On September 3, 2026, eGain Corporation (NASDAQ:EGAN) reported fiscal 2026 fourth-quarter and full-year results. Full-year revenue rose 3% to $91.1 million, AI customer revenue grew 20%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed to $13.6 million, a 15% margin, up from 10% a year earlier. Operating cash flow reached a record $21.2 million.

Fiscal 2027 guidance calls for total revenue of $84.5 million to $86 million, below fiscal 2026’s total, with adjusted EBITDA margin guided to just 1% to 2%.

Iakov Filimonov/Shutterstock.com

A Gartner Nod and a Widening Pipeline Back the Long-Term AI Bet

Despite the weaker fiscal 2027 outlook, eGain still has several indicators that support management’s longer-term AI thesis. In July, Gartner released its inaugural Magic Quadrant covering customer service knowledge management systems, placing eGain Corporation (NASDAQ:EGAN) in the Leaders category and positioning it highest for ability to execute and furthest for completeness of vision. CEO Ashu Roy described the recognition as evidence that AI-focused knowledge management is emerging as a distinct layer of enterprise infrastructure. New customer wins rose 27% year-over-year, while the number of pipeline opportunities carrying at least $500,000 in annual recurring revenue doubled. Customers are also showing greater willingness to pay for pilot programs before moving to broader deployments, replacing the free-trial approach eGain had previously used. In one early testing and certification engagement, self-service resolution reached 95%. Cash increased to $73.3 million from $62.9 million, despite the company repurchasing 1.6 million shares for $11.5 million. Management is targeting $100 million to $120 million in AI customer ARR by fiscal 2030, compared with $54 million in fiscal 2026.

Analysts on Record Say the Legacy Runoff is Outrunning the AI Ramp

B. Riley’s Erik Suppiger cut his target to $6 from $10.50 on September 8, 2026, keeping a Neutral rating, saying eGain Corporation (NASDAQ:EGAN) beat fiscal Q4 estimates but issued fiscal 2027 guidance well below consensus, driven by accelerating churn in the legacy non-AI business that is significantly reducing next year’s revenue and profitability.

Roth Capital’s Richard Baldry went further the same day, downgrading eGain Corporation (NASDAQ:EGAN) to Neutral from Buy and cutting his target to $7 from $21, citing a meaningful revenue pullback and roughly breakeven adjusted EBITDA for much of the year as legacy attrition more than offsets what he called “modest” AI revenue growth.

The retention data supports the caution.

Trailing 12-month net retention for AI customers fell to 104% from 120% a year earlier, a decline tied to a large expansion deal with JPMorgan Chase that boosted the prior year’s figure, and net retention across all customers dropped more sharply, to 93% from 105%. Total SaaS ARR declined 1% year-over-year, and remaining performance obligations fell 5%.

What The Smart Money Sees

Against that mixed backdrop, hedge funds were hardly moving in one direction either. Renaissance Technologies trimmed its position 10% to 760,999 shares worth $4.79 million as of the second quarter of 2026. Arrowstreet Capital raised its stake 20% to 560,326 shares worth $3.53 million, while AQR Capital Management increased its position 29% to 124,845 shares worth $786,524.

Overall hedge fund ownership ticked up to 12 funds from 11 the prior quarter.

Short interest sits at 9.29% of float, a level that reflects the same skepticism now showing up in B. Riley’s and Roth Capital’s cuts, and shares trade at 76.92 times forward earnings as of September 18, 2026, a multiple that leaves little room for the AI transition to slip further behind the legacy decline.

Both analysts who cut their price targets on eGain Corporation (NASDAQ:EGAN) agree on the same problem: the legacy business is shrinking faster than the AI business can replace it, at least for fiscal 2027. Where they might eventually differ is whether Gartner’s endorsement and a pipeline that doubled in size are enough to make that transition worth waiting through.

For now, the target cuts from B. Riley and Roth Capital reflect a guide that trades a year of visible growth for a bet that pays off only once the legacy runoff is substantially complete by fiscal 2030.

