Bitcoin Magazine

Michael Saylor Explains Why Microsoft Should Buy Bitcoin

At Strategy World 2025, Michael Saylor issued a bold message to tech giants like Microsoft: skip the stock buybacks and buy Bitcoin instead.

“Microsoft is going to do a buyback,” Saylor said. “Buying Bitcoin would be 10x better than buying their own stock.” Backed by data, he made the case that corporate treasuries are leaving massive upside on the table by sticking with legacy capital strategies.

Over the last five years, Microsoft stock has returned an impressive 18% annually. But Bitcoin? It’s up 62% annually over that same stretch. “If the cost of capital is the S&P 500 at 14%, Microsoft is outperforming by 4%. Bitcoin is outperforming by 48%,” Saylor emphasized. “Bonds, by the way, are down 5%—underperforming by 19%.”

According to Saylor, Bitcoin is not just a better-performing asset—it’s a fundamentally different type of asset. “It’s digital capital,” he said. “Everything digital is better. Digital pictures are better. Digital relationships, digital messages, digital videos. Don’t believe me? Ask Kodak. Ask Polaroid.”

He compared Bitcoin to a digital building—one that’s invisible, untouchable, and immortal. “Everything you hate about a physical building, that it’s visible and the mayor can rent control it and weather can strike it—everything you hate about it goes away,” he said. “Instead, the building becomes invisible, indestructible, immortal, and teleportable.”

Saylor argued that a company like Microsoft—which built its dominance on digital infrastructure—should now be powered by digital capital. “Microsoft should be powered by digital capital,” he said plainly. 

He also pointed to Bitcoin’s unique advantage as an uncorrelated asset. “You’re going to hold something on your balance sheet that’s not correlated to everything else,” he said. “You can do stock buybacks, dividend out your cash flow, or you can embrace the future.”

For Saylor, that future is clear. A company sitting on billions in cash should consider the upside of Bitcoin—a decentralized, borderless, censorship-resistant asset with the best performance record of the past decade.

“You’ve got to find something that’s not exposed to competitors, countries, corporations, creditors, currencies, or cultures,” he said. “And that’s Bitcoin.”

Watch the full live stream here. 

This post Michael Saylor Explains Why Microsoft Should Buy Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Jenna Montgomery.

Bitcoin Magazine

Jack Maller’s Strike Launches Bitcoin-Backed Loans for Eligible U.S. Customers

Strike has unveiled one of its most powerful and innovative features to date: bitcoin-backed loans. For the first time, eligible users in select U.S. states can now borrow cash against their bitcoin holdings without having to sell their cryptocurrency. This option allows individuals to access liquidity without losing their long-term exposure to bitcoin’s price appreciation.

The loans range from $75,000 to $2,000,000, offering flexible terms of up to 12 months. Interest rates start at 12% APR, and Strike proudly offers these loans with no origination fees, making the service more attractive compared to many traditional lending options.

This launch reflects a growing trend among long-term bitcoin holders. According to blockchain data from April 2025, 63% of bitcoin supply hasn’t moved in over a year, signaling strong conviction among holders. On Strike, more than 90% of bitcoin purchased is withdrawn to cold storage, showing that users tend to view bitcoin as a long-term investment rather than a short-term trade. Many of these holders are unwilling to sell their bitcoin due to its strong performance history, and now, with Strike’s new loan offering, they won’t need to.

Strike is also introducing bitcoin-backed loans for businesses, with amounts ranging from $10,000 to $2,000,000. Business owners will benefit from the same competitive rates, flexible terms, and straightforward application process. This move opens up new opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises to obtain working capital without needing to liquidate bitcoin held on their balance sheets.

In addition, Strike offers flexible repayment options—borrowers can repay monthly or make a lump-sum payment at maturity. Users can also adjust their loan-to-value (LTV) ratio by adding more collateral if needed, reducing the risk of liquidation during volatile market conditions.

The process is both simple and secure. Borrowers post bitcoin as collateral, receive cash in their accounts, and manage the loan entirely through the Strike app. Once the full loan amount, along with any accrued interest, is repaid, the bitcoin is safely returned to the user. There are no credit checks, no long approval processes, and no taxable events triggered by selling assets.

By offering this new loan service, Strike is attempting to help expand the financial utility of bitcoin. It brings modern financial tools—typically reserved for traditional assets like real estate or stocks—into the world of Bitcoin. The company has partnered with vetted third-party capital providers to ensure secure custody and smooth loan execution. 

