Bitcoin mining report | Q1 2026

1. Executive summary

Q4 2025 marked the most challenging quarter for Bitcoin miners since the April 2024 halving. A sharp BTC price correction (from an all-time high of ~$124,500 in early October to ~$86,000 by late December, a ~31% drawdown), combined with near-record hashrate, compressed hash prices to five-year lows.

The weighted average cash cost to produce one bitcoin among publicly listed miners rose to approximately US$79,995 in Q4 2025.

Three defining themes emerged during the quarter:

Profitability squeeze: Hash price hit ~$36–38/PH/s/day, near or at breakeven for many miners. Three consecutive negative difficulty adjustments, the first such streak since July 2022,  signalled miner capitulation. This has fallen significantly further to $29/PH/s/day in Q1 implying there is further pain for them to endure.

AI/HPC pivot acceleration: The divergence between pure-play miners and AI-pivoting infrastructure companies widened further. Over $70 billion in cumulative AI/HPC contracts have now been announced across the public mining sector. WULF, CORZ, CIFR, and HUT are effectively becoming data centre operators that happen to mine Bitcoin.

Capital structure transformation: Several miners took on massive debt loads to fund AI buildouts. IREN now carries $3.7B in convertible notes; WULF has $5.7B in total debt; CIFR issued $1.7B in senior secured notes. The sector’s aggregate leverage has fundamentally changed its risk profile.

2. AI competing with Bitcoin mining competing for rack space

AI is continuing to compete for rack space in many data centres, likely driving bitcoin mining towards more intermittent and cheaper power sources over the long term.

The migration of Bitcoin miners toward AI and high-performance computing is accelerating rapidly. Based on recent company announcements, listed miners could derive as much as 70% of their revenues from AI by the end of this year, up from roughly 30% today. What began as a marginal diversification strategy is increasingly becoming the core business.

Over the course of 2025 and early 2026, Bitcoin miners have signed a number of GPU co-location and cloud service deals with hyperscalers, worth over US$70 billion in aggregate. While most of these deals envisage new data centres being built, it is likely that some cannibalisation and shutting down of existing mining facilities will occur. As a result, the share of Bitcoin mining revenues for these operators will see a significant decline throughout 2026 as capacity under these contracts ramp up.

This shift is largely economic. Hashprices remain near cyclical lows, compressing mining margins, while AI infrastructure offers structurally higher and more stable returns. In that context, redeploying power and capital toward HPC appears rational, particularly for operators with access to scalable energy and existing data centre capabilities.

That said, the transition is not uniform. Some miners, such as IREN and Bitfarms, are actively repositioning themselves as HPC providers, effectively using mining as a bridge into AI infrastructure. Others, like CleanSpark, continue to prioritise mining in the near term, using it to monetise recently developed capacity while gradually building out AI exposure.

A third cohort remains committed to Bitcoin mining but is evolving operationally. Rather than pursuing megascale facilities, these operators are focusing on the lowest-cost and often intermittent energy sources, such as stranded renewables or flare gas. Marathon, for example, has deployed smaller, localised ~10MW containerised sites at the edge of energy networks. These configurations are well suited to mining, which can tolerate interruptions, but are incompatible with AI workloads that require near-continuous uptime.

Load balancing is likely to remain an enduring niche within mining. By providing demand flexibility to grids such as ERCOT, miners can secure more favourable electricity pricing. This role may become increasingly important, although it is likely to attract smaller and more specialised operators over time.

A key open question is the durability of the AI-driven shift. While current economics strongly favour AI, mining remains highly sensitive to Bitcoin price. Should mining profitability recover meaningfully, some operators may reassess the allocation of capital between the two activities. In that sense, the current trend may be less a permanent transition and more a function of relative returns.

Over the longer term, the implication is likely a smaller cohort of pure-play miners, alongside a broader set of hybrid infrastructure companies straddling both mining and AI. At the same time, new entrants may emerge to exploit niches that incumbents vacate, particularly in energy-constrained or highly flexible segments of the market.

The cost differential between BTC mining infrastructure (~$700K–1M/MW) and AI infrastructure (~$8M–15M/MW) is wide, and the conversion opportunity is now being realised at scale:

• CORZ: ~350MW energised for HPC, ~200MW billing. CoreWeave contract expanded to $10.2B over 12 years. Full 590MW targeted by early 2027.

• WULF: 39MW of critical IT capacity online at Lake Mariner. $12.8B in total contracted HPC revenue. Additional buildings on schedule through Q4 2026. Platform expanding to ~2.9GW across five locations.

• CIFR: 300MW Barber Lake site under development with Fortress Credit Advisors. Multi-billion-dollar Fluidstack agreement (Google-backed). Revenue has not yet commenced.

• IREN: Scaled to 10,900+ NVIDIA GPUs. Childress Horizon 1–4 expansion (up to 200MW liquid-cooled GPUs). AI Cloud Services revenue reached $17.3M in Q4.

• HUT: Signed a $7B, 15-year lease with Fluidstack for 245MW at its River Bend campus in Louisiana, with the first data hall targeted for early 2027.

The failed CORZ–CoreWeave merger (shareholder vote rejected October 30, 2025) highlights the tension between infrastructure value and equity value. CORZ subsequently restated financials due to improper capitalisation of assets committed to demolition during HPC conversion, a sign of the accounting complexity.

Revenue contribution remains early but growing: CORZ colocation AI/HPC data centers was 39% of Q4 revenue; WULF HPC was 27%; IREN AI Cloud was 9%; HIVE HPC was 5%. Mining remains dominant, but it is evident that revenue contribution from AI will continue to increase pretty much across the board.

3. Network hashrate

The Bitcoin network reached a significant milestone in late August 2025, surpassing 1 ZH/s for the first time. The network peaked at approximately 1,160 EH/s in early October.

However, Q4 saw a notable reversal. The hashrate declined ~10% from the October peak to ~1,045 EH/s by late December (and then to 850 EH/s by early February, before recovering), with three consecutive negative difficulty adjustments, the first such streak since July 2022. This was driven by:

• BTC price correction pushing legacy S19-era hardware below breakeven (breakeven electricity price for S19 XP fell from ~$0.12/kWh in Dec 2024 to ~$0.077/kWh in Dec 2025)

• Rising winter energy costs and ERCOT curtailment, with a sharp escalation in uneconomic mining hours during November–December

• Renewed Chinese regulatory actions in Xinjiang (December 2025 inspections curtailed mining operations, though capacity was not permanently displaced)

Despite the short-term decline, the network added ~300 EH/s during 2025. As of time of writing, hashrate has remained roughly where it ended 2025, at ~1,020 EH/s.

While the recent hashrate declines may seem alarming, looking on a log scale one can see they were far less severe than the China mining ban in 2021, representing a combination of cyclical and weather factors rather than something more ominous for the industry. It has since bounced back sharply, highlighting that many miners consider it a viable economic endeavour.

Using our piecewise prediction model that we have detailed in the past, we now expect the hashrate to achieve 1.8 zetahash by the end of 2026, and 2 zetahash by end-March 2027, one month later than previously predicted.

Geographic shifts: The top three countries (US, China, Russia) control ~68% of global hashrate. The US gained ~2 percentage points of market share QoQ. Emerging markets such as Paraguay, Ethiopia, and Oman entered the global top 10, driven by miners like HIVE (300MW in Paraguay) and BTDR (40MW in Ethiopia).

4. Hash price dynamics

Hash price, the metric that determines miner revenue per unit of hashpower, declined steadily through Q4 2025 after peaking at ~$63/PH/s/day in July. By November, it had fallen to ~$35-37/PH/s/day, setting what was then a five-year low. A brief recovery to ~$38-40 in late December and early January proved short-lived, with hash price collapsing further into Q1 2026, reaching ~$28-30/PH/s/day by early March, a new all-time post-halving low.

The decline was driven by the convergence of record difficulty (peaked at 155.97T after a +6.31% adjustment on October 29), a depressed BTC price (~31% below the October ATH), and minimal transaction fee income (consistently below 1% of total block rewards, with average fees per block of ~0.018 BTC).

This created the tightest margin environment since the April 2024 halving. Miners running mid-generation hardware (S19j Pro-class at ~29.5 J/TH) at average industrial electricity costs of $0.05/kWh (0.077/kwh for S19 XP) were operating well below breakeven by year-end, and conditions have only worsened into 2026.

Updated forecast: The hash price environment has deteriorated beyond our prior expectations, briefly touching ~$28/PH/s/day in late February before recovering to ~$30-35 at the time of writing. At these levels, miners running mid-generation hardware need access to sub-5c/kWh power to remain cash-profitable, while latest-generation fleets (sub-15 J/TH) retain meaningful margin at typical industrial electricity rates. A sustained recovery above $40 would require a BTC price rally towards US$100k by the end of the year and that outpaces continued hashrate growth. 

We expect further capitulation among higher-cost operators in H1 2026 unless BTC price recovers materially.  Current mining economics do not incentivise a broad hardware refresh cycle. The hash price would first have to fall further, driving enough older-generation capacity and operators offline, resulting in lower network hashrate levels and difficulty, which could provide an entry point for new Bitcoin miners, or enough incentives for upgrades in existing operations. However, network hashrate has proven remarkably resilient despite the relentless margin squeeze. This is likely supported by a combination of state-backed mining with strategic rather than economic-driven mandates, operators with access to exceptionally cheap or stranded power, and ASIC manufacturers plugging unsold inventory into their own facilities to maintain order commitments at foundries such as TSMC and Samsung. 

Pain in the mining sector has led to capitulation amongst miners, with many selling holdings. Publicly listed miners have collectively reduced their BTC treasuries by over 15,000 BTC from peak levels, with Core Scientific selling ~1,900 BTC (~$175M) in January alone and planning to liquidate substantially all remaining holdings in Q1 2026, Bitdeer reducing its treasury to zero in February, and Riot selling 1,818 BTC (~$162M) in December 2025.

We do not believe it is an unrealistic assumption to see bitcoin prices recover to the US$100k mark, and at that price we would see hash prices recover to the US$37/PH/day. If prices were to stay below US$80k for the remainder of the year, we forecast the hashprice to continue to fall, assuming difficulty continues to rise. This may not be the case in this scenario and we would likely see the hashrate fall further as miners turned off unprofitable rigs, so the hashprice would more likely flatline. If we saw prices begin to test the all-time-high of US$126k, we would likely see hash prices rise to US$59/PH/day.

Hash prices have fallen dramatically further than our predicted range, although we see this as a temporary issue caused by recent price declines and expect it to moderate to range between US$30-40/PH/day.

The current hash price has made it unfeasible to mine various models at present. Any miner below an S19 XP at an electricity price of US$c6/kWhr or above at the current hash price of US$30/PH/day is losing money - which we estimate represents approximately 15-20% of the global mining fleet.

5. Cost to mine analysis

5.1 Overview

The table below presents the Q4 2025 cost-per-BTC breakdown for all covered miners. All figures are in USD per BTC mined, with costs allocated to self-mining using the revenue-share methodology described in the Appendix.

Key observations:

1. AI/HPC buildouts are distorting per-BTC cost metrics for hybrid operators. Debt, SG&A, and D&A driven by AI infrastructure buildouts are being allocated against a shrinking BTC production base, inflating headline cost-per-BTC figures. For companies like WULF, CORZ, and CIFR, the all-in cost increasingly reflects the economics of becoming a data centre operator rather than the economics of mining Bitcoin.

2. Electricity costs have risen materially across the board compared to Q2 2025, reflecting higher network difficulty diluting per-BTC production, rising winter energy costs, and the BTC price decline.