While we acknowledge the potential of EGAN as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you’re looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.READ NEXT: 33 Stocks That Should Double in 3 Years and 15 Stocks That Will Make You Rich in 10 YearsDisclosure: None. Follow Insider Monkey on Google News.

Kalshi has filed with U.S. regulators to launch perpetual futures linked to individual US stocks, extending the “crypto-style” derivatives model into traditional equity trading. The prediction market operator submitted its proposed rule change to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and separately to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for approval on Friday, with the CFTC still pending a decision.

The proposal would create contracts without a preset expiration date and would rely on periodic funding payments between long and short positions to keep the futures price aligned with the underlying equities. Kalshi said the products would be treated as security futures and cleared through its CFTC-registered clearinghouse, Kalshi Klear.

Key takeaways

• Kalshi filed for single-stock perpetual futures with the SEC and CFTC; CFTC approval is still outstanding.
• No expiration date: contracts would remain open-ended, with periodic funding used to maintain price alignment.
• Security futures framework: Kalshi says the contracts would be cleared through its CFTC-registered clearinghouse, Kalshi Klear.
• Racing competitors: Coinbase submitted a related proposal the same day, and Payward (Kraken) also filed to expand the concept.

What Kalshi’s proposal would change in US equities

Perpetual futures are a derivatives format that has been widely used in crypto markets, where contracts do not settle on a predetermined maturity date. Instead, traders typically rely on a funding mechanism—payments exchanged between long and short positions—to encourage the perpetual contract to track the spot price of the underlying asset.

In Kalshi’s filing, the exchange described contracts tied to individual US stocks that would similarly avoid a fixed expiration date and use periodic funding payments to keep contract prices in step with the referenced equities. Kalshi also framed the offering as “security futures products,” which would place the proposal in a specific regulatory lane and allow for clearance via Kalshi Klear.

Coinbase and Payward join the single-stock perpetual push

Kalshi’s filing lands in the middle of a broader push by crypto firms and crypto-linked trading venues to bring perpetual-style derivatives to the US stock market.

According to a separate report, Coinbase submitted its own proposal to offer perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks on the same day. The timing suggests a coordinated wave rather than isolated experimentation.

Payward—the parent company of crypto exchange Kraken—also moved forward. Earlier coverage of the filings noted that Payward, through its Bitnomial Exchange, submitted a proposal to offer single-stock perpetual futures and said it intends to make them available to US traders on Kraken. Payward stated it plans to start with perpetual futures linked to 10 equities, naming Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon among them, and said it is working toward 24/5 trading.

Kalshi already has a precedent: crypto perps

This is not Kalshi’s first attempt at perpetual derivatives. The company already offers perpetual futures tied to cryptocurrencies in the US, including Bitcoin, Ether, Solana, and XRP. Kalshi received CFTC approval for its Bitcoin perpetual contract in May, demonstrating it has experience operating within the CFTC’s regulatory framework for these products.

That prior track record may be part of why Kalshi is now attempting to replicate the structure—perpetual contracts paired with funding payments—within a different underlying asset class. Still, investors should note that the regulatory posture for equities and security futures differs from crypto spot and crypto derivatives, even if the trading mechanics are familiar to perp users.

Regulatory momentum after the CLARITY Act setback

The filings come shortly after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the US Senate on Sept. 15, falling short of the 60 votes required to proceed. The outcome has raised questions about whether comprehensive crypto legislation would move forward quickly.

In a statement reported following the vote, SEC Chair Paul Atkins said the agency would “act decisively” within its existing statutory authority “with or without legislation.” That message aligns with what traders and market operators are now seeing: rather than waiting for new legislation, firms are moving ahead with product proposals that fit within existing regulatory pathways.

Kalshi’s SEC and CFTC submissions, along with parallel filings from Coinbase and Payward, effectively test how the current rulemaking and approval processes handle perpetual derivatives when the underlying assets are equities instead of crypto tokens.

What to watch next

For traders and market participants, the key next step is regulatory: the CFTC must decide on Kalshi’s proposal, and other filings—such as Coinbase’s and Payward’s—will also need to clear their respective review processes. The most important question is how quickly regulators will reconcile perpetual contract mechanics with security futures requirements, and whether the early product schedules described by applicants translate into approved, widely accessible trading.

On September 8, Fifth Third Bancorp (NASDAQ:FITB) said it had finished moving close to 600,000 former Comerica customers and 293 branches across Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan and Texas onto its own systems, a conversion carried out over Labor Day weekend. The move caps the integration that began when the two banks joined forces on February 1, and turns Fifth Third into the ninth-biggest bank in the country by size, with north of $300 billion on the balance sheet. The systems work is finished. Whether that translates into durable earnings growth is the part investors still have to watch.

A Bank Built For Growth Markets

Comerica customers now get the full Fifth Third menu, including the Momentum Banking suite, Early Pay and Extra Time, backed by roughly 1,500 branches and 21,300 ATMs. In Michigan, where Fifth Third already leads in retail deposits statewide and in Detroit, former Comerica customers get 60% more branch access and existing Fifth Third customers get 42% more. Texas is the bigger story. Fifth Third now runs 107 financial centers there and plans to spend nearly $1 billion over five years, adding 150 new centers by 2029 in one of the country’s fastest-growing state economies. By 2030, the bank expects roughly 1,750 branches total, with more than half sitting in Texas, the Southeast, Arizona and California.

The early numbers back up the strategy. Fifth Third pulled in $2.5 billion of consumer deposits from its Comerica Southwest marketing push, and Newline deposits climbed $2.1 billion while fee revenue there jumped 35% year over year. Net interest margin widened 6 basis points sequentially to 3.36%, and the adjusted efficiency ratio improved 480 basis points from the prior quarter to 57.1%. Credit quality held up too. Net charge-offs fell to 30 basis points in the second quarter, the lowest reading since the second quarter of 2023.

The Integration Bill Isn’t Paid Off

None of this came free. Merger-related charges cut $155 million from after-tax income in the second quarter, part of a $0.19 per share drag from certain items, and management says year-to-date merger costs already represent about 65% of what it expects to spend for the full year. Noninterest expense fell 12% from the first quarter but was still up 67% from a year earlier.

Average wholesale funding rose 20% sequentially as the bank leaned on $3.3 billion more in short-term Federal Home Loan Bank advances to bridge a seasonal dip in commercial deposits, a reminder that funding costs can swing while the deal digests. The CET1 capital ratio sat at 9.93%, still below the 10.58% posted a year earlier, reflecting $933 million of pre-tax merger-related capital hits, and Fifth Third did not repurchase any shares in the first half of 2026. Nonperforming loans also crept higher, with the NPL ratio rising to 0.58% from 0.54% the prior quarter.

Where Wall Street Stands

Hedge fund ownership of Fifth Third fell to 35 funds from 46 in the prior quarter, a meaningful pullback in institutional conviction right as the integration reached its finish line. That comes alongside a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 10.82, as of September 18, a multiple that does not suggest the market is pricing in much of the growth story management is selling. The gap between a cheap valuation and fewer funds willing to hold the stock is the tension shaping how investors are reading this merger right now.

The Verdict Isn’t In Yet

The systems conversion is behind Fifth Third, but the financial case is still being written. The bull argument rests on Texas expansion, deposit campaign wins, and margin gains that are already showing up in the numbers. The bear argument rests on a capital base still recovering from acquisition costs and an expense base that has not fully normalized. For the growth story to win out, Texas and Southeast expansion will need to keep generating deposits at the pace seen so far. For the skeptics to be right, merger costs and funding pressure would need to linger well past the point management has promised they will fade.

While we acknowledge the potential of FITB as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you’re looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.

READ NEXT: 10 Best Future Stocks to Buy Under $10 and 12 Best Performing Semiconductor Stocks to Invest In.

Disclosure: None. Follow Insider Monkey on Google News.

On August 11, Franco-Nevada (NYSE:FNV) posted second-quarter results that dwarfed last year’s numbers, with revenue up 57% to $580.9 million and gold equivalent ounces sold climbing 18% to 132,405. Net income rose 43% to $354 million, and the royalty giant says it’s now tracking toward the upper half of its 2026 guidance range. But the line that matters most sits further down the release: after two years of halted production, the company’s Cobre Panamá stream started moving again, and how that story plays out will shape the next few years more than this one strong quarter does.

Every Metric Moved The Same Direction

Franco-Nevada didn’t just grow; it grew everywhere at once. Adjusted EBITDA rose 45% to $529.7 million, or $2.75 a share, while operating cash flow climbed 12% to $482.5 million. Zoom out to the first half of the year and the numbers get even bigger: revenue hit $1.23 billion, up 67% and a half-year record, while adjusted net income reached $807.5 million, up 82% from the first half of 2025. Gold, silver and platinum group metals made up 86% of second-quarter revenue, and 88% of that revenue came from the Americas, led by South America and Canada.

The company also kept buying while the results rolled in. With $4.3 billion in available capital as of June 30, Franco-Nevada closed four separate royalty deals: a $40 million royalty portfolio from Victoria Gold Corp. covering Yukon and Nevada assets on April 16, a $32.9 million royalty on Rox Resources’ Youanmi gold project in Australia on May 29, a $2.0 million royalty tied to Equinox Gold’s Greenstone mine in Canada on June 22, and, after quarter-end on July 15, an $8.4 million royalty on Gorilla Gold Mines’ Comet Vale project. CEO Paul Brink pointed to that capital cushion as fuel for “a strong pipeline of deal opportunities” still ahead.

The Mine Nobody Fully Controls

Cobre Panamá is still not a normal mine. It remains in Preservation and Safe Management, with actual production halted, and its longer-term fate now rests with a ministerial commission the Panamanian government set up during the quarter to weigh an integral audit, published June 19, that found 87.7% compliance. What restarted on April 7 was narrower: government approval to process and export stockpiled ore already sitting on site, and by May the company had commissioned its first processing train and produced initial copper concentrate.

Even that narrower restart runs through someone else’s numbers. First Quantum, the mine’s operator, estimates 30,000 to 40,000 tonnes of copper will come out of the stockpiles in 2026, out of about 70,000 tonnes total once 2027 processing is included. Franco-Nevada’s own stream deliveries, expected near 23,100 gold ounces and 265,000 silver ounces, depend on First Quantum actually selling that concentrate under its offtake contracts, are only set to begin in the third quarter of 2026, and just a third of the total is expected to land by year-end. Meanwhile, production across the rest of the portfolio is weighted toward the back half of 2026, so a meaningful chunk of the guidance upgrade still has to show up.

Funds Warm Up Slowly

Hedge fund ownership ticked up from 43 funds to 44 last quarter, a modest gain rather than a rush into the name. Shares trade at 30.03 times forward earnings, as of September 18, a multiple that already prices in the growth Franco-Nevada just delivered. That combination, rising but not surging institutional interest alongside a full valuation, suggests the market has priced in this quarter’s strength and is now waiting on what Cobre Panamá does next.

The Real Test Starts Now

Franco-Nevada’s second quarter answered one question and opened another. The core royalty and streaming business is compounding fast, with half-year records across revenue, cash flow and earnings, and the company still has $4.3 billion to keep adding to that engine. What it hasn’t answered is what Cobre Panamá becomes once the ministerial commission weighs in and stockpile processing gives way to a real decision about the mine’s future. For the growth story to keep compounding at this pace, the rest of the portfolio’s back-half ramp needs to show up as promised. For Cobre Panamá to matter beyond a modest stream contribution, Panama’s government has to actually settle the mine’s fate.

While we acknowledge the potential of FNV as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you’re looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.

READ NEXT: 10 Best Future Stocks to Buy Under $10 and 12 Best Performing Semiconductor Stocks to Invest In.

Disclosure: None. Follow Insider Monkey on Google News.

Asset manager VanEck has issued a sharp critique of Metaplanet’s executive compensation design, arguing that the Japanese corporate Bitcoin treasury’s efforts to limit shareholder dilution do not go far enough. In a Friday analysis of compensation practices across the 10 largest digital asset treasury companies, VanEck concluded that Metaplanet’s structure is the only one that falls into the report’s lowest tier.

