goes below 1.0. Currently about 1.17 and it has fallen from just over 3 during the biggest hype. Should MSTR issue more common shares to be able to pay dividends on the preferred shares or sell BTC.
- ·21 t sittenBtc is down 1.4%, but strategy down -6%. Any explanation ?🤨·6 t sittenYes, bear markets can be brutal. I haven't even seen a bitcoin bull market ever, so I'm excited to see if I ever get to see it 😂·2 t sittenProfit is profit! One can always be wise after the event. But it's clear that it would have been more fun to sell at 126,000. I - like everyone else - wish I had bought at any time from bitcoin's beginning until 2020 or in the bear market 2022
- ·1 päivä sittenDoes anyone among you have a reasonable formula for the relationship between BTC and its price?
- ·2 päivää sitten@Marckzepper 500 USD within 6 months.18 t sitten18 t sittenIn 5 years its going to be in bear market and less than 1k.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt