Cleanspark, Inc. (CLSK) Stock Analysis and Metrics

Cleanspark

NASDAQ: CLSK

$13.43 ▲ +1.07 (+8.62%)

At close: Jul 14, 2026 · 3:59 PM UTC

Financial Ratios

Market Cap3.65 Bn

P/E-6.80

Div. Yield0.01

ROIC (Qtr)0.00

Total Debt (Qtr)1.79 Bn

Add ratio to table…

About

CleanSpark, Inc. is a data center developer that until recently focused exclusively on bitcoin mining. It independently owns leases and operates a large portfolio of data centers and power assets across the United States with locations in Georgia Tennessee Mississippi and Wyoming for a total contracted power capacity of approximately 1,027 megawatts as of September 30 2025. The company intends to continue growth in these regions and is actively developing plans for additional capacity in these states and other domestic regions. CleanSpark designs its infrastructure to efficiently profitably and responsibly secure and support both bitcoin mining and AI and HPC workloads. It continuously analyses its portfolio and pipeline of potential new developments and expansions of existing sites to identify opportunities for maximum return on investment which may include bitcoin mining AI and HPC hosting and leasing or a combination of both. The company cultivates trust and transparency among its employees and the communities where it operates. Through CleanSpark and its wholly owned subsidiaries it has operated in the bitcoin mining sector since December 2020. It previously had an independent bitcoin mining operation in Massena New York subject to a hosting agreement that operated 50 megawatts which expired on December 31 2024.

Bitcoin mining has historically been the principal revenue generating activity for CleanSpark. The company provides computing power to a single mining pool operator and receives bitcoin rewards consisting of newly issued coins and transaction fees as variable consideration. CleanSpark sells bitcoin from time to time to support operations and strategic growth and may use bitcoin as collateral for lending arrangements. In April 2025 the company launched an in house trading function and began entering bitcoin linked derivative contracts to hedge price volatility and generate liquidity for core operating activities. It also uses a substantial portion of the bitcoin it mines to fund its operations and capital expenditures. For the fiscal year ended September 30 2025 CleanSpark mined approximately 7,873 bitcoins net of mining pool fees representing a decrease of 11 percent compared to the prior year. In addition CleanSpark is developing its AI and HPC hosting business which will generate revenue from leasing data center capacity to hyperscale cloud providers AI providers and other technology companies.

The company operates through the following segments: Bitcoin Mining and AI and HPC Hosting.

• CleanSpark's Bitcoin Mining segment owns leases and operates data centers and power assets in Georgia Tennessee Mississippi and Wyoming with a total contracted power capacity of approximately 1,027 megawatts as of September 30 2025. The segment delivers an average hashrate of about 45.6 exahash per second peaking near 50 exahash per second and operates roughly 241,934 mining machines with an average age of about fifteen months and an average energy efficiency of 16.7 watts per terahash. It supplies its computing power to a sole mining pool operator under a terminable contract and earns bitcoin rewards that are sold to fund operations or used as collateral and in the fiscal year ended September 30 2025 the segment mined approximately 7,873 bitcoins net of pool fees.

• The AI and HPC Hosting segment leverages the company's power optimization land acquisition engineering operations and construction expertise to develop portions of its sites for AI and HPC hosting and leasing to hyperscale cloud providers AI providers and other technology companies. CleanSpark added a Senior Vice President of AI Data Centers in October 2025 and is working with Submer to evaluate future collaboration for next generation AI infrastructure. The segment secured rights to approximately 271 acres in Austin County Texas and executed long term power supply agreements totaling 285 megawatts to support a new data center campus while also retaining the existing 620 megawatt platform in Georgia for retrofit and dual purpose compute deployment. It continues to explore additional property acquisitions and expansions to grow its AI and HPC capacity.

CleanSpark holds a notable position among North American bitcoin miners due to its substantial owned power capacity and large scale mining fleet. Its principal competitors in the bitcoin mining space include MARA Holdings Riot Platforms Core Scientific Bitfarms IREN Limited Cipher Mining and TeraWulf. In the emerging AI and HPC data center market it faces competition from established operators such as Equinix Digital Realty Trust CoreWeave and others. The company's competitive advantages stem from its deep expertise in energy management the high efficiency of its mining hardware and its proven ability to maintain high uptime across its owned and operated facilities. CleanSpark also leverages the bitcoin it mines as a store of value to finance growth and as collateral for borrowing and it collaborates with local communities to help stabilize energy usage and reduce power rates for residential customers.

CleanSpark's Bitcoin Mining segment derives its revenue from a single mining pool operator that compensates the company for providing computing power to the pool. The AI and HPC Hosting segment is in the process of building a customer base that will consist of hyperscale cloud providers AI enterprises and other technology companies seeking scalable and energy efficient data center capacity. No specific customer names are disclosed in the filing for either segment.

