🔥WHY STRC DIVIDENDS ARE A NON-ISSUE FOR STRATEGY🔥

Saylor has routinely said he expects a 30% Bitcoin CAGR over the next 20 years.

That is CRAZY growth, that we are all very excited for :)

Bitcoin's CAGR and the dividend % is the spread that Strategy is capturing.

What if the CAGR is only 15%, rather than 30%?

Is that 4% spread really worthwhile?

Yes. And it will blow your mind how much it is.

Setup

Assume Strategy issues $100 of STRC, paying an 11% cash dividend each year.

The $100 is swapped for Bitcoin that compounds at a 15 % CAGR.

No tax, no trading friction, no additional leverage. Pure spread math.

Year 1: BTC $115 | Divs $11 | Surplus $104 | Cover 10.4×
Year 2: BTC $132 | Divs $22 | Surplus $110 | Cover 6.0×
Year 3: BTC $152 | Divs $33 | Surplus $119 | Cover 4.6×
Year 4: BTC $175 | Divs $44 | Surplus $131 | Cover 4.0×
Year 5: BTC $201 | Divs $55 | Surplus $146 | Cover 3.7×
Year 6: BTC $231 | Divs $66 | Surplus $165 | Cover 3.5×
Year 7: BTC $266 | Divs $77 | Surplus $189 | Cover 3.5×
Year 8: BTC $306 | Divs $88 | Surplus $218 | Cover 3.5×
Year 9: BTC $352 | Divs $99 | Surplus $253 | Cover 3.6×
Year 10: BTC $405 | Divs $110 | Surplus $295 | Cover 3.7×

Coverage = BTC value ÷ cumulative dividends.

Because dividends pile up linearly (11 % × $100 × years) while BTC compounds exponentially (15 % CAGR), you get a two-phase curve:

Early years – ratio shrinks

Year 1 starts huge (10.45×) because only one coupon has been paid.

Each new coupon adds $11 to the denominator, so the ratio falls until compounding momentum catches up.

Around Year 7 the bottom is hit (~3.45×).

From that point on, 15 % growth outruns the extra $11 per year, so the ratio turns upward.

Later years – ratio accelerates upward. The longer the horizon, the wider the gap, because the numerator compounds while the denominator just adds.

That inflection around Year 7 is precisely where the convexity kicks in and Strategy’s advantage snowballs.

Even after paying 10 full years of 11 % coupons, Strategy still sits on ~3× more BTC value than it ever distributed.

Cost-of-capital vs BTC return:

Cost ≈ 11 % simple interest.

Return ≈ 15 % compound.

The compound-vs-simple dynamic means the effective spread compounds at ≈ 4 % but on an ever-growing base, producing a convex benefit (see green “Net Spread” line in the chart).

Economic power of the spread:

Strategy nets $2.95 in surplus for every $1.00 of cumulative dividends it pays over the decade.

Viewed as an IRR, the stream of –$11 coupons funded by +$100 upfront and a $405 residual pushes the project-level return well north of 50 %; the “equivalent” borrowing cost would have to exceed 100 % to turn NPV negative.

Put differently, BTC only needs to grow ≳ 11 % long-term for dividends to be entirely self-funded; any growth above that becomes incremental equity upside.

With Bitcoin’s historical CAGR far above 11%, the dividend looks more like a marketing expense than a true funding burden.

The larger the STRC program, the larger the daily BTC bid supplied by incremental issuance, creating a reinforcing loop:

STRC issuance → BTC purchase → price support → larger unrealized gains → even easier dividend cover.

Now do the math with a 30% BTC CAGR.

And remember there's already 75+ years of NAV coverage for dividends on the balance sheet.

STRC dividend risk is a rounding error.

Strategy is unassailable