The MicroStrategy/Strategy playbook is now being run on three continents. More than two dozen non-U.S. listed companies — most notably Metaplanet in Tokyo, Hut 8's restructured Canadian operations, and several smaller Brazilian and Scandinavian issuers — have announced material Bitcoin treasury positions over the past twelve months. The largest of the non-U.S. names now hold positions in the high four-digit BTC range, and Metaplanet alone has crossed 17,000 BTC after a series of equity raises and convertible issuances through the year.
The pattern is most pronounced in Japan, where Metaplanet's transformation from a budget-hotel operator into the country's flagship Bitcoin-treasury company has produced one of the strongest single-stock rallies in the Tokyo market over the past two years. Several smaller Tokyo-listed issuers have followed, with names that previously traded as corporate shells reinventing themselves around BTC accumulation. The pattern has drawn enough attention that the FSA has begun explicitly engaging on the disclosure adequacy of these strategies, particularly around the use of convertible debt to fund accumulation.
In Brazil, three publicly listed companies — Méliuz, Bitfarms's local restructured arm, and one mid-cap technology issuer — have announced multi-year treasury programs. The Brazilian context is distinctive in that BTC adoption is partly a hedge against the structurally inflationary domestic environment as well as a portfolio-diversification play. The accumulated positions remain modest in absolute terms but have driven outsized share-price moves and have, in several cases, materially shifted the balance-sheet composition of the issuers.
Canadian and Scandinavian issuers round out the visible cohort. Hut 8's restructured operations have continued to accumulate BTC alongside its mining business; several smaller Canadian Venture Exchange-listed companies have followed similar paths. Norwegian and Swedish issuers, particularly Aker ASA's H100 Group, have built positions through convertible debt and rights issues. The cumulative effect across the international cohort is that public-equity Bitcoin exposure now exists across at least 12 distinct stock exchanges in jurisdictions outside the United States.
The international fragmentation matters strategically. Public markets now offer something they did not in the last cycle: a real menu of Bitcoin-equity exposures across multiple jurisdictions, with different tax treatments, regulatory regimes, governance structures, and corporate forms. For allocators who want geographic diversification within a Bitcoin-treasury framework, the options have proliferated dramatically. Some Japanese family offices, for example, prefer the domestic treatment of Metaplanet equity to direct BTC exposure for tax and reporting reasons. Brazilian institutional accounts have similar structural preferences for local listings.
The pressure point — the question that haunted the original MicroStrategy thesis and that haunts every treasury-company copycat — is whether the model is sustainable through a multi-quarter price freeze. The mechanism depends on equity trading at a premium to underlying NAV, and the premium across the international cohort has compressed in tandem with MSTR's through November. Several of the smallest international names now trade at slight discounts to NAV, the configuration in which the model genuinely breaks. Bitwise's flagship treasury-company index has underperformed BTC by 18 percentage points over the past month, the widest negative spread the index has produced.
"The international diffusion of the playbook is genuinely interesting, but the underlying constraint is unchanged from the original," said one strategist who covers the cohort. "Every one of these companies depends on premium-to-NAV to keep accumulating non-dilutively. None of them have solved that constraint." Whether the model survives a true bear-cycle test is the question setting up 2026 for the entire cohort. If premiums collapse across the complex through a sustained price freeze, the international diffusion of the strategy may end up looking less like global validation and more like the late-cycle adoption that historically marks the end of a particular financial model.