3. D&A is the largest non-cash cost component and varies wildly by depreciation policy. MARA’s $136K/BTC and CIFR’s $88K/BTC are outliers (MARA’s massive fleet; CIFR’s 3-year useful life assumption).

4. SBC remains a significant differentiator. HUT’s $48.5K/BTC (one-off CEO/CSO grants) and CORZ’s $35.5K/BTC are outliers. BTDR ($3.9K) and CLSK ($6.7K) show the most disciplined profiles.

5. Interest costs now meaningfully impact several miners. WULF ($145K/BTC), CIFR ($56K/BTC), and BTDR ($16K/BTC) carry substantial debt loads. HIVE ($320/BTC) and CLSK ($830/BTC) have minimal leverage, a structural advantage.

5.2 Company-by-company breakdown

MARA MARA Holdings

BTC mined: 2,011

All-in cost: $153,040/BTC

Cash cost (ex-tax): $103,605/BTC

MARA remained the largest public miner by production in Q4 with 2,011 BTC mined. The company ended December with 53.2 EH/s of energised hashrate (+15% during the quarter), though daily production averaged ~21.9 BTC, down from prior quarters due to rising network difficulty.

Electricity costs of $64,703/BTC placed MARA mid-pack, reflecting diverse geography and heavy reliance on third-party hosting ($79.4M of $130.1M total power cost). D&A of $136,166/BTC was the highest in peers, reflecting the massive fleet (FY D&A: $772.8M).

The headline all-in cost is significantly distorted by a $183.4M income tax benefit driven by fair value adjustments on BTC holdings under ASU 2023-08. Excluding this non-operational benefit, the all-in cost rises to $240,407. During Q4, MARA maintained its HODL approach and did not sell BTC, while keeping 7,377 BTC in third-party lending arrangements. However, the company had already begun softening this stance in Q3 2025, permitting sales of newly mined BTC to fund operations. In its 10-K filing on March 2, 2026, MARA went further, expanding the policy to authorise sales from its entire balance sheet reserve of 53,822 BTC. The shift was partly driven by pressure on its $350M Bitcoin-backed credit facility, where the loan-to-value ratio climbed to ~87% as BTC fell toward $68,000 in early 2026. This marks a meaningful departure from the full HODL strategy adopted in July 2024.

The company also announced a partnership with Starwood Capital for AI and HPC data centres, and acquired a 64% stake in Exaion for $174.5M in February 2026, signalling an accelerating diversification beyond pure-play mining.

IREN IREN Limited 

BTC mined: 1,664

All-in cost: $140,441/BTC

Cash cost: $58,462/BTC

IREN delivered the lowest electricity cost per BTC at $34,325, driven by favourable power agreements at the Childress, TX facility and $1.8M in Q4 demand response income. Installed hashrate reached 46 EH/s with fleet efficiency of ~15 W/T.

SBC of $31,717/BTC was the second-highest in peers (Q4 SBC of $58.2M, a 7.3x YoY increase driven by $75 exercise price options and large RSU vesting). Payroll taxes on SBC added $6.8M in real cash cost. D&A nearly tripled YoY to $99.2M, reflecting the Childress expansion.

IREN carries $3.7B in convertible notes across five series (2029–2033), the largest debt load by face value in the peer group, though low coupons (2.75–3.50%) keep interest manageable. A $111.8M debt conversion inducement expense (non-cash) and $182.5M deferred tax benefit are excluded from the cost analysis. AI Cloud Services revenue reached $17.3M (9% of total), with the Horizon 1–4 GPU expansion (up to 200MW) under construction.

CLSK CleanSpark

BTC mined: 1,821

All-in cost: $118,932/BTC

Cash cost (ex-tax): $71,188/BTC

CleanSpark demonstrated exceptional operational discipline. SG&A of $17,848/BTC and SBC of $6,662/BTC were among the lowest in peers. The 100% allocation ratio (pure-play, no hosting/HPC revenue) simplifies cost analysis.

