DAT Research Report: From Coin Hoarding on-chain to the Financial Innovation New Paradigm of Equity Flywheel

1. DAT Market Overview

The Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) has become a new phenomenon at the intersection of capital markets and the crypto market in recent years. Its core logic is to raise funds through public equity financing tools—including listed company stocks, convertible bonds, ATM placements, PIPE private placements, and more—and allocate mainstream crypto assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum on the balance sheet, thereby creating returns for shareholders through operations and revenue management. Essentially, it is "using equity financing to purchase on-chain assets," allowing traditional secondary market investors to gain exposure to leveraged, structured, and tradable crypto assets in the form of stocks. This mechanism not only bridges the gap between on-chain and traditional finance but also creates new trading logic and investment narratives in the market.

Compared to ETFs, DAT exhibits significant differences across multiple dimensions. First is the difference in liquidity pathways. The operation of ETFs relies on a cumbersome subscription and redemption mechanism, requiring the involvement of authorized participants and market makers, with fund settlement often taking one to two days, while DAT stocks can be traded instantly in the secondary market, whose efficiency is more aligned with the liquidity characteristics of on-chain assets. Secondly, there is a difference in pricing metrics. ETFs typically anchor to net asset value (NAV), with relatively limited fluctuations, making them more suitable for long-term allocation; DAT stocks, on the other hand, are dominated by market value (MV), with greater price elasticity and more significant volatility, allowing hedge funds and arbitrage institutions to utilize the premiums and discounts for structured operations. The third distinction lies in the leverage structure. ETF funds generally lack leverage capacity, while DAT companies can incorporate leverage through methods such as convertible bonds, ATM issuance, and PIPE financing, expanding asset sheets and amplifying excess returns during upward cycles. Finally, there is the issue of discount protection. The premiums and discounts of ETFs are quickly corrected by arbitrage mechanisms, whereas if DAT stocks fall below their treasury net value, it effectively allows investors to buy the underlying crypto assets at a discounted price, theoretically creating a form of downside protection. However, this protection is not absolute; if the discount arises from passive deleveraging, and the company sells underlying assets to repurchase stocks, it may trigger even more severe downward pressure.

Since 2025, DAT has accelerated its development in the direction of Ethereum, becoming the focus of market attention. BioNexus was the first to announce the Ethereum treasury strategy, marking the first year of corporate holding of ETH; BitMine (BMNR) disclosed in August that it holds 1,523,373 ETH, becoming the largest Ethereum treasury in the world, with a market value reaching several billion dollars; SharpLink (SBET) has continued to increase its holdings of ETH through high-frequency ATM financing, with holdings exceeding 800,000 ETH, and has pledged almost all of its assets, thereby directly converting the productive asset attributes of Ethereum into cash flow. These companies have brought traditional investors' funds into crypto assets through equity market financing activities, promoting the institutionalization and financialization of Ethereum prices. Meanwhile, the activity of decentralized exchanges also reflects the liquidity characteristics of this new mechanism. In August 2025, the spot trading volume on the DEX platform Hyperliquid once exceeded that of Coinbase in a single day, showing that funds are rapidly migrating between on-chain trading, the equity market, and the derivatives market, with DAT becoming an important node in this cross-market capital flow. Some companies have even introduced innovative methods in shareholder incentives. For example, BTCS announced a method of attracting long-term investors through ETH dividends and loyalty rewards, which not only enhanced market stickiness but also countered stock borrowing and short selling.

However, the risks of DAT cannot be ignored. Its model relies on a premium flywheel during bull markets: rising stock prices drive financing increases, and the funds from the increases are used to purchase more crypto assets, which further boosts the mNAV, stimulating stock prices to continue rising. This cycle can yield substantial returns during upward cycles, but in bear markets, it may become a risk amplifier. When the mNAV shifts from a premium to a discount, investors lose confidence in management, and companies often stabilize valuations by selling underlying assets to repurchase shares, creating a negative feedback loop. If multiple DATs enter a discount state simultaneously and take similar measures, the market could face systemic risks. Leverage is another key concern. DAT companies widely use convertible bonds, short-term financing, and equity issuance to layer on leverage, which can amplify returns during upward movements but may trigger margin calls or forced liquidations during downturns. Once on-chain asset prices drop significantly, concentrated selling will impact the market, especially in cases where assets like Ethereum have a high concentration, making the risks even more pronounced.