This post Jack Maller’s Strike Launches Bitcoin-Backed Loans for Eligible U.S. Customers first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Oscar Zarraga Perez.

Bitcoin Magazine

Samara Asset Group Launches Bitcoin CPI as a New Inflation Benchmark

In corporate finance, inflation is often accepted as an unavoidable force—something to hedge against, but never escape. Every fiscal model, investment thesis, and capital plan ultimately bends around it. But the way we measure inflation is rarely questioned.

The Consumer Price Index (CPI), the world’s default inflation gauge, measures price changes of a basket of goods in fiat currency. But here’s the problem: fiat currencies are designed to lose value. This means we’re measuring rising prices with a yardstick that’s shrinking.

Now, Samara Asset Group, an executive member of Bitcoin For Corporations (BFC), is challenging that convention.

They’ve launched the world’s first Bitcoin Consumer Price Index (BTCCPI)—a bold new benchmark that prices the same CPI basket in Bitcoin instead of fiat. It’s a subtle shift with profound implications: Bitcoin isn’t just an asset—it may be a better measure of value.

A Yardstick That Doesn’t Melt

Think of CPI as a thermometer—only the mercury keeps rising not just because the heat is increasing, but because the scale is broken.

Traditional CPI always trends upward, not necessarily because goods become more valuable, but because the purchasing power of fiat currency is constantly eroded by inflationary policy.

Samara’s BTCCPI flips the framing.

By expressing the same CPI basket in Bitcoin, the index reflects what happens when measured against a supply-capped, non-sovereign monetary standard. And what it reveals is striking: over the long term, prices trend downward.

The BTCCPI doesn’t ignore Bitcoin’s volatility—but it reframes it. In short-term windows, prices fluctuate. But across longer timeframes, Bitcoin holds purchasing power far better than fiat.

This is not just a reframing of inflation. It’s a more honest way to assess whether capital is holding its value—or being silently diluted.

What It Means for Corporate Treasuries

Corporate finance teams think in terms of performance, preservation, and predictability. But preservation is the one that’s hardest to measure—especially in fiat terms.

The BTCCPI offers an emerging class of Bitcoin Treasury Companies a new tool: a way to benchmark the real-world strength of their treasury strategy.

A company that holds Bitcoin on its balance sheet isn’t just making a speculative bet—it’s aligning its capital with a monetary system that is structurally deflationary.

This changes the story you can tell shareholders.

It reinforces the idea that your treasury isn’t just surviving inflation—it’s resisting it. That you’re anchoring corporate value to a global, neutral, incorruptible base layer.

In that light, BTCCPI is more than a chart. It’s a signal. A tool to communicate value preservation in a world where most assets quietly erode.

Why Samara’s Move Matters

Plenty of firms talk about inflation. Samara built a new way to measure it.

Their launch of BTCCPI is not a thought experiment or a marketing stunt. It’s a live, data-driven benchmark—transparent, methodologically grounded, and freely available to the public.

That’s the kind of leadership the Bitcoin For Corporations network exists to highlight.

Samara is showing how a Bitcoin-native company can contribute to the broader corporate finance toolkit—building infrastructure that serves investors, treasurers, analysts, and decision-makers beyond its own business.

It also signals something deeper: that Bitcoin is no longer content to play defense. It’s building a new system—with new metrics, new levers, and new standards of truth.

Toward a New Benchmark for Honest Capital

CFOs have always relied on trusted benchmarks: CPI, LIBOR, the 10-year yield, the S&P. But each of those reflects a world built on fiat assumptions.

Bitcoin offers something different. A monetary system where supply is fixed, issuance is transparent, and value isn’t manipulated by policy or politics.

Samara’s BTCCPI is one of the first attempts to use that system as a lens, not just a ledger.

It invites us to ask: what if we’ve been measuring inflation incorrectly? What if the signal we’ve been using to manage capital is inherently distorted?

And what if there was a better benchmark—not just for inflation, but for honest capital?

Thanks to Samara, we now have the beginning of an answer.

This post Samara Asset Group Launches Bitcoin CPI as a New Inflation Benchmark first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Bitcoin Mempool: What Is It For?

Everyone who has used bitcoin has made use of the mempool, or a mempool. So what is the mempool?