Investment Thesis

▲ Bull case

CleanSpark’s strategic focus on monetizing its 1.8 gigawatts of contracted power capacity through a balanced Bitcoin mining and AI/HPC model positions the company to capture significant upside as data center demand accelerates, particularly because management emphasized that mining funds the platform while AI monetizes it, creating a self-reinforcing cycle where volatile Bitcoin cash flows de-risk infrastructure buildout; the company’s ability to maintain gross margins above 40% despite a 24% sequential drop in Bitcoin price demonstrates operational resilience, and with power costs declining to 5.2¢ per kWh year-over-year, the mining segment remains a low-cost engine that can fund AI expansion without dilutive equity raises, a point understated in the transcript but critical to sustaining long-term growth.
The appointment of Ruben Sahakyan as SVP of Finance brings deep capital markets expertise from KBW, where he advised on over $20 billion in digital assets and infrastructure transactions, directly addressing a hidden catalyst: CleanSpark’s ability to access low-cost financing for its multigigawatt growth pipeline, as Gary Vecchiarelli noted recent data center landlord financings are being oversubscribed 5x to 6x and priced slightly over 6%, yet the company has not actively promoted how Sahakyan’s background in structured finance and M&A will enable it to capitalize on these favorable terms to fund AI campus builds at Sealy, Brazoria, and Sandersville without relying on volatile Bitcoin revenue, a structural shift the market is overlooking.
CleanSpark’s factory-based modular construction approach, which reduces on-site labor by up to 70% and compresses timelines to 14–18 months post-lease signing, represents a durable competitive advantage in an industry facing labor bottlenecks, especially as Matthew Schultz highlighted that this model allows the company to replicate builds across its portfolio—such as the 25 MW added in Metro Atlanta—while maintaining optionality; the market is underestimating how this capability transforms CleanSpark from a pure-play miner into a scalable infrastructure developer with defensible margins, as evidenced by Harry Sudock’s comment that the approach creates “the best total cost of ownership for the client over multiple refresh cycles,” a long-term value driver not reflected in current Bitcoin-price-driven sentiment.
The company’s HODL balance of 13,561 Bitcoin, worth $925 million at quarter-end and now valued at approximately $1.1 billion post-quarter, serves as a strategic asset beyond mere speculation—management revealed less than 40% of this balance is actively deployed in Digital Asset Management (DAM), yet DAM still generated $4 million in net positive cash returns this quarter and $17.2 million fiscal year-to-date, proving the strategy’s durability in volatile markets; this undeployed balance represents a latent yield engine that could significantly boost adjusted EBITDA if market conditions improve or if DAM allocation increases, a hidden lever the market ignores while focusing solely on mining revenue volatility.
CleanSpark’s portfolio diversification strategy—explicitly targeting multisite deployments with high-credit tenants seeking capacity across geography—addresses a critical industry constraint: grid interconnect delays and political headwinds around large single-site projects, as Matthew Schultz noted the company avoids the “9 gigawatt range” projects facing opposition by pursuing “bite-sized” sites in jurisdictions with pre-existing community trust; this approach, validated by Harry Sudock’s comment about replicating the Sandersville model elsewhere, reduces execution risk and accelerates lease signing timelines, a structural advantage in the AI infrastructure race that the market is not pricing in due to overemphasis on near-term Bitcoin price swings.