VanEck’s comparison points to both the size of Metaplanet’s equity compensation plan and the degree of personal exposure for its officers. The firm said Metaplanet’s equity plan equals 14.7% of fully diluted shares, while officer exposure stands at 8.2%—figures VanEck describes as materially higher than peers.

Key takeaways

• VanEck rated Metaplanet’s executive compensation as “Bad,” the only company in its lowest category in a peer review of 10 major Bitcoin treasury firms.
• VanEck cited Metaplanet’s equity plan at 14.7% of fully diluted shares and officer exposure at 8.2%—far above peer averages of 0.8% (officer exposure) and an overall plan nearly four times lower than Metaplanet.
• VanEck said a prior compensation mechanism allowed Metaplanet’s option pool to expand automatically as new shares were issued to fund Bitcoin purchases.
• While Metaplanet ended the automatic adjustment in August and reduced its option pool by 41% in September, VanEck argued the fixes still “fall well short of the mark.”
• VanEck urged Metaplanet to reverse a roughly 273 million-share expansion created by the earlier adjustment clause and to replace remaining rights with a shareholder-approved plan.

Why VanEck says Metaplanet’s incentives misalign

VanEck’s report evaluates executive compensation among the largest publicly traded digital asset treasury companies, focusing on how equity plans may contribute to dilution for existing shareholders. In that framework, VanEck said Metaplanet stands out for the scale of both its equity reserve and executive ownership exposure.

The asset manager argues that Metaplanet’s officer exposure—8.2%—is roughly 10 times the 0.8% average of the other nine companies reviewed. It also said Metaplanet’s broader equity plan is nearly four times the peer average, raising concerns that incentives may be overstated relative to what shareholders receive in return.

A contrast with Strategy’s “fixed” approach

VanEck’s report includes a direct comparison with Strategy, described as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder. According to VanEck, Strategy’s equity plan equals 2% of fully diluted shares, and officer exposure is 0.5%. VanEck rated Strategy’s compensation structure as “Good,” noting that its equity reserve is fixed and that plan increases require a shareholder vote.

That difference—between automatic scaling and shareholder-approved adjustments—appears to be central to VanEck’s critique. The implication for investors is straightforward: compensation structures that expand in lockstep with capital raises (even those done to purchase Bitcoin) can magnify dilution pressure over time.

The mechanism VanEck says drove past dilution

VanEck said part of the disparity traces back to Metaplanet’s former compensation setup. In the period before changes, the company’s option pool could grow automatically as Metaplanet issued shares to finance Bitcoin acquisitions. VanEck reported that this mechanism expanded the pool from 46 million shares to 319.5 million shares, adding about 273 million potential shares.

At the time, the expansion drew criticism from some Metaplanet shareholders. Earlier coverage by Cointelegraph noted backlash over the way the adjustment mechanism increased the pool, prompting calls for cancellation of the additional potential shares created by the clause (see Cointelegraph’s reporting).

Metaplanet’s cuts—VanEck still not satisfied

In response to the controversy, Metaplanet ended the automatic adjustment mechanism in August. It also reduced the overall pool by 41% in September, from 319.5 million shares to 188.2 million shares (Cointelegraph previously reported on the cut in its coverage).

However, VanEck argued that the newer arrangement does not fully correct the underlying issue. The firm stated that the changes still “fall well short of the mark,” and it said Metaplanet should address the roughly 273 million-share expansion attributable to the earlier adjustment clause.

VanEck further noted that unless past grants are clawed back, much of the dilution already occurred—an important distinction for shareholders. Even if future option pools are reduced, prior equity rights may continue to affect share count and per-share metrics depending on exercise and conversion dynamics.

In practical terms, VanEck’s recommendation was that Metaplanet reverse the additional share potential created by the earlier mechanism and replace the remaining rights with a compensation plan approved by shareholders.

What VanEck wants Metaplanet to do next

Beyond undoing earlier expansion, VanEck recommended restructuring compensation around more shareholder-aligned metrics. The firm said executive pay should be tied to a measure such as Bitcoin per fully diluted share, rather than relying on mechanisms that expand when shares are issued for Bitcoin purchases.

VanEck also called for a written grant-timing policy. The intent, as implied by the recommendations, is to reduce ambiguity around when equity is granted and to make compensation practices easier for investors to assess against stated dilution goals.

For context, Metaplanet is a Japanese Bitcoin treasury company and currently ranks as the third-largest publicly traded corporate Bitcoin holder, holding 43,000 BTC according to BitcoinTreasuries.net.

Investors looking at corporate Bitcoin treasuries may want to watch whether Metaplanet can translate “anti-dilution” intentions into enforceable structural changes—particularly around whether prior equity expansion is reversed or mitigated. VanEck’s critique suggests the key question is not only how the pool is handled going forward, but what happens to the dilution already embedded in past grants.

Kalshi has filed to offer perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks, joining Coinbase in a push to bring crypto-style derivatives to traditional equity markets.

The prediction market filed the proposed rule change with the Securities and Exchange Commission and submitted it to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for approval on Friday. The CFTC has yet to approve the proposal.

The proposed contracts would have no preset expiration date and would use periodic funding payments between long and short positions to keep their prices aligned with the underlying stocks. Kalshi said the contracts would be treated as security futures products and cleared through its CFTC-registered clearinghouse, Kalshi Klear.

The filing comes the same day Coinbase submitted a separate proposal to offer perpetual futures tied to individual US stocks, as both companies look to bring a derivatives product popular in crypto markets to traditional equities.

Kalshi already offers perpetual futures tied to cryptocurrencies in the US, including Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH), Solana (SOL) and XRP (XRP), after receiving CFTC approval for its Bitcoin perpetual contract in May.

Related: DoubleZero adds Kalshi election market data ahead of US midterms

US stock perpetual futures race expands

Kalshi and Coinbase were not alone in filing to bring single-stock perpetual futures to the US market. Payward, the parent company of crypto exchange Kraken, also filed through its Bitnomial Exchange to offer the products, with plans to make them available to US traders on Kraken.

Payward said it plans to initially offer perpetual futures tied to 10 US equities, including Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon, and is working toward 24/5 trading.

The filings come days after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the Senate on Sept. 15, falling short of the 60 votes needed to proceed.

A day after the vote, SEC Chair Paul Atkins said that “with or without legislation,” the agency would “act decisively” within its existing statutory authority to provide regulatory certainty for American investors and entrepreneurs.

Source: Paul Atkins

Magazine: Is there any chance left to save the CLARITY Act?

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Asset manager VanEck has sharply criticized Metaplanet’s executive compensation design, arguing that the company’s recent steps to reduce shareholder dilution tied to its Bitcoin treasury activity do not fully solve the underlying misalignment between management incentives and existing shareholders.

In a Friday research note that reviewed executive pay structures across the 10 largest digital asset treasury companies, VanEck ranked Metaplanet’s approach as “Bad,” the only one in the lowest category. VanEck said Metaplanet’s compensation framework still leaves executives with far more equity exposure than peers and implies higher dilution pressure than investors should tolerate.

Key takeaways

• VanEck rated Metaplanet’s executive compensation “Bad,” citing an equity plan sized at 14.7% of fully diluted shares.
• VanEck estimated officer exposure at 8.2% for Metaplanet—around 10 times the average (0.8%) across the other nine treasury companies reviewed.
• VanEck said Metaplanet’s officer equity exposure and overall option pool remain substantially higher than peer levels even after recent reductions.
• VanEck attributed part of Metaplanet’s problem to a prior option-pool mechanism that automatically expanded as new shares were issued for Bitcoin purchases.
• VanEck urged Metaplanet to unwind the earlier expansion and replace remaining rights with a compensation plan approved by shareholders.

Why VanEck says Metaplanet’s incentives still miss the mark

VanEck’s report focused on how corporate Bitcoin holders structure executive pay—especially where equity compensation can increase alongside treasury activity. The core argument is straightforward: if executive incentives are tied to actions that require share issuance, investors can face dilution even when management claims the strategy is designed to enhance long-term value.

According to VanEck, Metaplanet’s equity plan amounted to 14.7% of fully diluted shares, while officer exposure stood at 8.2%. VanEck compared those figures to the other nine companies in its sample, where officer exposure averaged 0.8% and equity plans were markedly smaller.

VanEck also contrasted Metaplanet with Strategy, identified as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder in its peer set. VanEck rated Strategy’s compensation structure “Good,” citing an equity plan equal to 2% of fully diluted shares and officer exposure of 0.5%. VanEck said Strategy’s equity reserve is fixed, and plan increases require a shareholder vote—an investor-friendly setup designed to prevent automatic equity expansion.

The option-pool mechanism VanEck says drove outsized dilution

VanEck argued that the disparity is not accidental. It said Metaplanet’s previous compensation structure included an option pool that could expand automatically as the company issued additional shares to fund Bitcoin purchases.

Under that mechanism, VanEck said the pool grew from 46 million shares to 319.5 million—an increase of roughly 273 million potential shares. The report points to how such a design can embed dilution into the compensation framework: when the treasury company issues stock to acquire Bitcoin, the equity compensation pool can expand in tandem, compounding the effect for existing shareholders.

That expansion had already drawn scrutiny from Metaplanet shareholders at the time. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that the pool growth faced backlash, with some shareholders urging Metaplanet to cancel the additional potential shares created by the adjustment clause (see https://cointelegraph.com/news/metaplanets-executive-stock-pool-backlash-ceo-mmxx-ties).

What changed—and why VanEck still says it’s not enough

In response to the criticism, Metaplanet ended the automatic adjustment mechanism in August and cut the overall pool by 41% in September, according to the timeline described in VanEck’s report. The pool fell from 319.5 million shares to 188.2 million shares.

Even with those changes, VanEck said Metaplanet’s current structure “falls well short of the mark.” The implication is that the company’s revisions may have reduced future growth in the pool, but did not fully address the magnitude of the earlier expansion—particularly from the period when issuance linked to Bitcoin purchases also expanded the option pool.

VanEck’s recommendations went further. The report called on Metaplanet to reverse the roughly 273 million-share expansion created by the earlier adjustment clause and replace the remaining rights with a shareholder-approved compensation plan.

VanEck also warned that unless past grants are clawed back, much of the dilution effect may already have occurred. This is an important investor consideration: even if new grants are made under a tighter framework, compensation already delivered or irrevocably granted can leave shareholders carrying the cost.

Proposed fixes: tougher alignment with per-share Bitcoin metrics

Beyond arguing for structural changes to the equity plan, VanEck suggested how Metaplanet could better align executive outcomes with investor interests tied to corporate Bitcoin performance.

The report recommended tying executive compensation to a measurable metric such as Bitcoin per fully diluted share. VanEck also said Metaplanet should adopt a written grant-timing policy, aiming to reduce discretion and create clearer rules around when compensation is granted relative to share dilution and treasury activity.

The broader theme for corporate Bitcoin holders is that pay design can either dampen dilution concerns or amplify them. VanEck’s peer comparison highlights that not all corporate Bitcoin treasuries rely on the same mechanics: in its analysis, companies with fixed equity reserves and shareholder approval requirements scored better on investor alignment than Metaplanet’s former auto-expanding pool.

Metaplanet’s role in the corporate Bitcoin landscape

Metaplanet is a Japanese Bitcoin treasury company and, according to BitcoinTreasuries.net, is currently the third-largest publicly traded corporate Bitcoin holder with 43,000 BTC. That positioning makes the compensation debate more than just governance nitpicking: Metaplanet’s governance choices can influence how global investors evaluate the broader “treasury company” model and whether the economics remain shareholder-friendly as Bitcoin exposure is accumulated.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph also described how Metaplanet’s compensation pool adjustments came alongside corporate restructuring around share issuance (see https://cointelegraph.com/news/metaplanet-executive-stock-pool-hong-kong-subsidiary).

For investors, the next key question is whether Metaplanet will meaningfully unwind past dilution tied to the earlier option-pool expansion and how any replacement compensation plan will be structured—particularly whether shareholder approval, clawbacks, and performance metrics are introduced in a way that reduces the link between Bitcoin purchases and executive equity growth.