$SBET and $BMNR are in an interesting spot. At $22, $SBET trades around mNAV 1.2. At $63, $BMNR sits near mNAV 2.0. Two approaches make sense 1) High mNAV play ($BMNR) - Higher mNAV = more ETH per ATM share, faster ETH/share growth, boosted by high liquidity (Tom Lee’s velocity + liquidity). That growth justifies a higher multiple. Saylor already mentioned Strategy won't issue ATM under mNAV 2.5, only using prefs/buybacks instead, which means low mNAV slowing growth. 2) Low mNAV value ($SBET) — At mNAV 1.2 (PBR ~1.2), downside is small (~0.2). As it nears 1.0, bargain buyers likely step in, supporting price. Both are valid. Key overlooked fact: ETH Treasury is still nascent, and both started this strategy only 1~2 months ago. Neither has tapped CBs or prefs yet, but both have the scale/management to execute multiple capital-raising levers. Which means there are plenty of financing options/skills still to come that could boost their stock price. Likely outcome: when one’s valuation rises, capital flows to the other, as there will still be expectations for the other side (again, it's still early stage). But in 1~2 years, consensus will likely cement toward one - though it's unclear which one yet In addition, liquidity will stay concentrated in top-2 players—smaller ETH Treasuries lacking leverage over Capital Market won’t see the same flows (just like BTC & ETH vs. alts). So it seems to me that, at this point, $SBET’s lower mNAV offers better mid-term risk/reward, though I hold both. (and will hold both) Our emotions follow price - but historically, acting against that instinct has worked best in the long term.