CleanSpark’s strategic focus on monetizing its 1.8 gigawatts of contracted power capacity through a balanced Bitcoin mining and AI/HPC model positions the company to capture significant upside as data center demand accelerates, particularly because management emphasized that mining funds the platform while AI monetizes it, creating a self-reinforcing cycle where volatile Bitcoin cash flows de-risk infrastructure buildout; the company’s ability to maintain gross margins above 40% despite a 24% sequential drop in Bitcoin price demonstrates operational resilience, and with power costs declining to 5.2¢ per kWh year-over-year, the mining segment remains a low-cost engine that can fund AI expansion without dilutive equity raises, a point understated in the transcript but critical to sustaining long-term growth.
The appointment of Ruben Sahakyan as SVP of Finance brings deep capital markets expertise from KBW, where he advised on over $20 billion in digital assets and infrastructure transactions, directly addressing a hidden catalyst: CleanSpark’s ability to access low-cost financing for its multigigawatt growth pipeline, as Gary Vecchiarelli noted recent data center landlord financings are being oversubscribed 5x to 6x and priced slightly over 6%, yet the company has not actively promoted how Sahakyan’s background in structured finance and M&A will enable it to capitalize on these favorable terms to fund AI campus builds at Sealy, Brazoria, and Sandersville without relying on volatile Bitcoin revenue, a structural shift the market is overlooking.
CleanSpark’s factory-based modular construction approach, which reduces on-site labor by up to 70% and compresses timelines to 14–18 months post-lease signing, represents a durable competitive advantage in an industry facing labor bottlenecks, especially as Matthew Schultz highlighted that this model allows the company to replicate builds across its portfolio—such as the 25 MW added in Metro Atlanta—while maintaining optionality; the market is underestimating how this capability transforms CleanSpark from a pure-play miner into a scalable infrastructure developer with defensible margins, as evidenced by Harry Sudock’s comment that the approach creates “the best total cost of ownership for the client over multiple refresh cycles,” a long-term value driver not reflected in current Bitcoin-price-driven sentiment.
The company’s HODL balance of 13,561 Bitcoin, worth $925 million at quarter-end and now valued at approximately $1.1 billion post-quarter, serves as a strategic asset beyond mere speculation—management revealed less than 40% of this balance is actively deployed in Digital Asset Management (DAM), yet DAM still generated $4 million in net positive cash returns this quarter and $17.2 million fiscal year-to-date, proving the strategy’s durability in volatile markets; this undeployed balance represents a latent yield engine that could significantly boost adjusted EBITDA if market conditions improve or if DAM allocation increases, a hidden lever the market ignores while focusing solely on mining revenue volatility.
CleanSpark’s portfolio diversification strategy—explicitly targeting multisite deployments with high-credit tenants seeking capacity across geography—addresses a critical industry constraint: grid interconnect delays and political headwinds around large single-site projects, as Matthew Schultz noted the company avoids the “9 gigawatt range” projects facing opposition by pursuing “bite-sized” sites in jurisdictions with pre-existing community trust; this approach, validated by Harry Sudock’s comment about replicating the Sandersville model elsewhere, reduces execution risk and accelerates lease signing timelines, a structural advantage in the AI infrastructure race that the market is not pricing in due to overemphasis on near-term Bitcoin price swings.

▼ Bear case

CleanSpark’s continued reliance on Bitcoin mining as a funding mechanism for AI infrastructure exposes the company to persistent cash flow volatility, as the $241 million negative adjusted EBITDA this quarter—despite improvement from $295 million—was driven by a 24% sequential drop in Bitcoin price to $76,000, and Gary Vecchiarelli explicitly acknowledged that net loss includes $263 million in non-cash GAAP mark-to-market adjustments, meaning the underlying mining operation remains unprofitable at current prices; the market may be ignoring how prolonged Bitcoin weakness could force the company to liquidate HODL balance or draw on credit lines to fund AI buildout, undermining the balance sheet strength it touts, especially since less than 40% of HODL is currently generating yield via DAM.
The company’s ambitious power pipeline—over 5 gigawatts of potential capacity beyond the contracted 1.8 GW—remains speculative and unsecured, as Matthew Schultz carefully distinguished between “approved, contracted, and available” power and the pipeline, which he labeled “speculative or potential,” yet the bullish thesis assumes rapid conversion of these sites; the market may be overlooking how ERCOT and utility approval processes, described by Harry Sudock as requiring “constructive deals” and deep engagement with agencies like CenterPoint, are inherently uncertain and time-intensive, with no guarantee that the Sealy or Brazoria sites will energize on schedule, particularly given political headwinds around data centers that Schultz acknowledged exist even if CleanSpark avoids them via smaller sites.
CleanSpark’s co-location strategy pairing Bitcoin mining with AI workloads to utilize spare baseload capacity faces significant technical and economic hurdles, as Gary Vecchiarelli admitted immersion miners will drop efficiency from 16 joules/terahash, increasing energy costs, and the model relies on utilities accepting interruptible loads to meet five-nines reliability—a concept Schultz described as “early in the discussion” and requiring education; the market may be ignoring that this approach adds operational complexity, potential downtime risk, and unproven revenue streams, especially since tenants demand firm, high-uptime power, and any failure to guarantee baseload monetization could make CleanSpark’s sites less attractive than pure-play data center REITs with simpler, proven models.
The Digital Asset Management (DAM) segment, while generating $4 million in cash returns this quarter, remains a marginal contributor to overall profitability and may not scale meaningfully, as Harry Sudock noted returns come from activating less than 40% of the HODL balance, implying diminishing returns at higher allocation; the market could be overestimating DAM’s ability to offset mining losses, especially since the strategy depends on active trading and volatility—factors that are inherently unpredictable—and with Gary Vecchiarelli stating the team is still “refining trade execution,” there is no evidence DAM can become a reliable, high-margin pillar to support AI expansion during prolonged Bitcoin downturns.
CleanSpark’s capital allocation discipline, while emphasized by management, risks delaying AI monetization, as Gary Vecchiarelli confirmed only “minimal investment” is being made at Sandersville until lease signing, and Matthew Schultz reiterated a conservative approach to avoid overbuilding; this caution, while prudent, may allow competitors with stronger balance sheets or more aggressive execution to lock in hyperscale tenants first, particularly since the company admitted it is not pursuing GPU cloud services and is focused solely on colocation—a slower path to revenue—and the market may be ignoring how this delay erodes first-mover advantage in a rapidly consolidating AI infrastructure landscape where speed to market is critical.

