لماذا تراجع حيازة المؤسسات للبيتكوين بنسبة 10% في ثلاثة أشهر.. وماذا يحل محلها؟

It was not one force driving the sell-off but four, each exposing a different fracture in the corporate-treasury model that had defined Bitcoin's institutional era. And perhaps the most telling detail is that fresh institutional capital has not stopped flowing in—it has simply changed vehicles.

The Four Forces Behind the 130,000-BTC Reduction

1. Strategy: Selling at a Loss for the First Time

Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy), the world's largest corporate Bitcoin holder, sold 1,638 BTC between July 27 and August 2, 2026, at an average price of $63,957—roughly $11,500 below its $75,419 cost basis . The sale raised $104.7 million, of which $52.4 million went to preferred-stock dividends and $52.3 million to STRC share repurchases .

The sale marked a historic inflection point. For the first time, the company that had built its brand on relentless accumulation began liquidating to self-fund obligations . It was the third discrete BTC sale of 2026 and the sixth consecutive week without a purchase . The sale followed an $8.33 billion Q2 operating loss, largely driven by impairment on its digital-asset holdings . Strategy's holdings fell to 842,138 BTC, down from 843,775 .

2. MARA Holdings: From HODL to Active Treasury Management

MARA Holdings, the largest publicly listed Bitcoin miner by BTC held, sold 20,880 BTC in Q1 2026 for roughly $1.5 billion to fund operations and debt repurchases, then sold another 2,213 BTC in Q2 at an average price of $73,078 . It did not buy a single Bitcoin in Q2 .

The company's BTC holdings fell 29% year-over-year to 35,577 BTC . It reported a $611.3 million net loss and a 27% revenue decline for Q2 2026 . MARA had formally rewritten its treasury policy in March 2026, authorizing the sale of accumulated stockpile Bitcoin for the first time—a stark departure from its earlier HODL approach .

3. Bhutan: A Sovereign Treasury in Quiet Liquidation

The Royal Government of Bhutan has liquidated roughly 70% of its Bitcoin portfolio since October 2024, cutting reserves from approximately 13,000 BTC to around 3,774 BTC . On August 7, 2026, Bhutan moved another 434.87 BTC (~$28 million), resuming outflows after a month-long pause .

Total 2026 outflows exceeded $233 million, with sales funding the Gelephu Mindfulness City project and national infrastructure . Mining inflows have slowed sharply after the 2024 halving, leaving the kingdom as a "pure seller" with no fresh supply coming in .

4. The Collapse of the Equity-Premium Feedback Loop

The broader institutional reduction was amplified by a roughly 50% Bitcoin price decline—from an all-time high near $126,000 down to about $64,000 . That price collapse broke the equity-premium feedback loop that had fueled Strategy's accumulation: the practice of issuing stock at a premium to its net-asset value and using the cash to buy more BTC. CryptoQuant explicitly warned that the corporate treasury trade is "breaking" as the model that amplified demand collapses .

The Counter-Narrative: $626 Million in ETF Inflows

While direct corporate treasuries were selling, spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a structural inflow. In early August 2026, net inflows reached $626 million, led by BlackRock's IBIT .

This bifurcation—corporations selling, ETF investors buying—explains how the broader institutional category could decline 10% even as fresh capital entered the ETF wrapper. Institutional demand is not retreating from Bitcoin. It is rotating from self-custody corporate treasuries toward regulated ETF vehicles that offer liquidity, custody, and balance-sheet convenience.

What This Means for Bitcoin's Institutional Thesis

The three-month sell-off represents the most severe structural test for the original corporate-treasury model since its inception. The equity-premium arbitrage that made Strategy's approach viable depended on a rising Bitcoin price. When that price fell 50%, the model cracked.

But the simultaneous inflow into spot ETFs suggests a more nuanced picture: institutions are not abandoning Bitcoin exposure; they are re-evaluating the wrapper. ETFs offer regulatory clarity, lower counterparty risk, and easier portfolio management. Whether that ultimately supports a larger institutional base over the long term or simply relocates the same demand is the open question.