In the third quarter of 2026, Metaplanet made headlines by selling 10,000 Bitcoin (CRYPTO:BTC) for approximately $790 million. Shortly after, the Tokyo-listed company repurchased 11,000 Bitcoin for around $950 million. This left Metaplanet with 1,000 more coins but also about $160 million less in cash.

Metaplanet presented this round trip as a proof of liquidity. The sale represented about a quarter of the 43,000 Bitcoin the company held in July, raising the question: Did this trading activity demonstrate that a Bitcoin-focused company could sell its assets when necessary?

A Bitcoin treasury company is a publicly traded business whose primary asset is Bitcoin. Investors buy into these companies largely to gain exposure to their Bitcoin holdings. Thus, the value of these holdings and the company’s ability to convert them into cash are crucial for their success.

Liquidity measures how easily an asset can be converted into cash without significantly impacting its price. For individual investors, selling small amounts of Bitcoin has little effect on the market. However, when a company tries to sell thousands of coins, the price can drop with each block sold. This price drop is known as slippage.

The lingering doubt surrounding Bitcoin treasury companies is whether they could liquidate a large position quickly without drastically lowering the price they receive. Many of these companies have yet to sell their Bitcoin, even during significant price drops like the 50% crash Bitcoin experienced in early 2026. That uncertainty persists until a company shows it can sell in a hurry.

The numbers suggest that Metaplanet sold its Bitcoin at an average price of about $79,000 per coin and then repurchased at an average of roughly $86,400 per coin.

If Metaplanet had bought back the 11,000 coins at the original sale price, it would have spent about $869 million—meaning that approximately $79 million of the $160 million difference funded the acquisition of the extra 1,000 coins. The remaining $81 million accounted for Bitcoin’s price increase by the time of the buyback.

In simpler terms, Metaplanet retained its extra Bitcoin but spent around $81 million just to make this liquidity demonstration. This is money the company could have saved by simply holding onto its assets. As of October 6, Bitcoin trades at about $86,050, which is close to the average buyback price, leaving the repurchased coins nearly stable in value.

Metaplanet sold a substantial block of Bitcoin worth $790 million and managed to buy back even more. This suggests some market depth, meaning the market could handle significant buying and selling at those prices. The company upheld a claim that many treasury firms only mention in their presentations.

However, Metaplanet timed its sale without external pressure, allowing an orderly market transaction. Critics raise concerns about a forced sale scenario, where prices are declining, buyers are scarce, and the seller needs to offload quickly. In such cases, the seller can’t wait for a more favorable moment, and that’s the advantage Metaplanet maintained throughout its transactions.

Additionally, the company did not provide details about the specific dates, trading venues, or counterparties involved in these transactions. This lack of information makes it difficult to determine whether the Bitcoin was traded on public exchanges or through a private deal, and a transparent sale across open markets would provide more insight into market depth.

CEO Simon Gerovich emphasized that their strategy was never simply about accumulating Bitcoin. Instead, Metaplanet aims to become a global financial platform built on Bitcoin. While the company generates income from options on its holdings, this ambition does not illustrate how a sale would unfold if the company faced urgency.

Ultimately, Metaplanet showed it can sell and repurchase a large portion of Bitcoin at its convenience, but it did not prove it could do so under pressure. The exercise cost the company around $81 million beyond the additional coins acquired, providing shareholders with a talking point instead of a definitive answer to the liquidity question.

Future disclosures could clarify the situation. If Metaplanet shares clear details on the dates, venues, and counterparties showing the sale of 10,000 Bitcoin took place during a downturn, it would strengthen the liquidity argument. Conversely, if the coins were sold to one private buyer, or if no details are released, it would only confirm that Metaplanet could sell when it wanted to, not when it needed to.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.