Well technically, there is no such thing as “the” mempool. Every individual full Bitcoin node operates its own mempool, a cache of valid bitcoin transactions that have been broadcast to the network but have yet to be confirmed in a block. Nodes exchange messages with each other to see what transactions they have or not, and exchange ones they don’t have. 

Each mempool is its own independent island essentially, with its own set of unconfirmed transactions, and sometimes its own configuration variables and settings. There is a size value to configure, set to 300 MB by default. In addition to this there is a minimum feerate that dynamically adjusts itself, and can have a configured value. This is used to decide which transactions to kick out of your mempool when it gets full and more transactions keep coming. There are a few other configurable options, such as the datacarrier and datacarriersize options affecting transactions containing OP_RETURN outputs. 

Different nodes have different reasons for running a mempool, and therefore different needs, but it is ultimately through everyone in synchrony running their own mempools interacting with each other that those individual needs are met. 

Think of each mempool as a literal pool, all connected to each other by channels in the ground. The larger a mempool is the deeper the pool in the ground is. Miners, exchanges, block explorers, these are all going to be the deepest pools. They all have different reasons motivating them to want to know of every unconfirmed transaction that is waiting to get into a block. Miners, to be sure they have the most profitable transactions for their next block. Exchanges, to be sure they are aware of all pending transactions. Block explorers, because their entire service is displaying as complete a dataset about the blockchain and mempool as possible. Your average nodes only really need to be deep enough to contain the top feerate slice of the “mempool.” 

Now think of each transaction as a drop of liquid, the higher the feerate, the denser the drop of liquid. These drops flow in the channels between the pools, and upon arriving at each pool, a drop received is duplicated and then sent on through the channels to any other pool that hasn’t gotten that drop already. As pools fill up, upon overflowing the less dense liquids (lower feerates) will spill over the edge and out of the pool first. 

Eventually some lucky miner gets to scoop a size-restricted amount of liquid out of the bottom of its pool, and dump that into the newest glass tank in a long, snaking line of glass tanks being filled with liquid to sit there forever (the blockchain). This is just a way to think about the system intuitively and encompass most of its dynamics. 

This arrangement of pools interlinking serves different purposes for different users. 

Transactors 

Users making transactions have two uses for the mempool. First and foremost, is to get their transactions to the miners. If they don’t get to a miner’s mempool, then there is no possible way for them to wind up in a block. Mempools interlinking and sharing transactions with each other guarantees that eventually, once a transaction is put into one mempool, it will wind up in the mempools of all of the miners. Having a robust and decentralized network to guarantee that transactions will eventually get from a user to all the miners regardless of changing and fragmented connections on the network is a valuable thing. 

The second use is fee estimation, which is especially important for Layer 2 users who could at any time have to ensure a response transaction to an invalid state is confirmed in a timely manner. It is possible to get some degree of fee estimation by just looking at the feerate of transactions in those blocks, but that does not tell you anything about the current state of the mempool after the most recent block. It doesn’t account for sudden spikes, opportunistic actors flooding the mempool, or the next wave of a growing transaction spike that hasn’t finished yet. Without a view of the mempool, fee estimation cannot be sure it is taking into account the current state of pending transactions. 

Receivers

When you receive bitcoin, your node verifies that transaction as well as the entire block containing it. The transaction paying you is broadcast, winds up in a miner’s mempool, they find a block, that block is broadcast to the network, and then your node downloads and verifies it. 

Except that’s not how that actually works (unless you disable your node’s mempool and run in blocksonly mode). Your node validates each transaction when it is first received in its mempool and caches that as a valid bitcoin transaction. When a miner finds a block, they actually only relay the blockheader and a small piece of compressed information, for lack of a better simple explanation, that can be used to figure out which transactions are in a block. Your node then grabs the pre-validated transactions, verifies the header, and if it all passes, forwards the “compact block” onward. 

This optimization is actually why miners no longer depend on centralized and permissioned relay networks like FIBRE, formerly maintained by Matt Corrallo, and the short-lived Falcon Network, which used to be necessary for miners to connect to in order to guarantee low block relay latency to other miners due to the poor relay speed across the peer-to-peer network. 

Miners

Miners obviously want to see everything. They are profit-driven entities that want to be able to select from the largest set of pending transactions possible the ones that include the highest paying fee. This is how they maximize profit and earn revenue to continue expanding their operation and remain competitive. 

