Japan Exchange Group JPX plans to limit listed companies' encryption Holdings: Regulatory intervention to protect investors

In November 2025, according to Bloomberg, the Japan Exchange Group (JPX) is considering strengthening regulations on large-scale cryptocurrency investments by listed companies, which may extend the ban on reverse mergers to companies that shift their business focus to Digital Money Holdings. This initiative stems from recent fluctuations in Crypto Assets that have caused investors to suffer huge paper losses—Japan's largest Bitcoin Holdings company, Metaplanet, has fallen over 75% from its mid-June peak, while the nail salon-turned-Convano has also dropped about 60% since the end of August. Regulatory intervention aims to prevent listed companies from taking excessive risks and to maintain market stability.

Japan's Crypto Regulation Shift: From Tolerance to Cautious Control

A spokesperson for the Japan Exchange Group stated that while there is no comprehensive ban on companies holding crypto assets, they will closely monitor those companies that raise risks and governance concerns to protect the rights of shareholders and investors. This regulatory tightening focuses on “backdoor listings”—where companies go public through mergers and acquisitions rather than traditional IPOs. JPX has prohibited such operations and is currently assessing whether to expand the scope of the ban to listed companies that shift their main business towards accumulating crypto assets.

This policy shift has a profound market background. According to data from industry tracking agencies, Japan has now become the country in Asia with the most publicly traded Bitcoin holders, with 14 listed companies heavily allocating Crypto Assets. Earlier, the Hong Kong exchange had conducted strict inquiries into at least five companies applying to become core Crypto Assets Holdings firms, emphasizing that the listing business must be feasible and sustainable. Major exchanges in Asia are forming a regulatory consensus: Crypto Assets can be part of asset allocation but cannot become the main business.

Case Study: The Roller Coaster Journey of Japanese Bitcoin Holdings Companies

The performance of the Tokyo-listed company Metaplanet perfectly illustrates the double-edged sword effect of Crypto Assets Holdings. The company has transformed from its hotel business at the beginning of 2024 to a digital asset treasury, accumulating over 30,000 Bitcoins, becoming one of the largest public holders in the world. Its stock price surged by 420% before mid-year, but sharply fell after mid-June, with a decline of over 75%, causing significant losses for early-following retail investors.

A similar scenario played out on Convano. The former nail salon operator announced plans to acquire 21,000 Bitcoins, leading to a stock price drop of about 60% since the end of August. More professional on-chain analysis also found that the investment tool focused on XRP, Evernorth, faced about $78 million in unrealized losses shortly after building its position. Even established holdings giants like Strategy find it difficult to avoid the impacts of market fluctuations, indicating that the treasury model of crypto assets companies faces widespread challenges.

Key Information on Japan's Crypto Assets Regulation

• Number of affected listed companies: 14
• Metaplanet fall: 75% (from June peak)
• Convano fall: 60% (since the end of August)
• Regulatory Focus: Backdoor Listings, Business Transformation Review
• Asian Trend: Hong Kong and Japan Tighten Simultaneously

Global Comparison: Regulatory Differences for Crypto Asset Listed Companies Across Regions

Japan is not the only region concerned about this phenomenon. Although the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has not explicitly restricted corporate crypto asset holdings, it indirectly influences corporate behavior through accounting and disclosure requirements—public companies must measure crypto assets at fair value, and quarterly fluctuations directly affect the income statement. The European Union, on the other hand, sets corporate holding limits through the MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) regulation and includes digital money in the calculation of risk reserves.

Emerging markets exhibit more differentiated attitudes. The Monetary Authority of Singapore allows but does not encourage listed companies to allocate a large amount of crypto assets; the Dubai Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority is more lenient towards enterprises directed at professional investors. This regulatory fragmentation presents compliance challenges for multinational corporations and prompts the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) to consider developing a globally unified standard. From a trend perspective, major economies are shifting from outright prohibition or laissez-faire to a middle ground of “allowing but regulating.”

Investor Protection Perspective: How to Assess Risks of Crypto Holdings Companies

For ordinary investors, it is crucial to discern the quality of listed companies' cryptocurrency strategies. Quality indicators include: whether the holdings are diversified (such as paired with government bonds or cash), whether there is a clear risk control framework, whether the management has blockchain expertise, and whether business revenue can cover operating expenses without relying on asset sales.

Professional analysts suggest that when evaluating such enterprises, a “dual-track valuation method” should be employed—traditional businesses are discounted based on cash flow, while Crypto Assets holdings are valued at market price with a liquidity discount. At the same time, caution should be exercised regarding companies whose main business has shrunk and are attempting to regain market attention through speculation in encryption; historically, the success rate of such transformations is extremely low. Investors should also check whether the company has set a limit on Holdings and whether there is an emergency plan in place to deal with falls.

The Crossroads of Crypto Asset Enterprise Treasury Models

The regulatory considerations of the Japanese exchange group mark the entrance of the integration of Crypto Assets and traditional capital markets into a deep water zone. When listed companies regard Bitcoin as corporate assets, they not only embrace technological innovation but also align themselves with the risks of the world's most Fluctuating asset class. Timely regulatory intervention does not stifle innovation but rather sets necessary guardrails for the market to prevent individual enterprises' risk-taking behaviors from evolving into systemic risks. On the long road to the institutionalization of Digital Money, such adjustments are just the beginning rather than the end—finding a balance between protecting investors and promoting innovation will be a common challenge for all market builders.