Market research has simulated possible scenarios. In the baseline scenario, companies gradually adjust their positions through over-the-counter trading, which exerts limited downward pressure on ETH prices; in a severe scenario, if 20%-30% of Ethereum treasury holdings are concentrated and sold off within a few weeks, the price could drop to $2500-$3000; in an extreme scenario, if regulatory tightening occurs or funding chains break, over 50% of holdings could be forced to liquidate, leading to Ethereum prices potentially falling to $1800-$2200. Although the probability of extreme situations is low, their potential impact should not be underestimated. It is worth noting that the compensation of DAT executives is often closely tied to stock prices, which leads them to prefer short-term measures in the face of stock price discounts, such as selling coins to repurchase stocks to boost market value, rather than adhering to a long-term strategic hold. This misalignment of governance and incentives makes DAT more susceptible to pro-cyclical amplification risks under pressure scenarios.

Nevertheless, the prospects for DAT remain promising. In the next three to five years, DAT is likely to develop in parallel with ETFs, forming a complementary pattern. ETFs provide stable β exposure, suitable for passive investors; DAT offers high elasticity and engineered financial return opportunities, making it more suitable for hedge funds, family offices, and institutional investors seeking excess returns. More importantly, the DAT model is expanding from Bitcoin and Ethereum to quality altcoins, granting some projects a capital market channel similar to an "IPO moment," further institutionalizing the crypto industry. The gradual clarity of regulatory frameworks, the improvement of information disclosure mechanisms, and the diversification of shareholder incentive tools will jointly determine the long-term sustainability of DAT. Overall, DAT represents an important experiment in the integration of capital markets and crypto markets. It may become a milestone for a new generation of institutional financial instruments or, due to its pro-cyclical characteristics, become an amplifier of market volatility. For investors, effectively utilizing the complementarity of ETFs and DAT, and flexibly adjusting strategies between mNAV premiums and discounts, may become the core issue in the upcoming era of crypto finance.

2. Industry Development and Key Events

In 2025, the most striking phenomenon in the market evolution of Digital Asset Treasuries (DAT) is undoubtedly the concentrated explosion towards Ethereum. Unlike the previous reserve logic centered around Bitcoin, Ethereum is gradually becoming the main character of corporate treasuries. BioNexus was the first to announce its Ethereum treasury strategy in March, officially incorporating ETH into its corporate balance sheet and expanding its holdings through equity financing. This move is seen as a landmark event, symbolizing the entry of Ethereum into the era of corporate holding. Unlike previous exchanges like Coinbase that held ETH for operational needs, BioNexus's approach is to treat Ethereum as a strategic reserve asset, sending a signal of institutionalization to the outside world. This not only enhances the company’s visibility in the capital markets but also guides funds to begin recognizing Ethereum as having a reserve status equivalent to Bitcoin. Subsequently, BitMine (BMNR) pushed this trend to a climax. In August, the company disclosed that its Ethereum holdings had reached 1.52 million coins, valued at over $6 billion, accounting for about 1.3% of Ethereum's circulating supply. This scale rapidly made BitMine the 'Ethereum version of MicroStrategy', gaining significant voice in both the capital markets and on-chain narratives. The BMNR model is similar to that of MicroStrategy in its early days: continuously expanding its balance sheet through convertible bonds and equity financing, forming a flywheel of 'financing - buying coins - valuation increase - refinancing', which drives a mutually reinforcing cycle between stock prices and on-chain assets. The market's evaluation of it is polarized: on one hand, it is considered that BMNR has milestone significance in shaping the institutionalization of Ethereum; on the other hand, there are concerns that high leverage and concentrated holdings may amplify systemic risks in the event of a market reversal. Nevertheless, BMNR has become one of the most closely watched DATs in 2025, directly altering the funding landscape for ETH.

In parallel, SharpLink (SBET) has adopted a higher frequency and more aggressive expansion strategy. SBET continuously issues new shares in the secondary market through an ATM financing mechanism, disclosing new financing and buying scales almost every week. By the end of August, the company had accumulated more than 800,000 Ethereum, almost all of which were used for on-chain staking. This strategy directly converts Ethereum's productive asset attributes into cash flow, allowing the company to have not only paper gains on its balance sheet but also actual revenue returns. SBET's model has attracted a lot of attention, as its weekly disclosures and high transparency provide confidence to investors while also making its strategy easier for the market to quantify, track, and speculate. Critics argue that this "full staking" strategy increases exposure to security and liquidity risks of on-chain protocols, but supporters emphasize that this path of converting ETH into productive assets could become a best practice for DAT.