They literally get money out of the mempool. Their incentive to acquire any valid fee-paying transaction is so strong that they have, historically, presently, and almost certainly in the future, built numerous systems, and even informal arrangements available socially, designed to allow users to directly submit transactions to the miners rather than through the open peer-to-peer network. 

Block Explorers, Chain Analytics, Etc.

They, like miners, want to see every pending transaction that has been created and broadcast to the world. The major difference between the groups is miners directly monetize these transactions collecting fees, blockchain explorers and analytics companies indirectly monetize those transactions by displaying, analyzing, and providing that analysis of the information in a product that is monetized. 

I can’t point to any concrete examples involving cached mempool data, but chain analytics companies have been known to regularly buy privately acquired metadata regarding transaction activity on-chain. They have also been known to operate sybil Bitcoin nodes that peer as widely as possible with nodes across the entire network to be able to narrow down which set of nodes originally broadcast a transaction. 

Block explorers as well monetize visual displays of blockchain and mempool data, their entire business model is focused around that. Access to more data to display to their users is more information to potentially monetize if useful or novel ways to display that information or information derived from it. 

Information Wants To Flow

All of these different classes of users benefit from there being “a” public mempool because of one simple dynamic: information flows freely across them. As long as there is a sufficient fee to get past minimum relay filters, it is consensus valid, and does not present a legitimate denial of service or resource exhaustion risk to individual nodes, it provides value for every class of user in propagating across each individual mempool in the network. 

Without a functional public mempool, the only viable alternatives to all of these different uses for individual users is centralized solutions or an unmanageable chaos of slapdash and disorganized attempts at fragmented public mempools that each user will need to individually track. 

That not only introduces the potential for manipulation of feerate data, deceiving users, and Miner Extractable Value concerns caused by private relaying of transactions. Without a healthy and open public mempool, these are the types of issues that Bitcoin will have to confront. 

In a follow-up article I’ll be looking at these issues, as well as different types of mempool filters and why they exist. 

This post The Bitcoin Mempool: What Is It For? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Shinobi.

Bitcoin has continued to show weakness in price movement, with limited upside momentum over the past several weeks. The cryptocurrency has declined by 22.3% in the last month alone, bringing its price down to $83,191 at the time of writing.

The drop reflects ongoing uncertainty in the broader crypto market, as investors are struggling with reduced risk appetite and a lack of strong bullish catalysts.

Whale Accumulation Patterns Echo Previous Bull Market Phases

Despite the downtrend, recent on-chain activity suggests that certain investor cohorts remain confident in Bitcoin’s long-term value. In particular, whale addresses—wallets holding between 1,000 and 10,000 BTC—have demonstrated a historical correlation with Bitcoin’s price trends.

According to CryptoQuant contributor Mignolet, the current market cycle bears a resemblance to the 2020 bull cycle, where these whales exhibited accumulation behavior during bearish sentiment phases.

Mignolet noted that these patterns occurred three times throughout the 2020 cycle, each coinciding with brief drawdowns in price. In the current phase, similar accumulation activity is being observed among whale entities, particularly those with holdings in the 1,000 to 10,000 BTC range.

These patterns, as Mignolet suggests, may indicate that these market leaders are not exiting their positions, despite price pressure. Notably, the significance of whale behavior lies in its historical influence on market direction.

As long as whales remain in accumulation mode, it could provide a base of support for the broader market and reduce the likelihood of further rapid declines. However, this dynamic does not eliminate the possibility of continued volatility, especially if broader market sentiment does not improve.

Bitcoin Short-Term Holders Show Signs of Capitulation

In contrast to whale activity, short-term holders (STHs) are showing signs of distress. Another CryptoQuant analyst, Darkfost, highlighted that the Short-Term Holder Spent Output Profit Ratio (SOPR) has remained below 1.0 for over two months, currently hovering around 0.98.

This metric compares the selling price of Bitcoin with its acquisition price. When it falls below 1, it suggests that holders are selling at a loss—often viewed as a sign of capitulation.

STH Capitulation

“When this ratio drops below 1, it signals capitulation among STHs, often leading to short-term price declines.

We can confirm this trend by observing the $BTC being sent to exchanges at a loss.” – By @Darkfost_Coc

Link https://t.co/BUIo9caGck pic.twitter.com/QfNfFpT9VL

— CryptoQuant.com (@cryptoquant_com) March 31, 2025

Additionally, on-chain data shows that approximately 46,000 BTC have been sent to exchanges at a loss in recent weeks, highlighting the stress among STHs.