Electricity of $52,463/BTC rose vs Q2 ($44,679), reflecting higher difficulty. Fleet efficiency of ~16 W/T remains industry-leading at ~50 EH/s installed capacity. D&A of $58,381/BTC was in line with peers. Interest was minimal ($830/BTC), reflecting a low-leverage balance sheet.

New CEO Matt Schultz (replaced Zach Bradford, August 2025) has indicated capacity could climb to ~60 EH/s if market conditions warrant. The company is exploring equipment supplier diversification away from Bitmain. No explicit AI/HPC plans announced, though management has hinted at monetising data centre assets near metropolitan areas (Georgia facilities). Note: CLSK’s September 30 FY means this is their Q1 FY2026.

RIOT Riot Platforms

BTC mined: 1,324

All-in cost: $170,366/BTC

Cash cost (ex-tax): $102,538/BTC

Riot produced 1,324 BTC with average deployed hashrate of 31.5 EH/s. Electricity costs of $49,196/BTC benefited from $9.9M in Q4 ERCOT demand response credits ($56.7M FY total), meaningfully offsetting gross power costs.

SG&A of $31,534/BTC was among the highest, reflecting corporate overhead and the 1GW Corsicana development. SBC of $21,586/BTC was elevated. D&A of $66,900/BTC reflected ongoing fleet investment. The company held 17,722 BTC on December 31 (>$1.5B at period-end prices).

Riot’s strategic focus centres on Corsicana, where 600MW is earmarked for AI workloads. While a significant long-term opportunity, Q4 revenue remained overwhelmingly mining-driven. The 1GW total site capacity positions Riot as one of the largest single-site operators in North America.

CORZ Core Scientific

BTC mined: 421

All-in cost: $168,693/BTC

Cash cost: $110,282/BTC

Q4 marked a milestone in CORZ’s AI/HPC transition. Colocation revenue reached $31.3M (39% of total, up from $8.5M in Q4 2024). Self-mining revenue fell to $42.2M from $79.9M YoY as capacity was deliberately diverted to HPC.

The low BTC production (421) inflates per-BTC metrics. SG&A of $47,510/BTC and SBC of $35,506/BTC were among the highest, reflecting corporate overhead and the failed CoreWeave merger costs. Fleet efficiency of ~24.7 W/T trails peers (15–18 W/T), driving the elevated electricity cost of $66,720/BTC.

The failed CoreWeave merger (October 30, 2025) created uncertainty, but execution continued: ~350MW energised, ~200MW billing, targeting full 590MW by early 2027 ($10.2B contracted over 12 years). A material restatement of 2024–2025 financials (improper capitalisation of assets committed to demolition during HPC conversion) resulted in a change to KPMG as auditor and internal controls deemed ineffective. D&A of $17,701/BTC was the lowest in peers, partly reflecting the restated asset write-downs.

WULF TeraWulf

BTC mined: 262

All-in cost: $471,841/BTC

Cash cost: $384,517/BTC

Important note: WULF’s cost-per-BTC figures are not comparable to pure-play peers. 

The company has fundamentally transitioned to an AI/HPC infrastructure business that maintains a declining mining operation. The 262 BTC mined were produced alongside $9.7M in HPC lease revenue.

Q4 mining revenue fell 40% QoQ to $26.1M. HPC lease revenue grew 35% QoQ to $9.7M (27% of Q4 total). FY2025 revenue was $168.5M with HPC contributing $16.9M.

The extreme all-in cost reflects: interest of $144,974/BTC ($5.7B total debt: $2.5B convertible notes + $3.2B senior secured notes at WULF Compute); SG&A of $167,221/BTC (scaling workforce, milestone compensation); D&A of $77,217/BTC (new HPC infrastructure). The company ended 2025 with $3.7B cash (up from $274M), reflecting massive capital formation. 522MW contracted with $12.8B in long-term customer contracts.

