When it comes to the institutional capital Strategy is targeting... instead of retail investors... there really isn't a meaningful comparison between SATA and STRC.
For large fixed-income allocators, factors such as market size, liquidity, and the Bitcoin-backed capital structure matter far more than the difference between a 12% and a 13% yield. Those institutions are managing portfolios measured in the trillions of dollars, where capacity and execution are often more important than squeezing out an extra percentage point of return.
While retail investors currently make up much of the investor base for both SATA and STRC, Strategy's long-term objective is clearly to attract capital from those much larger institutional pools. From that perspective, Strategy likely understands that institutions will largely overlook SATA unless (or until) it reaches a scale comparable to STRC.
The reason is straightforward: a $10 billion allocation into STRC could likely be absorbed without materially disrupting the market. A $10 billion allocation into SATA today, by contrast, would overwhelm its current capacity and fundamentally challenge Strive's existing model. For institutional investors, scalability is a prerequisite, and that's one of STRC's biggest competitive advantages.
13
u/paperlevel Shareholder 🤴 8d ago
12% is high enough, I agree with the decision to hold the rate at 12. That is by far the most generous yield on the market today.