CleanSpark’s continued reliance on Bitcoin mining as a funding mechanism for AI infrastructure exposes the company to persistent cash flow volatility, as the $241 million negative adjusted EBITDA this quarter—despite improvement from $295 million—was driven by a 24% sequential drop in Bitcoin price to $76,000, and Gary Vecchiarelli explicitly acknowledged that net loss includes $263 million in non-cash GAAP mark-to-market adjustments, meaning the underlying mining operation remains unprofitable at current prices; the market may be ignoring how prolonged Bitcoin weakness could force the company to liquidate HODL balance or draw on credit lines to fund AI buildout, undermining the balance sheet strength it touts, especially since less than 40% of HODL is currently generating yield via DAM.
The company’s ambitious power pipeline—over 5 gigawatts of potential capacity beyond the contracted 1.8 GW—remains speculative and unsecured, as Matthew Schultz carefully distinguished between “approved, contracted, and available” power and the pipeline, which he labeled “speculative or potential,” yet the bullish thesis assumes rapid conversion of these sites; the market may be overlooking how ERCOT and utility approval processes, described by Harry Sudock as requiring “constructive deals” and deep engagement with agencies like CenterPoint, are inherently uncertain and time-intensive, with no guarantee that the Sealy or Brazoria sites will energize on schedule, particularly given political headwinds around data centers that Schultz acknowledged exist even if CleanSpark avoids them via smaller sites.
CleanSpark’s co-location strategy pairing Bitcoin mining with AI workloads to utilize spare baseload capacity faces significant technical and economic hurdles, as Gary Vecchiarelli admitted immersion miners will drop efficiency from 16 joules/terahash, increasing energy costs, and the model relies on utilities accepting interruptible loads to meet five-nines reliability—a concept Schultz described as “early in the discussion” and requiring education; the market may be ignoring that this approach adds operational complexity, potential downtime risk, and unproven revenue streams, especially since tenants demand firm, high-uptime power, and any failure to guarantee baseload monetization could make CleanSpark’s sites less attractive than pure-play data center REITs with simpler, proven models.
The Digital Asset Management (DAM) segment, while generating $4 million in cash returns this quarter, remains a marginal contributor to overall profitability and may not scale meaningfully, as Harry Sudock noted returns come from activating less than 40% of the HODL balance, implying diminishing returns at higher allocation; the market could be overestimating DAM’s ability to offset mining losses, especially since the strategy depends on active trading and volatility—factors that are inherently unpredictable—and with Gary Vecchiarelli stating the team is still “refining trade execution,” there is no evidence DAM can become a reliable, high-margin pillar to support AI expansion during prolonged Bitcoin downturns.
CleanSpark’s capital allocation discipline, while emphasized by management, risks delaying AI monetization, as Gary Vecchiarelli confirmed only “minimal investment” is being made at Sandersville until lease signing, and Matthew Schultz reiterated a conservative approach to avoid overbuilding; this caution, while prudent, may allow competitors with stronger balance sheets or more aggressive execution to lock in hyperscale tenants first, particularly since the company admitted it is not pursuing GPU cloud services and is focused solely on colocation—a slower path to revenue—and the market may be ignoring how this delay erodes first-mover advantage in a rapidly consolidating AI infrastructure landscape where speed to market is critical.

Peer Comparison

Companies in the Capital Markets

S.No.	Ticker	Company	Market Cap	P/E	P/S	Total Debt (Qtr)
1	MS	Morgan Stanley	330.70 Bn	0.00 Bn	4.50	119.83 Bn
2	GS	Goldman Sachs Group Inc	309.79 Bn	0.00 Bn	5.12	259.45 Bn
3	SCHW	Schwab Charles Corp	167.21 Bn	0.00 Bn	6.74	-
4	FUTU	Futu Holdings Ltd	111.36 Bn	85.66 Bn	82.13	0.01 Bn
5	HOOD	Robinhood Markets, Inc.	97.69 Bn	0.00 Bn	21.18	-
6	LPLA	LPL Financial Holdings Inc.	23.49 Bn	0.00 Bn	1.29	-
7	TW	Tradeweb Markets Inc.	21.59 Bn	0.00 Bn	9.99	-
8	CRCL	Circle Internet Group, Inc.	15.14 Bn	0.00 Bn	6.85	-

Research Tools

Developers

About

Investment Thesis

Business Combination Breakdown of Revenue (2025)

Peer Comparison

Research Tools

Developers

About

Investment Thesis

Business Combination Breakdown of Revenue (2025)

Peer Comparison

Create an account

Sign In

Reset Password