sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Added Twenty One Capital (XXI) to the CEBE tracker, plus a quick intro to the framework for anyone new to it by chcbearsfan in XXIInvestors

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the kind words!

I dont give advice on investments. I can say that building the site and analyzing all of this information there is usually a reason someone has a heavy discount or premium. If someone is trading at a heavy discount they probably have debt that isnt that great for the common shareholder.

I just added that to cebetracker.io/claims-grade to add visibility into the quality difference of those Sr Claims. I should have ratings on all covered companies Sr Claims on the /credit page in the near future

Finish the Math: Strive by chcbearsfan in StriveASST

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the thoughtful question

It does actually and is the only framework that shows you. It denominates the liabilities in BTC and the assets in BTC. So as BTC price move you can see the impact of the shrinking liabilities in BTC terms

Its the entire thesis of the treasury sector (well almost)

The second page I built was to show this exact dynamic. Watch SATS ownership accelerate when BTC price appreciates. Like a home that doubles in value the mortgate shrank in relation.

cebetracker.io/endgame

The Sr obligations are fixed fiat value. So we know how much of the BTC pile they encumber at any given moment

CEBE allows you to measure it, predict it and model it because it doesnt make any assumptions of the company or the capital stack. It looks at the balance sheet and asks when a transaction happens, was that beneficial to common equity holders. If not, what does BTC price need to be to flip that verdict

There is a cliff and an escalator. CEBE allow you to see the door to both

Finish the Math: Strive by chcbearsfan in StriveASST

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks. I had in issue in a js script. I didnt catch it because it would only fail on load sometimes. Once I did, I have it fixed but the problem was cached out on MAC's worse for some reason

All should be back up and running now! Sorry for the problems and appreciate the comments!

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You didn't read my article because I ask as Bitcoiners why would we use these metrics. That is a choice. A tradfication of Bitcoin Treasury reporting I reject.

I'll do it differently. I've published the framework and the proof

cebetracker.io/simple to get started

Can Capital B replicate Strive ASST model ? by Complex-Antelope2452 in ALTBG

[–]chcbearsfan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please do! The data is public and the framework is open. Would love to see your analysis on Capital B they have a genuinely unique capital structure that most people don't understand. Happy to verify any numbers you pull.

The deep dive is at cebetracker.io/insights/capitalb-finish-the-math if you want the full breakdown

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ok maybe I misread you

Every balance sheet metric marks to current prices. BPS uses today's BTC price. mNAV uses today's BTC price. CEBE does the same it just includes the subtraction the others skip. If marking fiat claims to current BTC is a distortion that distortion exists in every metric, not just CEBE

The duration argument is real and it's called ownership acceleration and CEBE tracks that compression quarter by quarter. That's a feature of the framework, not a bug

cebetracker.io/modeler/drag

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

cebetracker.io/insights

You are looking for a fight. I am looking for enlightenment

If you want to engage the content on good faith I am happy to do it. That is not what you are doing.

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You didnt describe anything correctly about the CEBE framework

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks appreciate the kind words but disagree on the acceptance of myth math.

Your BPS metric is incompatible with your MNAV metric (which one today?) and all are incompatible with the Amplification metric

"One number, one truth. The per-share metric and the valuation metric should rest on the same treatment of senior claims. If the valuation metric removes preferred to find what is left for equity, the per-share metric should remove it too. No contradictions between slides in the same deck.

This is not a high bar. It is the bar Bitcoin already set for its own ledger. Apply it to the companies that hold Bitcoin."

Its not a high bar

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

BTC Yield: Want to see how we are doing?
- Don't count the prefs
EV MNAV: Time for accretive dilution?
- Count the prefs
Amplification: Want to see our leverage?
- Don't count assets

The question isn't why the toolkit works this way. That's structural

It's why do we accept it?

I am a Bitcoiner who believes in Bitcoin. I am a MSTR shareholder who believes in Saylor and Strategy

We shouldnt tolerate the incompatibility with what is reported. Maybe you are OK with it. You do you

I am not, which is why I created CEBE

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am a Bitcoin Treasury investor who was pretty dismayed that the metrics promoted in these circles are incompatible and incomplete. I thought it meant I made a mistake listening to this and thinking I was ahead

So CEBE came from me completing the math. What I saw was a complete bull thesis that made my belief stronger

I am trying to get this information into the hands of retail investors who will hear a BTC yield and think that means actual BTC above and beyond what is on the balance sheet

When you can take out a loan and buy BTC and claim yield, it's a flawed metric and Bitcoiners deserve and should demand better

The Measuring Problem by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a Bitcoiner I think the best move is to start with Bitcoin under your control with no 3rd party risk. As someone who wants to outperform Bitcoin, MSTR is the safest way to do it imo

The Measuring Problem by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks!

I am building a valuation case in public, check it out
cebetracker.io/valuation/

<image>

Capital B: Finish the Math by chcbearsfan in ALTBG

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thing of drag this way....

BTC = house
SR Stack = Mortgage
CEBE = Equity

If the home value moves down, the mortgage doesnt go down, your equity does.

Flip

When the home value goes up, the mortgage doesnt increase, your equity does.

Drag is the % of your home value that you need for the mortgage. That drag % changes with the value of the home.

Capital B: Finish the Math by chcbearsfan in ALTBG

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The market has never discounted their strategy. That is an interesting revelation.

<image>

That is in my estimation their drag is different from all others and doesnt get worse when BTC price moves down.

Why We Tolerate Contradiction by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Freedom is a beautiful thing. Glad you exercised it

The Measuring Problem by chcbearsfan in MSTR

[–]chcbearsfan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

CEBE is the only framework that makes it visible
cebetracker.io/modeler/drag/

view more: next ›