Historically, periods of heavy short-term capitulation have often preceded market bottoms, as weak hands exit positions and longer-term investors take advantage of the discounts.

Featured image created with DALL-E, Chart from TradingView

After showing signs of recovery last week, Bitcoin appears to have lost its upward momentum once again. The cryptocurrency was closing in on the $90,000 psychological level but has since reversed direction, falling by 6.4% over the past week to hover around $82,000 at the time of writing.

This decline has placed renewed attention on market metrics that suggest the rally may have been short-lived. Amid this downward movement, several on-chain analysts have raised questions about whether recent price trends reflect real demand or speculative behavior.

Particularly, insights from CryptoQuant contributors point to warning signs, including a divergence between market capitalization and actual network activity.

NVT Indicator Signals Caution Amid Low Transaction Volume

In a recent post titled “Manipulative Moves or True Value? A Bitcoin and NVT Analysis,” CryptoQuant analyst BorisVest pointed to the Network Value to Transactions (NVT) ratio as a critical metric for understanding current market dynamics.

The NVT ratio is calculated by dividing Bitcoin’s market capitalization by its daily transaction volume. According to BorisVest, Bitcoin’s elevated NVT Golden Cross reading indicates a high market cap against low transaction activity — a combination that historically suggests price inflation driven by speculative interest rather than organic growth.

BorisVest emphasized that periods with a high NVT often precede market corrections. In contrast, when the NVT falls into the green zone — signaling a low market cap with rising transaction volume — it may present a stronger foundation for price appreciation.

As of now, the metric suggests Bitcoin’s recent price rise lacks transactional support, and continued pullbacks remain possible unless volume returns to the network.

Bitcoin Speculators Absent, Sentiment Remains Cautious

Adding to the cautious outlook, another CryptoQuant contributor known as crypto sunmoon highlighted the role of leverage in driving crypto bull markets.

The analyst pointed out that funding rates have recently “dead-crossed,” which occurs when short-term funding rates fall below long-term rates, often indicating bearish sentiment among traders.

According to sunmoon, this shift suggests that speculators are currently unwilling to take on risk — a key component needed to fuel bullish price movements.

The analyst concluded that the return of speculative trading behavior, typically marked by rising funding rates and leveraged positions, is essential for reigniting upward momentum in Bitcoin.

Until then, market sentiment may remain subdued, with sideways or declining price action more likely. According to these CryptoQuant analysts, watching Bitcoin’s transaction volumes and funding trends will be crucial in determining whether Bitcoin is set for a renewed breakout or further consolidation.

Featured image created with DALL-E, Chart from TradingView

Bitcoin Magazine

The Bill Miller IV Interview: Bitcoin as the Global Denominator of Capital

Summary: The Bill Miller IV Interview

Bill Miller IV, CIO of Miller Value Partners and Bitcoin 2025 speaker, joins Bitcoin Magazine’s “The Culture Bit” to lay out a markets-first case for Bitcoin as the world’s ultimate denominator of capital.

Bill explains why Bitcoin is more than digital gold: it’s a response to engineered outcomes, financial entropy, and institutional inertia. He hits hard on why Michael Saylor and Strategy’s ‘strategy’ matters, why more corporations will follow, and why the time for fence-sitting on Bitcoin is over for investors of all-types.

This should come as no surprise given comments on Bitcoin by his father Bill Miller III who revealed a “very big” Bitcoin position in 2022 after the cryptocurrency made up approximately half of his asset allocation.

Drawing from over a decade of investing experience in the space, Bill walks through how Bitcoin solves fundamental failures in fiat monetary systems—not with hype, but with game theory, governance, and first-principle design. Bill offers a powerful endorsement of Bitcoin, noting: “I buy Bitcoin every single day. It’s the last thing I’d ever sell.”

Follow along for a deep dive on how one of Bitcoin’s biggest bulls and longest-time investors is navigating the Bitcoin market in 2025 and beyond.

WATCH the full on Bitcoin Magazine YouTube, X, Rumble and the Bitcoin Magazine Podcast

This post The Bill Miller IV Interview: Bitcoin as the Global Denominator of Capital first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Bitcoin Magazine.