Editorial Standards

Purpose of this page

Bitcoin Strategy publishes editorial analysis for UK corporate treasurers, family offices, high-net-worth individuals, and energy producers. This page documents the standards our editorial work is held to. It exists for two reasons: (1) to be transparent with readers about how we produce content, and (2) to anchor the schema.org publishingPrinciples field referenced by every article on this site.

Education, not advice

Bitcoin Strategy is not authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority to provide regulated financial advice. Nothing on this site — including articles, market commentary, FAQs, or interactive tools — should be construed as a personal recommendation, an inducement to invest, or a financial promotion in the regulated sense.

Bitcoin and other cryptoassets are high-risk, volatile, and largely unregulated. The value of cryptoasset holdings can fall as well as rise, and investors may lose all of the capital they commit. Tax treatment depends on the individual circumstances of each investor and may change in the future. Where this site discusses corporate treasury, family-office, or mining strategies, those discussions are educational frameworks — not recommendations for any specific organisation.

When we engage with clients on a paid advisory basis, that engagement is governed by a separate written contract, scope of work, and (where the subject matter is regulated) appropriate authorised partners. Nothing published here substitutes for that bilateral, contracted relationship.

Anonymous authorship

We publish under the institutional byline Bitcoin Strategy rather than under named individual authors. This is a deliberate choice for two reasons:

• Bitcoin ethos. Bitcoin's founding tradition values argument-on-its-merits over personality. Identifying authors elevates people; anonymous publication elevates the underlying analysis.
• Regulatory caution. Putting a named individual against content that touches on cryptoasset strategy creates ambiguity about whether that individual is offering regulated advice. We resolve that ambiguity by publishing as an institution and explicitly marking content as educational.

This means we trade some E-E-A-T signal in exchange for clarity. We compensate by citing named external sources (regulators, academic publications, central banks) wherever possible, and by being explicit about the editorial process below.

Sourcing & citation

Where an article makes a factual claim about regulation, taxation, accounting treatment, or market data, that claim is sourced from one of:

• UK regulators (FCA, HMRC, HM Treasury, Bank of England).
• UK accounting bodies (FRC, ICAEW) and IFRS Foundation.
• Peer-reviewed academic publications and central-bank working papers.
• Established industry research providers, named in-line.
• Public filings (Companies House, AIM/main-market disclosures, SEC).

Where data is time-sensitive (prices, allocations, regulatory positions) we record the date of capture; readers should treat any quoted figure as historic from the article's datePublished.

Fact-checking & review

Each article passes through three internal stages before publication: research and drafting, technical review (does the claim hold up against primary sources?), and editorial review (is it clear, balanced, and appropriately caveated?). Articles that touch on UK tax or regulatory treatment are additionally reviewed against the relevant primary source at time of publication. We do not engage paid endorsements; we do not accept payment in exchange for favourable coverage of any product, service, or counterparty.

Conflicts of interest

Bitcoin Strategy is a Bitcoin-focused advisory firm. We hold a long-term institutional view that Bitcoin is a strategically relevant asset for certain UK organisations — that view is the reason we exist as a firm. We are transparent about this orientation rather than pretending to neutrality. Where an article discusses a specific named counterparty (custodian, OTC desk, miner, infrastructure provider) we disclose any commercial relationship that exists at time of publication.

Corrections policy

If you spot a factual error in any article, please email advisory@bitcoinstrategy.co.uk with the article URL and the issue. We aim to respond within five working days. Material corrections are made in-line, the article's dateModified is updated, and a brief note appended at the foot of the affected article describing what changed and why. Cosmetic corrections (typos, formatting) are made silently.

AI disclosure

We use AI tooling for research, drafting, and copy-editing. Every article is reviewed and approved by a human editor before publication, and any factual claim derived from AI output is verified against a primary source before it appears on the site. We do not publish AI-generated material unsupervised.

Contact

Editorial enquiries, source-checks, or correction requests: advisory@bitcoinstrategy.co.uk.