It is worth noting that BTCS has demonstrated another innovative approach in this round of competition. The company launched a combination plan of "ETH dividends + loyalty rewards," which distributes dividends using the held Ethereum while setting loyalty reward provisions to encourage shareholders to transfer their stocks to designated transfer agents and hold them until early 2026. This way, investors can not only receive cash and ETH dividends but also enjoy additional incentives through long-term holding. This practice not only enhances shareholder stickiness but also suppresses stock lending and short-selling behavior to a certain extent, thereby stabilizing market sentiment. Although there are doubts about the sustainability of "distributing dividends in ETH" from the outside, it undoubtedly shows DAT's flexibility and creativity in financial engineering, and highlights the differentiated response strategy adopted by the company when facing the risk of stock price discounts.

At the same time, changes at the trading level are also worth noting. In August 2025, the spot trading volume of the decentralized exchange Hyperliquid once exceeded that of Coinbase in a single day, which is highly symbolic. For a long time, CEX has been regarded as the core of cryptocurrency asset liquidity. However, with the continuous emergence of DAT stock financing and the deepening interaction between on-chain funds through DEX and the equity market, the liquidity landscape is undergoing reconstruction. Hyperliquid's trading volume surpassing Coinbase is not an isolated incident but a signal of the gradual integration of capital markets and on-chain trading. Funds are forming a new cycle through "DAT stock financing - enterprises purchasing on-chain assets - staking/re-staking to generate returns - investors arbitraging and trading." This cycle not only accelerates the integration of on-chain and traditional markets but may also amplify liquidity shocks during market pressures.

Overall, the evolution of the DAT market in 2025 showcases a new ecological prototype. BioNexus has opened the door to the ETH treasury strategy, BitMine has established its leading position in the industry through large-scale holdings, SharpLink has explored different paths with high-frequency financing and full collateralization strategies, while BTCS has created unique shareholder incentive tools in financial engineering. Meanwhile, the changes in trading volume at Hyperliquid reflect the liquidity restructuring between capital markets and on-chain markets. These cases collectively illustrate that DAT is not merely a simple model of "enterprises buying coins," but has evolved into a comprehensive financial innovation encompassing multiple dimensions including financing methods, asset allocation, yield management, and shareholder governance. In the future, this ecosystem will continue to expand and evolve, potentially becoming an accelerator for the institutionalization of crypto assets, or it may become an amplifier of market volatility due to leverage and liquidity mismatches. Regardless of the outcome, DAT has profoundly changed the narrative of capital markets for crypto assets in 2025 and has become a key focus that global financial observers must closely track.

3. Risks and Potential of DAT

As the DAT model rapidly develops, the risks and systemic concerns hidden behind it are becoming more pronounced. On the surface, digital asset vaults provide new sources of funding and liquidity support for the market, but a closer analysis reveals that their operational mechanisms possess strong pro-cyclical attributes, which can amplify gains during a bull market and potentially exacerbate losses during a bear market. This double-edged sword effect makes the role of DAT in the capital and cryptocurrency markets particularly sensitive and complex. First is the leverage risk. The expansion logic of DAT often relies on equity issuance and convertible bond financing. During a bull market, as stock prices and market values rise, companies can raise large amounts of capital at a lower cost, thus further increasing their holdings of Bitcoin or Ethereum, creating a flywheel effect of valuation and position. However, this leverage model can quickly backfire when the market turns. If the prices of underlying assets experience a significant correction, repayment and margin clauses on the debt side may be triggered, forcing companies to passively liquidate their positions to address funding gaps. Leverage amplifies returns, but it also amplifies risks, which is particularly dangerous given the high volatility of cryptocurrency assets.

