Europe’s Bitcoin treasury playbook won’t be a copy of Strategy: PBW 2026

TL;DR
European companies are unlikely to adopt Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin treasury strategy due to significant differences in capital market structures compared to the US. Executives at Paris Blockchain Week 2026 emphasized the need for a localized approach to Bitcoin treasury strategies.
Key points
- European companies exploring Bitcoin treasury strategies
- Differences in US and European capital markets
- Constraints on issuing financial instruments vary
- Local market infrastructure is being considered
- Europe's Bitcoin treasury model will evolve locally
Mentioned in this story
European companies exploring Bitcoin treasury strategies are unlikely to replicate the playbook pioneered by Michael Saylor’s Strategy, according to industry executives, who pointed to structural differences between US and European capital markets.
Speaking at Paris Blockchain Week 2026, Thomas Vogel, a partner in the Paris and Frankfurt offices of Latham & Watkins, said the constraints on issuing financial instruments in Europe differ significantly from those in the US, making a direct replication of the model difficult.
“If you issue convertibles in the US, the constraints are not the same as when you issue them out of a French balance sheet or a balance sheet in Europe,” Vogel said, pointing to differences in market depth, regulation and investor behavior.
Alexandre Laizet, who leads Bitcoin (BTC) strategy at France-based treasury firm Capital B, said European firms are instead looking to local market infrastructure, including French public markets and Luxembourg-based structures, to raise capital tied to Bitcoin exposure.
The remarks suggest Europe’s Bitcoin treasury model is likely to evolve as a local adaptation rather than a direct copy of Strategy’s US playbook.

Panel discussion on the Bitcoin treasury model in Paris. Source: Paris Blockchain Week
Europe’s listed holders remain small
A growing number of European public companies now hold Bitcoin on their balance sheets, but the market remains fragmented across small and mid-cap names.
According to data from BitcoinTreasuries.net, Germany-based Bitcoin Group SE held 3,605 BTC worth about $268 million at the time of writing, though it has not disclosed its average cost or profit and loss.
Related: EU adviser says ‘MiCA 2’ is likely as crypto market matures: PBW 2026
Capital B held 2,925 BTC at an average cost of $99,932 per Bitcoin, reflecting a roughly 25.6% unrealized loss. In contrast, Sequans Communications, also based in France, held 2,139 BTC, with cost and performance data not disclosed.
Other European names show similar pressure from recent price moves. Netherlands-based Treasury held 1,111 BTC at an average cost of $111,857, representing about a 33.5% unrealized loss, while Sweden’s H100 Group held 1,051 BTC at an average cost of $114,615, with an unrealized loss of around 35.1%
The gap in scale remains significant compared with the US. On Monday, Strategy acquired 13,927 Bitcoin for about $1 billion in a single week, bringing its total holdings to 780,897 BTC.
Magazine: Bitcoin will not hit $1M by 2030, says veteran trader Peter Brandt
Q&A
Why can't European companies replicate Michael Saylor's Bitcoin treasury strategy?
European companies face different constraints in issuing financial instruments compared to the US, making direct replication challenging.
What local market structures are European firms considering for Bitcoin exposure?
European firms are looking at local market infrastructures such as French public markets and Luxembourg-based structures to raise capital linked to Bitcoin.
How do US and European capital markets differ in relation to Bitcoin treasury strategies?
Differences include market depth, regulation, and investor behavior, which affect how financial instruments can be issued in each region.





