Meta Fails to Invest in Bitcoin After Investor Proposal Rejection

In January 2025, Ethan Peck, a Bitcoin advocate and Director at Strive Asset Management, submitted a shareholder proposal urging Meta to diversify its $72 billion cash reserves by investing in Bitcoin. Peck argued that Bitcoin could serve as a hedge against inflation, protecting shareholder value in an era where cash and traditional bonds yield returns below real inflation rates. He pointed out that Meta’s cash holdings, representing 28% of its total assets, were losing value over time, making Bitcoin an attractive alternative.

Peck’s proposal wasn’t a lone effort. He had previously pushed similar initiatives at Microsoft and Amazon through the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), a conservative think tank. While Microsoft’s shareholders rejected a Bitcoin proposal in December 2024, Amazon’s proposal to allocate 5% of its assets to Bitcoin is still pending a vote. Peck’s advocacy reflects a growing movement among Bitcoin enthusiasts to encourage public companies to adopt the cryptocurrency as a treasury asset, following the lead of companies like MicroStrategy, which holds 580,250 BTC valued at $60.9 billion.

Meta’s leadership had shown some indirect interest in Bitcoin in the past. CEO Mark Zuckerberg named his goats “Bitcoin” and “Max,” and board member Marc Andreessen, a prominent crypto advocate and Coinbase director, has long supported digital assets. Additionally, major shareholder BlackRock, a leader in Bitcoin Spot ETFs, appeared to align with the idea of corporate crypto adoption. These factors fueled speculation that Meta might embrace Bitcoin as part of its innovation-driven identity.

‍

Why Shareholders Rejected the Proposal

Despite the buzz, Meta’s shareholders delivered a resounding “no” to the Bitcoin proposal, with over 95% voting against it, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The board of directors labeled the proposal “unnecessary,” reflecting a broader skepticism about Bitcoin’s suitability for Meta’s financial strategy. Several key factors contributed to this rejection:

• Volatility Concerns: Bitcoin’s price volatility was a major sticking point. While Bitcoin reached $106,000 in June 2025, its history of sharp price swings—such as a 73% drop in 2018—made shareholders wary. Unlike MicroStrategy, which embraced Bitcoin’s volatility as part of its growth strategy, Meta’s investors prioritized stability for its cash reserves.
• Strategic Misalignment: Meta is heavily investing in artificial intelligence (AI), with plans to launch a fully automated AI-driven advertising engine by 2026. Shareholders likely viewed Bitcoin as a distraction from Meta’s core focus on AI and metaverse technologies. The company’s stock surged 3.6% following reports of its AI ambitions, underscoring investor confidence in its current trajectory.
• Lack of Precedent: While companies like MicroStrategy and GameStop have added Bitcoin to their treasuries, major tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and potentially Amazon have resisted. Shareholders may see Bitcoin as an unproven asset for large-cap tech firms with diverse revenue streams, unlike smaller firms betting heavily on crypto.
• Regulatory and Risk Concerns: Bitcoin’s regulatory landscape remains uncertain, and its high-risk profile could expose Meta to financial and reputational risks. Shareholders likely preferred Meta’s conservative approach to cash management, avoiding the complexities of crypto custody and compliance.

Posts on X echoed this sentiment, with users like @AltcoinDaily and @Cointelegraph noting the overwhelming rejection and Meta’s board dismissing Bitcoin as unnecessary. One user, @crptAtlas, suggested that big tech’s reluctance to adopt Bitcoin stems from its misalignment with their risk-averse financial strategies.

‍

The Broader Context: Bitcoin in Corporate Treasuries

Despite Meta’s rejection, the push for corporate Bitcoin adoption is gaining momentum. According to BitcoinTreasuries, 214 entities globally have added Bitcoin to their balance sheets, with MicroStrategy leading the pack. The company’s stock has soared 2,191% since adopting Bitcoin, far outpacing Meta’s performance.

Other developments highlight Bitcoin’s growing legitimacy:

• Institutional Investment: Mubadala’s $408.5 million investment in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) signals institutional acceptance of Bitcoin as a store of value.
• Government Adoption: Twenty U.S. states, including Arizona and Florida, are considering Bitcoin as a reserve asset, with potential investments totaling $23 billion.
• Market Resilience: Bitcoin’s price has remained robust, reclaiming $106,000 in June 2025, driven by strong demand and maturing derivatives markets.

However, Bitcoin’s volatility and speculative nature continue to deter conservative investors. Historical cases, like Sean Russel’s 96% loss on a $120,000 Bitcoin investment in 2018, underscore the risks. Analysts like Vivek Belgavi from PwC argue that Bitcoin lacks the fundamental ecosystem for reliable analysis, making it a speculative bet rather than a stable asset.

‍

Implications for Meta and the Crypto Market

Meta’s rejection of Bitcoin doesn’t necessarily spell doom for corporate crypto adoption, but it highlights a divide in corporate philosophy. While innovative firms like MicroStrategy see Bitcoin as “digital gold,” risk-averse tech giants prioritize stability and focus on core competencies like AI. For Meta, the decision aligns with its pivot toward AI-driven growth, which is already boosting shareholder confidence.

For the crypto market, Meta’s decision may temper enthusiasm among retail investors hoping for a wave of tech giants embracing Bitcoin. However, the broader trend of institutional and government interest suggests Bitcoin’s corporate adoption will continue, albeit selectively. Companies with high risk tolerance or crypto-aligned business models are more likely to follow MicroStrategy’s lead than diversified tech conglomerates like Meta.

‍

What’s Next for Meta and Bitcoin?

Meta is unlikely to revisit Bitcoin in the near term, given the strong shareholder pushback and its focus on AI. However, the company’s historical openness to digital assets—evidenced by its failed Diem stablecoin project—suggests it may explore other blockchain or crypto-related innovations in the future.

For Bitcoin advocates like Ethan Peck, the fight continues. With Amazon’s proposal still pending and growing institutional interest, the narrative of Bitcoin as a corporate treasury asset is far from over. Investors will be watching closely to see if other tech giants take the plunge or follow Meta’s cautious lead.

‍

Conclusion

Meta’s failed Bitcoin investment proposal underscores the challenges of integrating cryptocurrency into the balance sheets of tech giants. While advocates like Ethan Peck see Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation, Meta’s shareholders prioritized stability and strategic focus on AI, rejecting the proposal with a 95% majority. Although this setback highlights Bitcoin’s volatility and regulatory uncertainties, the broader trend of corporate and institutional adoption suggests the cryptocurrency’s journey in corporate finance is just beginning. Stay tuned for more updates on web3 and crypto trends as the landscape continues to evolve.