The second is the discount crisis. The valuation of DAT is anchored to what is called mNAV, which is the ratio of the company's market value to the fair value of its treasury-held crypto assets. In a bull market, mNAV is usually significantly above 1, and investors are willing to pay a premium for the company's future expansion and earnings. However, once market sentiment reverses and the stock price falls below the net asset value, mNAV shifts from a premium to a discount, and investor trust in management quickly diminishes. In such cases, companies often sell underlying ETH or BTC to repurchase shares in order to repair valuation and appease the market, attempting to pull the stock price back near net asset value. However, this practice essentially sacrifices the long-term holding strategy in exchange for short-term stock price repair, resulting in a temporary reduction of the discount, but the market bears additional selling pressure, creating a vicious cycle.

Liquidity shocks are another concern. The scale of crypto assets held by DAT is becoming increasingly large, and once these holdings are concentrated and released, the impact on the market could be beyond expectations. Especially in situations where decentralized exchanges lack liquidity, coordinated sell-offs by multiple DATs could likely lead to a waterfall decline in the market. Past experiences show that assets with high concentration tend to exhibit non-linear price declines when faced with passive deleveraging. In other words, even if the overall scale of the sell-off only accounts for a small portion of the circulating market value, it could still lead to severe volatility due to insufficient liquidity support. This risk is particularly pronounced in tokens with high holding concentration, such as Ethereum. The uncertainty of regulation is another sword hanging over DAT's head. Currently, there are no unified standards regarding the accounting treatment, information disclosure, leverage ratio limits, and retail investor protection for treasury-type companies. Differences in attitudes across different jurisdictions could change DAT's living environment at any time. For example, regulators may require companies to disclose on-chain addresses and staking risks, limit their leverage ratios, or prohibit dividend payments in token form, all of which could significantly impact DAT's financing capabilities and market narrative. For DAT, which heavily relies on capital market financing and investor confidence, such regulatory changes not only mean increased costs but could also directly undermine the sustainability of its model.

In addition, the mismatch between governance structure and incentive mechanisms is also a potential issue of the DAT model. Most DAT executives' compensation is directly linked to stock prices, which can stimulate the enthusiasm for expansion during a bull market, but may lead management to adopt short-term operational strategies during a bear market. When stock prices are discounted and investor confidence declines, executives may prioritize selling underlying assets to buy back shares, boosting market value to protect their own compensation, rather than adhering to a long-term holding strategy. This incentive mismatch not only undermines the strategic stability of DAT but also increases the likelihood of pro-cyclical sell-offs, exacerbating market fragility. Beyond risk analysis, scenario simulations provide a more intuitive understanding. In the baseline scenario, assuming a mild correction in ETH prices, DAT companies may gradually sell off through over-the-counter transactions to smooth market impacts, resulting in limited price shocks. However, in a severe scenario, if 20%-30% of ETH treasury holdings are sold off concentratedly in a short period, the market may not be able to fully absorb it, and ETH prices could potentially drop to the range of $2500-$3000. This level is close to a 30% drop from current prices, enough to reshape market sentiment. In an extreme scenario, if over 50% of holdings are forced to liquidate due to a funding chain break, tightening regulations, or systemic crises, the price of ETH could even plummet to $1800-$2200. This drop would completely erase the gains made since the initiation of the DAT wave, bringing the market back to early 2025 levels. Although the probability of extreme scenarios occurring is low, considering DAT's high reliance on financing and leverage, once triggered, the market impact will be profound. Overall, the rise of DAT undoubtedly injects new narratives and liquidity into the crypto market, but it is not a robust 'new normal' in itself. Its pro-cyclical characteristics determine that it is both an amplifier of bull markets and a source of risk during bear markets. For investors, understanding the leverage chain under the DAT model, the dynamics of mNAV premiums and discounts, and the incentive structure of management is key to assessing its sustainability. In the absence of comprehensive regulation and risk isolation, DAT resembles a high-leverage financial experiment, which may promote the institutionalization of crypto assets or become a trigger for market turmoil. In the coming years, the risk management capabilities of DAT and the maturity of the regulatory framework will determine whether this model can genuinely transition from speculative narratives to a robust financial instrument.

