Gross vs EV vs net mNAV
Gross mNAV, enterprise-value (fully-diluted) mNAV, or net (CEBE) mNAV: which is the correct way to value a Bitcoin treasury company? The BTC Prague 2026 debate left it unsettled, and for a leveraged company the three lenses can disagree completely. Galaxy Mind does not pick a side. It publishes all three live, with dated and cited senior-claims figures, so you can read each company through whichever you trust.
Right now Strategy (MSTR) reads 0.62x on gross mNAV, 1.03x on an enterprise-value basis, and 1.05x net of its senior debt and preferred. Same company, three different verdicts. That gap is the entire debate.
All three lenses, live
| Company | Gross | EV / diluted | Net (CEBE) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSTRStrategy 🇺🇸 | 0.62x | 1.03x | 1.05x |
| XXITwenty One Capital 🇺🇸 | 0.67x | 0.85x | 0.81x |
| MPJPYMetaplanet 🇯🇵 | 0.66x | pending | pending |
| ASSTStrive Inc 🇺🇸 | 0.73x | 1.00x | 1.00x |
Gross = market cap ÷ BTC value. EV / diluted = (market cap + debt + preferred − cash) ÷ BTC value. Net (CEBE) = market cap ÷ (BTC value − senior claims). Refreshed every 5 minutes · senior-claims figures hand-sourced from filings and dated on each per-ticker page. Pending where claims are not yet sourced.
Go deeper
Frequently asked
What is the difference between gross and net mNAV?
Gross mNAV divides a treasury company's market cap by the full value of the bitcoin it holds, ignoring its capital structure. Net (CEBE) mNAV divides by the bitcoin left for common shareholders after senior claims (debt and preferred, net of cash). The more leverage a company carries, the wider the gap · a stock that looks like a discount on gross mNAV can sit at or above NAV once its converts and preferred stack are accounted for.
What is fully-diluted or EV mNAV?
Enterprise-value (fully-diluted) mNAV adds the notional value of debt and preferred to the numerator instead of subtracting from the bitcoin side: (market cap + debt + preferred − cash) ÷ bitcoin value. At BTC Prague 2026 Michael Saylor argued mNAV should be calculated this way · including the notional value of convertible debt, preferred, and common. It is always greater than or equal to gross mNAV.
Does mNAV use enterprise value or market cap?
Both are used, and that is the crux of the debate. The standard, headline mNAV uses market cap (gross mNAV = market cap ÷ bitcoin value). Critics, including NYDIG, argue plain market-cap mNAV understates the true cost of a leveraged treasury because it ignores the debt and preferred stack, and that an enterprise-value version, (market cap + debt + preferred − cash) ÷ bitcoin value, is the more honest read. Galaxy Mind publishes both, plus the CEBE net view, side by side, so the difference is explicit rather than hidden inside one number.
Which mNAV is the right one?
There is no single agreed standard, which is exactly what the BTC Prague 2026 debate was about. Gross is the simplest and most comparable; EV / fully-diluted reflects the full claim stack as Saylor frames it; CEBE net is the conservative view of what common shareholders actually own. Galaxy Mind publishes all three live, with dated and cited senior-claims figures, so you can read the company through whichever lens you trust. Not financial advice.
Why do the three numbers differ so much for MSTR?
Strategy carries a large convertible-note and preferred stack. That leverage barely moves a debt-free company's numbers but pulls MSTR's three lenses apart: its gross mNAV can read like a discount while its net (CEBE) mNAV is higher, because the senior claims sit ahead of common shareholders. The live table above shows the current spread.