The Harsh Truth About Michael Saylor and MicroStrategy That Nobody Talks About

Source: Coindoo Original Title: The Harsh Truth About Michael Saylor and Strategy That Nobody Talks About Original Link: Peter Schiff used his 2025 recap to deliver one of his most direct critiques yet of the corporate Bitcoin accumulation model, placing Michael Saylor and MicroStrategy at the center of the discussion.

While Bitcoin proponents continued to promote long-term narratives around adoption and scarcity, Schiff focused on something far less discussed – results.

Key Takeaways

• Schiff argues Bitcoin failed to perform in both risk-on and risk-off environments in 2025
• MicroStrategy’s stock collapse is viewed as a warning sign for corporate Bitcoin treasuries
• Liquidity risks could magnify losses if large holders attempt to exit
• Capital rotation into precious metals may accelerate Bitcoin’s downside in 2026

Performance Analysis

Schiff argues that 2025 exposed a core weakness in the Bitcoin investment thesis. During a year when the Nasdaq gained more than 20% and gold surged over 64%, Bitcoin ETFs ended the year down roughly 7.5%.

In Schiff’s view, this is significant because Bitcoin was expected to perform in at least one of two environments. If risk assets rallied, Bitcoin was supposed to benefit. If markets turned defensive, Bitcoin was marketed as an alternative store of value. Instead, it failed to participate in either trend.

Schiff emphasizes a classic market principle: when an asset does not respond to overwhelmingly bullish expectations, it often signals that all the good news has already been priced in. In his interpretation, Bitcoin entered 2025 priced for perfection – and spent the year repricing lower.

MicroStrategy’s Stock Performance

Schiff places particular weight on the performance of MicroStrategy’s stock itself. The company ended the year down about 47.5%, closing at a new 52-week low. Schiff notes that if MicroStrategy were part of the S&P 500, it would rank among the worst performers in the index.

What makes this especially troubling in his view is that MicroStrategy’s aggressive Bitcoin buying strategy has failed to deliver meaningful returns over time. Schiff calculates that over roughly five years of accumulation, the company’s Bitcoin purchases have generated an average annual return of around 3%.

He argues that MicroStrategy could have allocated capital to almost any other major asset class and achieved better results, without exposing shareholders to the same level of volatility and balance-sheet risk.

The Liquidity Problem

One of Schiff’s most pointed criticisms centers on liquidity. He argues that MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin position is far more difficult to exit than many investors assume.

If the company attempted to liquidate its holdings at scale, Schiff believes it would be unable to sell near its average purchase price. The act of selling itself would pressure the market, pushing prices lower and locking in losses. In other words, the exit is not as liquid as it appears on paper.

At the same time, MicroStrategy has relied on issuing stock and tapping capital markets to finance continued Bitcoin purchases and meet interest and dividend obligations. Schiff questions how sustainable this model becomes if Bitcoin continues to weaken and investor appetite for dilution fades.

The Critical Question for 2026

Schiff believes this is the key question heading into 2026. MicroStrategy has been one of the most consistent buyers of Bitcoin, often stepping in during periods of weakness. But he argues that this support is not infinite.

If MicroStrategy is forced to slow or stop buying in order to preserve capital or meet obligations, Schiff asks who replaces them as the marginal buyer. He points out that ETFs have already seen net selling as investors cash out, and he does not expect other corporations to step in at scale.

In his view, once the largest buyer retreats, the downside risk increases sharply.

Capital Rotation Dynamics

Schiff expects investor psychology to shift further in 2026. As underperformance continues, more investors may realize that holding Bitcoin did not just lose money – it also prevented them from participating in rallies elsewhere.

He believes this realization could trigger a broader capital rotation. Investors seeking to recover losses or improve returns may exit Bitcoin and move into assets that are breaking out, particularly precious metals.

Schiff argues that many investors will reach this conclusion not during panic, but during reflection, as they compare Bitcoin’s stagnation with the continued strength in gold and silver.