A finished DBA-820 Topic 2 crypto treasury policy analysis example, testing a bitcoin allocation against a company's safety, liquidity and yield rules and locating the clauses that fail. Searches like "dba 820 topic 2 assignment example", "dba820 topic 2 sample" and "dba-820 topic 2 example" land here.
What a finished DBA-820 Topic 2 crypto treasury policy analysis looks like
The finished analysis starts from the document the board already approved: an investment policy ranking safety of principal first, liquidity second and yield third, with limits set by issuer credit rating and maturity. A composite CFO proposes moving a small share of excess cash into bitcoin, and the paper states her case as she would, as protection against currency debasement and a source of diversification. Each clause is then tested. The rating limit has nothing to attach to, because the asset has no issuer. The maturity limit cannot apply to an instrument that never matures. Liquidity holds in ordinary markets and is uncertain under stress. Safety of principal fails outright on price volatility. The paper also records custody and key-management risk, which the policy never contemplated, and notes that the accounting treatment has itself changed in recent years.
How a DBA-820 Topic 2 example is structured
The analysis runs proposal, policy, clause test, gaps and verdict. The opening restates the CFO's proposal and the company's operating cash needs in illustrative terms, and frames the question as whether the existing policy can govern the holding at all. The second part lays out the policy's structure: purpose, ranked objectives, eligible instruments, credit and maturity limits and reporting. A third part sets out the proponents' case and the skeptics' case at equal strength. The clause test follows, one row per provision, recording whether each applies, applies badly or cannot apply. A gaps section names what the policy lacks entirely, such as custody standards, control of private keys and a rule for forced sale. An evidence paragraph asks what record would support the diversification claim. The paper ends by recommending that the policy be amended before any purchase rather than after one.
The approved policy as the test
Every judgment in the paper is made against the board's own investment policy, so the analysis shows where that document fails rather than merely asserting that it does.
A rating limit with no issuer
Credit limits assume an issuer whose ability to pay can be rated, and bitcoin has no issuer, so that clause cannot restrain the holding at all.
Liquidity checked in stressed markets
Trading is deep on most days, but the paper asks whether the company could sell on a day when exchanges or banking links to them are under strain.
Custody named as an unpriced risk
Loss or theft of private keys, and failure of a third-party custodian, are exposures the existing policy never contemplated and has no clause to govern.
Diversification claim held to evidence
Observed correlations between bitcoin and equities have varied over time, so the paper treats diversification as a claim to test against stress periods rather than a settled property.
Where marks go in DBA-820 Topic 2
Graders mark down first the paper that declares treasury policy outdated without saying which clause fails. The analysis this topic asks for is local: the rating limit, the maturity limit and the safety objective each break for a different reason, and a paper that cannot say why has not located anything. Advocacy is the second hazard. Stating the debasement argument without the volatility record, or the volatility record without the argument proponents actually make, argues one side of a live dispute. Papers that treat bitcoin's liquidity as settled, in either direction, skip the stress question entirely. Custody is frequently missing, although it is the risk with no precedent anywhere in the policy. Accounting and regulatory treatment described as permanent dates the paper, since both have shifted in recent years and continue to be revised.
Get a DBA-820 Topic 2 example written to your instructions
Send the DBA-820 Topic 2 instructions and your classroom rubric, with the instrument or company case your section assigns. We write a custom example to them, with the existing policy used as the test, each clause checked, custody and stressed liquidity addressed and both sides stated fairly, in 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free.
DBA-820 Topic 2 questions, answered
Why test bitcoin against an existing treasury policy?
Because the policy is the framework the board has already approved, and the course asks where that framework fails. Testing clause by clause shows that most provisions still work for ordinary instruments and that a few break for this one. Naming those few tells a board what must be amended, which is more useful than a general claim that the policy is out of date.
How is bitcoin accounted for on a corporate balance sheet?
Treatment has changed in recent years. Under earlier US practice many companies carried it as an intangible asset subject to impairment, recording declines but not recoveries, and US standard setters have since moved certain crypto assets to fair value measurement. Because the rules continue to be revised and differ across jurisdictions, the example describes the direction of change rather than stating current requirements as fixed.
Should my company hold bitcoin in its treasury?
The example cannot answer that for any real company. The CFO, the policy and the proposal are composites built to show a framework under strain; any actual holding would turn on the company's cash needs, how much risk its board will accept, and its accounting, tax and custody arrangements. Those questions belong with qualified advisers. The analysis is DBA-820 coursework, not investment, accounting or legal advice.