At the beginning of July 2026, Strategy executed a transaction that drew widespread market attention—selling 3,588 bitcoins and cashing out approximately $216 million. This marked the company’s largest single bitcoin sale to date and broke its long-standing "buy-only, never sell" policy. For a time, the market viewed this event as a key risk factor for the Bitcoin price.
However, a team of analysts led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou, Managing Director at JPMorgan, offered a sharply different perspective in a report released on July 9. The report argued that Strategy’s sale was merely a short-term issue, and that Bitcoin’s true long-term structural risk comes from another direction—the expansion of permissioned blockchains.
As of July 10, 2026, according to Gate market data, Bitcoin was trading at $64,034. While market sentiment had partially recovered from the shock of Strategy’s sale, deeper discussions about Bitcoin’s long-term value proposition were only just beginning.
Why Strategy’s Sale of 3,588 Bitcoins Is Only a Short-Term Issue
Strategy’s bitcoin liquidation plan authorized the company to sell up to $1.25 billion worth of bitcoin to bolster cash reserves, pay preferred stock dividends, and optimize its capital structure. The 3,588 BTC sold in this transaction represented about 0.4% of its total holdings of 843,775 bitcoins. After the sale, the company still held roughly 844,000 BTC and $2.55 billion in cash reserves.
JPMorgan believes that while such sales can indeed increase short-term selling pressure, they do not pose a fundamental threat to Bitcoin. In terms of scale, the $216 million sale is relatively minor compared to Bitcoin’s average daily trading volume. In terms of motivation, this was a financial operation to pay preferred dividends, not a rejection of the company’s strategic direction.
More importantly, JPMorgan points out that Strategy’s new policy introduces "two-way flow risk" to the market—meaning both buying and selling are now possible. Still, this risk is fundamentally "avoidable." In contrast, another layer of risk is neither short-term nor something that can be influenced by individual actions.
Why the Expansion of Permissioned Blockchains Poses a Structural Risk to Bitcoin
The core argument of JPMorgan’s report is this: Bitcoin’s greatest long-term threat does not come from any single institution reducing its holdings, but from the way traditional financial institutions are adopting blockchain technology. If key financial activities such as tokenization, payments, and settlements ultimately take place primarily on permissioned private blockchains rather than on public, permissionless networks, the entire crypto ecosystem will face "structural devaluation."
The path of this structural devaluation is clear: Capital does not flow into native tokens on public chains, institutional funds bypass public blockchains in favor of private infrastructure, and on-chain transaction volumes slow down. This ultimately saps the vitality of the entire crypto ecosystem—and as the flagship asset of this ecosystem, Bitcoin will inevitably be dragged down as well.
JPMorgan analysts state bluntly: "In our view, the more important risk comes from the continued adoption of blockchain in traditional finance that circumvents public, permissionless networks." This is not a criticism of Strategy, but a systemic warning about the industry’s trajectory.
Why Institutions Prefer Permissioned Blockchains Over Public Chains
JPMorgan’s report provides a detailed analysis of why institutions are drawn to permissioned blockchains. These networks align more closely with traditional financial institutions’ operational requirements across several dimensions: privacy protection, KYC/AML compliance controls, clear governance mechanisms, higher transaction throughput, well-defined legal liability frameworks, and regulatory certainty.
These advantages are not just theoretical—they have already been proven in practice. JPMorgan’s own Kinexys platform—a permissioned blockchain network—has processed over $4 trillion in transactions to date, with an average daily volume exceeding $7 billion. This is not a pilot project, but a mature institutional infrastructure that moves real capital at scale, entirely independent of the public blockchain ecosystem.
When a Wall Street giant’s proprietary permissioned chain is already handling trillions of dollars in real transactions, the direction of institutional capital flows is no longer an open question.
Why the BIS and Regulators Side with Permissioned Blockchains
JPMorgan’s assessment is not unique. The report cites the position of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which has explicitly warned against using permissionless public blockchains as systemically important financial infrastructure.
In its 2026 annual economic report, the BIS further stated that public, permissionless blockchains (such as Bitcoin and Ethereum) struggle to meet the requirements of systemically important financial infrastructure in terms of scalability, legal accountability, and settlement finality. Instead, the BIS advocates for a "unified ledger" architecture that brings tokenized central bank money, commercial bank deposits, and various assets under a regulated framework.
Meanwhile, SWIFT’s blockchain-based shared ledger is already in development, with plans to launch real-time transactions within the year. Central bank digital currency (CBDC) projects such as the digital euro and digital yuan are also making steady progress. The expansion of these regulated channels is institutionally reinforcing the advantages of permissioned infrastructure.
