Invest ideasNews
9 Feb 2026, 22:48
Major Banks Assess Bitcoin Miners’ Shift Towards Infrastructure Models
Leading banks reviewed key Bitcoin miners, focusing on Cipher Mining and TeraWulf. Firms are shifting towards infrastructure models with long-term leasing agreements. Continue Reading: Major Banks Assess Bitcoin Miners’ Shift Towards Infrastructure Models The post Major Banks Assess Bitcoin Miners’ Shift Towards Infrastructure Models appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .
9 Feb 2026, 21:00
Bitcoin’s Quantum Risk Is Smaller Than Feared, Researcher Says
The Bitcoin market shrugged, but the conversation about quantum computers and Bitcoin popped back into feeds this week. It’s an old worry that keeps coming up: could future machines break the cryptography that protects wallets? Based on reports from CoinShares and comments from long-time Bitcoin voices, the real story is less about an immediate panic and more about practical planning and who would actually be at risk. Public Keys Expose A Small Slice Reports say that only 10,230 BTC sit in addresses where public keys are already visible, and that changes the math. Those coins would be the easiest targets if a powerful quantum machine appeared. Around 7,000 BTC sit in mid-size wallets holding between 100 and 1,000 coins. About 3,230 BTC live in larger addresses holding between 1,000 and 10,000 coins. At today’s values that stake is worth several hundred million dollars. That’s big money, but it’s not the same as a collapse of the protocol. An aggressive theft of that size would look like a heavy trade or a major security incident, not a network failure. Quantum Hardware Still Falls Short According to experts, the algorithmic threat is straightforward: Shor’s algorithm would attack elliptic-curve signatures and Grover’s algorithm would weaken SHA-256 hashing. But reports note a huge gap between experiment and attack. Current machines run at a little over 100 qubits in experimental setups. An effective break would need millions of stable, error-corrected qubits. That kind of hardware has not been built. In short: the math shows a possible route, but the engineering is far from ready. Old Coins, The Real Operational Headache Many of the more exposed addresses date back to Bitcoin’s early days and contain coins that have never moved. That makes them special. When those keys were first used, best practices were different. Now, those same keys are a known point of weakness if quantum computing power ever arrives. Movement of those coins would be messy. Custodians, exchanges, and individual holders would all need to coordinate. A technical fix could be proposed and adopted. The hard work would be getting people to update software and migrate keys before any real danger materializes. That is a logistics problem more than a cryptography puzzle. Veteran Voices Call For Early Work According to Andreas Antonopoulos, a well-known Bitcoin and cryptocurrency expert, the threat is real but distant; he urges preparation rather than alarm. British cryptographer Adam Back has said planning can happen in an orderly way, and panic is unnecessary so long as steps start now. Those views line up: upgrade paths should be designed, wallets must discourage key reuse, and the community should test migration procedures. If action is taken early, there’s ample room to make the shift without rushing or breaking systems. Featured image from Crypto Valley Journal , chart from TradingView
9 Feb 2026, 20:10
NFN8 Group Inc. files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Bitcoin mining operator NFN8 Group Inc. and its subsidiaries have gone down the dreaded path of formally filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company seeks court protection from creditors after running into financial challenges due to a fire outbreak at its Texas facility. NFN8 made the Chapter 11 filing in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. This move comes as a shock to many who have witnessed the company’s rapid growth in recent years. Fire, leases, and increased pressure on mining margins NFN8’s bankruptcy filing can be traced to multiple events over the past year. Beginning with the fire outbreak at its leased facility in Crystal City, Texas, which cut mining capacity by a little over 50%. The fire incident happened at, perhaps, the worst of times for NFN8; a period where global mining profitability was dwindling due to compressed hashprice – a measure of mining revenue per unit of computational power – following the April 2024 Bitcoin halving. NFN8’s operational model (a sale-leaseback equipment financing program involving more than 250 counterparties) became unsustainable after a major dip in revenue. Also, the company’s ongoing legal & tax issues have added more strain on its finances. To keep its head above water, NFN8 secured $2.75 million in debtor-in-possession financing from Twelve Bridge Capital LLC to keep essential operations running during the court-supervised sale of assets. At its peak, NFN8 operated over 5,000 Bitcoin mining machines in Texas and Iowa as the industry expanded in the late 2010s and early 2020s. The company had to fight through periods of uncertainty when Core Scientific , a key hosting partner, went bankrupt in 2022. However, the combo of catastrophic events and lower hashprice finally brought NFN8 to its knees. What’s next for NFN8? NFN8’s filing will look to preserve whatever value is left in the company while ensuring an orderly process of liquidation, which aims to preserve value and avoid disorderly liquidation. The process involves marketing the company’s assets to prospective bidders, with the hope of getting the best return for stakeholders. What does this mean for Bitcoin mining profitability? