I think we enjoy keeping everybody guessing. It definitely makes X a lot more interesting. Our view is business as usual here. We're kind of matter-of-fact about this. The goal of the company is to drive Bitcoin per share and to increase its Bitcoin and increase the enterprise value continuously forever. We'll make decisions about how we fund our liabilities week by week, day by day. Sometimes we make them minute by minute to tell you the truth. We set algorithms where we're looking at what is most long-term advantageous to the company. Are we managing our credit risk? Are we creating Bitcoin per share? And are we best off to pay a liability with cash or to pay a liability by issuing equity or to pay a liability by issuing credit or to pay a liability by selling Bitcoin? We've done a lot of multivariate models and in all the models, what we find over the long term is that by far the best thing for the company is to engage in a mixture of those four instruments. Any model that we put together that's limited only to equity or only to credit or only to Bitcoin always underperforms. So, ultimately, the way to think of it is, 7 years out, we would like to have maximized our Bitcoin per share. And what is it that we should be doing now that's going to maximize and optimize the company's performance so that we maxed out Bitcoin per share 7 years from now. And I think it's not unlikely that we'll sell some Bitcoin between now and the end of the year. I don't know how much. We still consider these things. But it's also likely that we'll sell a mixture of equity, a mixture of credit. You know, we'll manage our USD, our cash positions. And we do it in a very thoughtful, programmatic fashion where we're running our multivariate models and we're literally running them. We're making trading decisions. To say every minute might be an understatement. We oftentimes make trading decisions every second. And we'll continue to do that.
If Strategy sells Bitcoin to fund Stretch distributions, does that shift the tax treatment from return of capital to ordinary income since the gains would be realized? The short answer on that is no. We stated that we're going to be able to have ROC dividends for Strategy and for all of our preferreds for the foreseeable future, likely the next 10 years. The reason selling Bitcoin doesn't result in a threat is primarily because we have cost bases of Bitcoin everywhere from $10,000 to $125,000. So if we're able to sell Bitcoin at a high cost basis and take a tax loss, which we can keep on our balance sheet for a while, that's positive. And it doesn't affect our ROC dividends.
Bitcoin is its own asset and it's driven by geopolitical capital flows. So for example, Chinese crypto investors, Asians, South Americans, Africans, Europeans, they all have their own capital flow dynamics. And so, an edict coming out of India, Pakistan, China, Iran, Russia, or Ukraine could drive Bitcoin flows having nothing to do with the US equity capital markets. Right now the headwinds that it faces are rising interest rates on the high end of the yield curve everywhere in the world. And that is drawing capital out of this ecosystem. It's also facing the headwinds of AI. There's a lot of capital flowing into the AI trade right now, and that has drawn capital out of Bitcoin from on the investor side. And also, if you're watching the miners, a lot of the Bitcoin miners have been diversifying or transitioning into doing AI hyper high-powered compute, and they're selling Bitcoin, and or they're not holding Bitcoin in order to fund their transition. So, that's a bit of a headwind. I think that the trade wars are a headwind. I think the hot wars are a headwind. And I think the lack of the roll out of bank credit networks, which is evolving, but it still has not taken place yet. Those are all headwinds. And if you look at the equity capital markets, the equity markets aren't influenced by the lack of credit from JP Morgan. They have a lot of it. The equity markets are being driven by the AI trade. They're benefiting from it. The equity markets, they don't have the drag of China crypto policy, which has an impact on Bitcoin, but not on equity capital markets. And so, equity capital's got its own dynamic. You know, metallic capital, gold has its own dynamic. Digital capital has its own dynamic. And you just kind of have to humbly make your peace with them. They're different asset classes. They're not always going to correlate in lockstep. And you don't want them to correlate. They're different things for different investors with different degrees of utility.
One of the biggest opportunities of Stretch beyond what it does for Bitcoin and what it does for digital credit is to equalize opportunity for people regardless of how much income they have or how much wealth they have. And I know this is important to you, too, Natalie. If you have a low income level and you're making 50,000 or 100,000 dollars a year and you don't have much money in your checking account and no money in your savings account, you pay a bank for your account. And if you have a little more, you get 0% and a little bit more, you get half percent. And at some point, if you're lucky, you can get a 3 and 1/2% money market. So, I think there's a huge opportunity with a product like Stretch and digital credit to provide yield generation. What will it take to get there? I think maturity of the product and people understanding digital credit and perpetual preferreds and Stretch. I think why we work a lot with traditional finance is they are the gateway to those types of folks, right? Who can't get into institutional offerings that provide 8, 10, 12%. And I think things like the Clarity Act, our integration into traditional finance, launching these products through wealth management, will start to legitimize digital credit. And, you know, you say Bitcoin is for everyone, we say Stretch is for everyone.
If the company can generate 20% BTC yields, you can double Bitcoin per share in three years. That's a much faster growth rate. That's worth a higher premium to NAV. You know, when the market sees BTC yield, right, that's sort of the dividend yield for someone on the Bitcoin standard. So, if you're Bitcoin maxi on the Bitcoin standard, you're saying, 'Okay, well, 20% would be a 20% dividend yield.' And then the question becomes, 'Okay, have you embraced the Bitcoin standard?' If not, you don't recognize that as being valuable at all, right? But if yes, then yeah, that's 20%. Now, the second question is, 'How durable is the business model?' So, if I thought that would last for 10 years, I might put a P/E of 10 on it, and I might say, 'I'm going to multiply 10 * 20 and give you a 200% premium to your Bitcoin holdings.' That works out to an MNAV of three. If on the other hand, I thought that was going on for 20 years, right, if I was really very confident, the P/E might stretch out further. You could say, 'When you see a business model that the equity capital markets are hyper enthusiastic about,' I'll give you an example. Apple, when people thought the iPhone was going to get commoditized, it got a P/E of eight. And then, when people thought everybody's going to use the iPhone and it's the best thing ever, the P/E went to 30. And so, when the market embraces the business model, the P/E expands.
And right now, we're in an early state. I mean, the business model is dynamically evolving. It was convertible bonds about a year ago, a year and a half ago, and now it's digital credit, and digital credit is 10 months old, and for the last 3 months, the digital credit business last month was a $24 billion annualized run rate. And 12 months ago, it was a $0 annualized run rate. So, we have to go out, and we have to communicate the power of Stretch digital credit to create BTC yield, and then the question becomes, 'Explain the Stretch thing again. How much of this can you sell? How does it work with the Bitcoin? How does it work with the capital?' And now, an equity investor, they have to consider the business model fit to consider how durable it is, and based upon that, they'll put a multiple on the key metrics. So, our plan to drive MNAV to 3, 4, 5, or 6 is kind of simple. First, make sure that the business can generate Bitcoin per share. The more, the better, right? The faster we generate Bitcoin per share, the higher the BTC yield, the higher the premium that is warranted. But second, we need to build the machine so that we can keep doing this consistently over the next decade. So, it can't be a one-and-done. And so, first, you build a machine, then you make the machine capable of running the marathon and running hard for the next decade. And then third, you have to go communicate that to the marketplace, then explain it to them. They're rational investors. When they understand how you create shareholder value, and then when they understand the risks associated and the unique capabilities the company has, then they will decide, 'Yeah, I'm going to put a PE of five on that.' At a five, then they give you a 100% premium. 'Maybe I'll give you a 10. Maybe that's a 200% premium. Maybe I'll give you a 20, right?' And that's a 400% premium. And then, of course, we got to perform. And so, I think we're simultaneously doing things: make the credit better, sell the credit, manage the balance sheet, strip the credit risk, and then we're communicating things, and the market is digesting and absorbing a revolutionary new business model. Digital capital is a new asset class. Digital credit is a new asset class. Digital equity is a new asset class supported by the digital treasury model. And a treasury company is like a reserve asset bank. I actually believe there will be a hundred billion-dollar companies that will be created based on Stretch. And there'll be a hundred billionaires spawned or, you know, incredible amounts of wealth created by people doing all these cool things that we can conceptualize because, number one, it's better for them to do them. Number two, they will actually execute better, and then they'll come up with a hundred ideas of their own we never come up with.