CIFR Cipher Digital

BTC mined: 591

All-in cost: $231,980/BTC

Cash cost: $103,516/BTC

CIFR’s all-in cost was the second-highest (ex-WULF), driven by D&A of $87,768/BTC (3-year useful life assumption adopted in 2024) and an interest charge of $56,445/BTC.

The interest spike defines CIFR’s Q4: $1.733B in 7.125% Senior Secured Notes issued November 2025 caused Q4 interest to surge to $33.4M vs $3.2M for the entire first 9 months. Electricity of $41,047/BTC was competitive (Odessa PPA at ~2.8¢/kWh). SBC of $40,695/BTC was elevated, classified within “Compensation and benefits” rather than SG&A (unusual presentation).

Significant Q4 impairments ($45.3M Odessa miners, $96.1M Black Pearl, $29.4M disposal loss) are excluded from cost analysis. The company was renamed to Cipher Digital Inc. on February 20, 2026. On the HPC front, the 300MW Barber Lake site (Fortress) and Fluidstack agreement (Google-backed) position CIFR for diversification, though revenue had not yet commenced.

HUT Hut 8 Corp.

BTC mined: 719

All-in cost: $160,402/BTC

Cash cost: $50,332/BTC

Hut 8’s headline all-in appears competitive but requires careful interpretation due to several one-off items.

SBC of $48,527/BTC was the highest in peers, driven by November 2025 CEO/CSO equity grants (2.3M RSUs + PSUs). Q4 SBC of $39.7M vs $18.1M for all of 9M — a 2.2x ratio. Normalised SBC would materially reduce all-in cost.

G&A (excl. SBC) of $7,413/BTC appears artificially low due to a $17.8M Canadian HST refund in December 2025. Normalised G&A would be closer to ~$30K/BTC. D&A of $48,621/BTC was at the consolidated level; mining-related D&A is lower (~74% of PP&E is mining-related). Interest of $6,840/BTC reflected ~$411M total debt (TZRC at 15.25%, Coinbase at 9%, Coatue convertible at 8%).

BTC production ramped to 719 (from 578 in Q3) driven by Vega site Bitmain miners (14.86 EH/s). The company holds 15,679 BTC (~$1.37B). Structural complexity (4 segments, ABTC subsidiary, intercompany eliminations) makes clean attribution challenging. The $78.2M Q4 income tax benefit (deferred tax reversal) is excluded.

BTDR Bitdeer Technologies Group

BTC mined: 1,673

All-in cost: $118,188/BTC

Cash cost: $87,144/BTC

Bitdeer’s all-in cost was among the most competitive, though partly reflecting IFRS conventions and multi-segment revenue (SEALMINER sales $23.4M, HPC/AI $2.3M). Average electricity cost rose to $46/MWh (from $43 in Q3).

The standout issue is a Q4 depreciation policy change: management shortened miner useful lives, causing D&A in self-mining CoR to double QoQ ($63.9M vs $31.2M) despite ~60% hashrate growth. Self-mining gross margin collapsed to 3.6% (from 27.7% in Q3). This is an accounting artefact, not operational deterioration.

D&A/SBC are bundled within CoR (IFRS presentation), complicating US GAAP peer comparison. Interest of $16,306/BTC reflects ~$1B in convertible notes and related-party borrowings. BTDR’s proprietary ASIC strategy (SEALMINER A2 at 16.5 W/T, A3 at 9.7 W/T commencing mass production) is a competitive differentiator, reducing capex/TH vs Bitmain.

HIVE HIVE Digital Technologies

BTC mined: 884

All-in cost: $144,321/BTC

Cash cost: $75,274/BTC

HIVE mined 884 BTC in Q4 (fiscal Q3, ending December 31), a significant increase driven by the Paraguay expansion. Fleet efficiency improved from 21 W/T to 18.5 W/T.

Electricity of $65,368/BTC was the highest in peers (ex-WULF), inflated by a prospective accounting change: HIVE capitalised $41.3M of non-refundable Paraguayan VAT to PP&E and expensed $5.5M of VAT on electricity through opex. This treatment lifts both D&A and electricity costs relative to peers.