The Direction of Tokenization and the RWA Market
The tokenization of real-world assets (RWA) offers the best window into this trend. JPMorgan’s report notes that the RWA tokenization market is currently approaching $50 billion in size, with a significant portion of activity based on Ethereum.
However, JPMorgan believes this is more of an "early-stage experiment" rather than the market’s final structure. As technology matures, core functions such as issuance, custody, settlement, and asset lifecycle management may gradually migrate to private or permissioned infrastructure that meets requirements for identity verification, confidentiality, and operational resilience. Public chains may increasingly serve only for distribution and limited secondary trading.
Tokenized deposits are the most illustrative example. As digital claims on bank deposit balances, tokenized deposits remain within the framework of bank regulation and deposit insurance. If these deposits are widely adopted in the regulator-preferred "non-transferable" form, they could substantially displace public-facing stablecoins in institutional payment scenarios. JPMorgan has cited the cases of the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) and Securitize as evidence of this trend.
Is a Reversal Possible in the Public vs. Permissioned Blockchain Debate?
JPMorgan does not treat the expansion of permissioned blockchains as an irreversible certainty. The report outlines three potential scenarios that could invalidate the above thesis.
First, a hybrid model could become mainstream, with public and permissioned blockchains each playing distinct roles and coexisting within the ecosystem. Second, under more favorable regulatory regimes (such as the passage of the US "Clarity Act"), stablecoin adoption could rise significantly. Third, Bitcoin could continue to serve as "digital gold," functioning as a hedge against devaluation and operating independently from other crypto asset sectors.
However, JPMorgan also notes that even if the Clarity Act passes this year, the greater beneficiaries may be bank-issued deposit tokens rather than public-facing stablecoins—potentially further strengthening the competitive advantage of permissioned chains. This assessment highlights the high degree of uncertainty surrounding the ultimate direction of regulatory change.
Conclusion
The value of JPMorgan’s research lies in redirecting market attention from short-term events to a deeper structural issue. Strategy’s sale of 3,588 bitcoins, raising $216 million—while notable in size—is, in the analysts’ view, just a ripple on the surface. What truly warrants caution is the undercurrent: tokenization, payments, and settlements are slowly but surely shifting toward permissioned infrastructure rather than public blockchain networks.
If this trend continues, Bitcoin will not face pressure from any single institution’s selling, but rather from a broader decline in ecosystem vitality—deteriorating liquidity, reduced capital flows, and slowing on-chain transactions. This is not merely a matter of price volatility, but a fundamental question of value proposition.
Of course, the debate over blockchain models is far from settled. The potential for hybrid models, regulatory changes, and Bitcoin’s unique position as digital gold could all alter the final outcome. Regardless, the competition between public and permissioned blockchains has already moved beyond Bitcoin price discussions and become the central issue shaping the crypto industry’s trajectory over the next decade.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What does JPMorgan see as the biggest long-term structural threat to Bitcoin?
According to the report led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou at JPMorgan, the greatest long-term structural threat is the adoption of private, permissioned blockchains by institutions and banks rather than public networks. If tokenization, payments, and settlements ultimately take place on permissioned chains, the crypto ecosystem will face structural devaluation—such as deteriorating liquidity and reduced capital flows—ultimately dragging down Bitcoin.
Why is Strategy’s Bitcoin sale not seen as a major threat?
Strategy’s sale of 3,588 bitcoins ($216 million) in early July was a short-term financial operation mainly to pay preferred stock dividends. The sale represented only about 0.4% of its total holdings, and the company still holds approximately 844,000 BTC. JPMorgan believes such sales may create short-term pressure but do not constitute the main structural threat to Bitcoin.
What is a permissioned blockchain, and how does it differ from a public chain?
A permissioned blockchain is a network where only authorized participants can access and validate transactions. Unlike public, permissionless blockchains such as Bitcoin and Ethereum (which anyone can join), permissioned chains offer greater privacy, KYC/AML compliance, governance, throughput, and regulatory certainty—making them more attractive to traditional financial institutions.
What scenarios could invalidate JPMorgan’s "permissioned chain threat" thesis?
JPMorgan outlines three scenarios that could challenge this thesis: a hybrid model where public and permissioned chains both play major roles; favorable regulation (such as the Clarity Act) driving widespread stablecoin adoption; and Bitcoin continuing to serve as "digital gold," providing a hedge independently of other crypto sectors.