Looking ahead to the next three to five years, Digital Asset Trusts (DAT) are likely to develop in parallel with ETFs, together constructing a systematic investment landscape for the crypto market. ETFs have proven their advantages in compliance, stability, and low costs, providing robust β exposure for passive investors, pension funds, sovereign funds, and more. In contrast, DAT, with its higher flexibility, more complex capital engineering, and the attribute of directly holding on-chain assets, is naturally more suitable for hedge funds, family offices, and actively managed institutions seeking excess returns. This division of market structure indicates that ETFs and DAT do not have a zero-sum competitive relationship but rather complement each other, jointly promoting the deep integration of traditional capital and the crypto market. From the perspective of asset expansion, the investment scope of DAT is likely to no longer be limited to BTC and ETH. As the industry ecosystem matures, high-quality Altcoin projects may achieve a moment similar to an "IPO" through DAT, that is, by leveraging the equity financing of publicly listed company treasuries to establish large-scale on-chain positions in the early stages. This not only provides institutional endorsement for the relevant tokens but also creates a new narrative for capital markets. For example, core protocols related to Layer 2, decentralized data networks, or stablecoins may all become targets for future DAT allocations. If this trend materializes, DAT will not only be a leveraged tool for BTC/ETH but also a "booster" for the new generation of public chains and protocols in the capital market, significantly impacting the crypto ecosystem.

In terms of operational models, the engineering of DAT's revenue will become the next focus. Currently, some enterprises have begun to explore staking their held tokens to obtain on-chain interest income, converting it into cash flow to reward shareholders. In the future, this model is expected to expand into diversified methods such as options hedging, basis arbitrage, re-staking, and governance participation. Unlike traditional ETFs, which purely track prices, DAT can form a "dynamic treasury" through active management, obtaining on-chain revenue while enhancing its influence on the underlying ecosystem. This means that DAT is not only an asset holder but may also become an important governance participant in on-chain protocols, potentially evolving into a "systemic player" in the crypto economy. The gradual clarification of the regulatory framework will be a key factor for the sustainable development of DAT. Currently, different jurisdictions have not unified their attitudes towards DAT, with issues such as information disclosure, accounting standards, leverage ratios, and retail protection still unresolved. However, as the market size expands and the investor base grows, regulatory pressure is bound to increase. In the future, DAT may be required to disclose its on-chain address, clarify its holding size and staking ratio, and even regulate its dividend distribution model to ensure transparency and investor protection. In a sense, this will enhance DAT's compliance and credibility, making it easier to attract institutional funds, but it may also weaken the flexibility of its capital engineering. Stricter regulations are both a challenge and a necessary path for DAT to transition from a "financial experiment" to an "institutional tool."

In the long run, DAT has the potential to evolve into a quasi-financial intermediary in the crypto market. Its uniqueness lies in its ability to connect both the equity capital market and the on-chain asset market, forming a bridge for cross-market capital allocation. When investors purchase DAT shares, they are indirectly participating in the holding and operation of on-chain assets, while the DAT company brings traditional capital into the crypto space through equity financing. This bidirectional interaction will enable DAT to play an increasingly important role in global capital flow and asset allocation. Especially in the context where cross-border capital finds it difficult to directly invest in crypto assets, DAT may become one of the compliant channels, providing "indirect exposure" and thereby expanding the investor base for crypto assets. However, behind this bright prospect lies a significant systemic risk that cannot be ignored. The pro-cyclical nature of DAT means that it may act as an accelerator for price increases during bull markets, but it will amplify the depth of market declines during bear markets. Unlike the passive holdings of ETFs, DAT highly relies on equity market financing and the premium maintenance of mNAV. Once the market environment reverses, DAT's financing chain may quickly break, leading to large-scale passive deleveraging. In other words, although DAT has a broad prospect, whether it can truly grow into a robust institutional sector depends on its performance in risk management and regulatory adaptation.

Overall, in the next three to five years, the development of DAT will present two parallel trajectories. On one hand, it will continue to innovate by expanding the range of assets, embedding yield engineering, and enhancing on-chain participation, gradually building a unique competitive advantage and becoming a highly elastic supplement to ETFs; on the other hand, it will also gradually explore a more robust and sustainable model in the face of regulatory constraints, leverage control, and the real tests of market volatility. DAT is both a symbol of the integration of capital markets and crypto markets, as well as a reflection of pro-cyclical risks. Only by finding a balance between institutionalization and innovation can it truly become a new type of intermediary in the global financial system, promoting the transition of crypto assets from the margins to the mainstream.