SG&A of $9,054/BTC was among the lowest. SBC of $7,501/BTC was moderate (Oct 2025 RSU grants at C$7.30). Interest of $320/BTC was the lowest in peers — HIVE carries just $13.8M in total debt, a structural advantage. The 100MW Valenzuela facility entered service during the period; HIVE now has 300MW of ANDE power agreements in Paraguay.

The company faces a contingent VAT liability of ~$79.2M from Swedish Tax Agency assessments on Bikupa subsidiaries (in court appeal). Equipment deposits paid using 2,079 BTC with repurchase options represent an unusual capital management technique.

BITF Bitfarms

Will be updated once Bitfarms reports their Q4 earnings

6. Miner stock performance & valuation

The AI/HPC valuation premium continued to widen in Q4. Miners with secured HPC contracts now trade at EV/NTM sales multiples of 12.3x, while pure-play miners trade at 5.9x. The Q4 BTC price decline (−31% from ATH) created a double headwind: lower mining revenue and reduced value of BTC treasury holdings.

CORZ’s post-merger-failure discount (potential hedge fund position unwinding) contrasts with WULF/CIFR/HUT premiums. Short interest is elevated across the sector (MARA at ~30% of float as of writing).

The sector has fundamentally bifurcated into “infrastructure companies” (WULF, CORZ, CIFR, HUT) and “mining companies” (MARA, CLSK, RIOT, HIVE). Whether the AI-focused multiples are justified depends on execution: not all announced deals will translate to operational infrastructure, and capital requirements remain substantial.

7. Outlook for Q1 2026 and beyond

1. Hash price recovery is contingent on BTC price - At ~$70K BTC and ~$30 hashprice, many mid-generation fleets are at or below breakeven. A sustained move below $70K could trigger larger capitulation, paradoxically benefiting survivors through lower difficulty/hashrate.

2. Next-generation hardware deployment - Bitmain S23 series and SEALMINER A3 (both sub-10 J/TH) are expected at scale through H1 2026, widening the efficiency gap and accelerating fleet refresh cycles.

3. AI/HPC revenue inflection - CORZ targeting full 590MW CoreWeave delivery by early 2027. WULF’s Lake Mariner buildout continues. The market will closely watch whether contracted revenue converts to billings and whether margins hit 85%+ targets.

4. Dispersion in leverage creates M&A catalysts - miners with clean balance sheets and strong liquidity positions (HIVE, CLSK) could be acquirers, though even CLSK has taken on meaningful convertible debt ($1.15B at 0%) to fund its AI infrastructure pivot.

5. Geographic and regulatory shifts - The US continues gaining market share. Paraguay and Ethiopia are emerging mining geographies. China’s Xinjiang enforcement may push hashrate offshore. Texas SB 6 (signed June 2025) imposed new requirements on large mining and data centre loads connecting to ERCOT, including mandatory remote disconnection capability.

6. Consolidation - We expect further M&A in 2026. The efficiency gap between best-in-class (~15 W/T) and lagging fleets (~25+ W/T) is wide enough that acquiring efficient capacity may be cheaper than upgrading legacy operations.

Appendix: Methodology

Denominator: Self-mined BTC produced in the quarter.

Allocation: Self Mining Revenue / Total Revenue. Applied to SG&A, D&A, SBC, Interest, and Tax.

All-In Cost per BTC = Electricity (net of curtailment) + SG&A (excl. SBC) + D&A + Net Interest + Income Tax + SBC — all allocated by mining revenue share where applicable.

Cash Cost per BTC = Cost of Revenues (excl. D&A) + SG&A (excl. SBC) + Net Interest + Income Tax — all allocated.

Electricity is net of curtailment/demand-response credits. Excludes impairments, fair-value remeasurements, and non-operational items (e.g., BTC revaluation gains/losses, derivative fair value changes, debt conversion inducement expenses).

Values are in US$ thousands unless otherwise stated. Non-USD reporters are converted at average quarterly FX rates.