IV. Conclusion

The rise of the Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) is undoubtedly one of the most iconic events in the capital markets and crypto industry of 2025. It is not only a new asset allocation tool but also an institutional experiment that combines equity financing with on-chain assets, representing a deep coupling of two major financial systems. Essentially, DAT directly binds the financing capacity of listed companies with the high volatility of blockchain assets, creating an unprecedented investment logic and market narrative. For investors, it provides a new channel for amplified returns while also introducing new risks for magnified losses. During bull market phases, the operational logic of DAT is particularly smooth. The premium on stock prices boosts the mNAV, making it easier for companies to raise funds through convertible bonds, PIPEs, or ATMs. The raised funds are further transformed into purchases of crypto assets such as ETH and BTC, and the expansion of the balance sheet, in turn, boosts market value, forming a "premium-financing-reinforcement" flywheel. This mechanism makes DAT an important catalyst for market rises, with its market value elasticity far surpassing that of traditional ETFs, and it has become a target pursued by hedge funds and high-net-worth investors. In this narrative, DAT is not only a product of financial innovation but also a core participant in the flow of funds and valuation expansion during bull markets.

However, the DAT in a bear market may present a completely opposite picture. As prices fall and mNAV shifts from a premium to a discount, market confidence in management begins to wane. To repair the stock price, the company may sell underlying assets to buy back shares, in an attempt to temporarily narrow the discount. However, this behavior often leads to increased selling pressure, accelerating the price decline, and causing more DAT to fall into a deleveraging predicament simultaneously. In this cyclical mechanism, DAT is no longer a stabilizer in the market but may become an amplifier of systemic risk. In other words, the risk of DAT is not merely the individual risk of a single company, but the impact it may have on the overall cryptocurrency market when multiple treasury-like companies sell off in tandem. From an investment perspective, the functional division between DAT and ETFs is becoming increasingly clear. ETFs are more suitable as foundational tools for long-term allocation, offering transparent, low-cost, and predictable β exposure; while DAT, with its high leverage, high elasticity, and active return management characteristics, has become an option for incremental allocation, especially suitable for institutions and individuals seeking excess returns and willing to take on risk. For family offices or actively managed funds, DAT provides capital engineering advantages that traditional ETFs cannot replicate, but it also carries potential liquidity risks and governance uncertainties. In the future, how investors find a reasonable combination between ETFs and DAT will become a core topic in asset allocation strategies.

In the next three to five years, DAT has the potential to grow into a institutional segment alongside ETFs. Its development path will mainly depend on three factors. First, regulatory clarity. Only when unified standards are established for accounting treatment, information disclosure, leverage ratios, and shareholder protection can DAT attract a wider inflow of institutional funds. Second, information transparency. Public disclosure of on-chain addresses, holding sizes, and staking ratios will become an important basis for investors to assess risk and valuation, and it is also a prerequisite for DAT to establish long-term trust. Third, market resilience. Whether the crypto market can maintain resilience under potential pro-cyclical shocks will directly determine whether DAT is a positive force for institutionalization or a risk source that exacerbates volatility.

If these conditions are met, DAT may become another milestone in financial history, similar to how ETFs did for index funds. From initial market experimentation to widespread application, DAT has the potential to redefine the boundaries between capital markets and crypto markets, allowing crypto assets to truly enter larger investment portfolios. However, if these conditions cannot be fulfilled, DAT may simply be a brief celebration, ultimately proving to be a "gamble on financial innovation and risk management" in history. The development trajectory of capital markets indicates that the emergence of each new tool brings both efficiency improvements and opportunities, along with unknown risks. The advent of DAT is an inevitable product of the current era, combining traditional financing logic with decentralized assets to create a brand new value capture method. However, its long-term success depends not only on market enthusiasm but also on the maturity of regulatory rationality, governance stability, and risk control mechanisms. Investors, enterprises, and regulators must recognize that DAT is not a risk-free arbitrage tool but a new challenge to the entire market structure. Ultimately, the future of DAT fundamentally depends on the joint shaping of the market and institutions. If regulation and market mechanisms can form a virtuous interaction, DAT has the opportunity to become an important bridge for the institutionalization of crypto assets; conversely, it may exacerbate market turmoil due to its pro-cyclical features and leverage chains, becoming a case of "financial alchemy" failure. Just as ETFs were questioned two decades ago but have since become cornerstone tools in global markets, the fate of DAT may also reveal itself in the coming decade. Regardless, its emergence has already etched a mark in the long river of capital markets that is destined to be remembered.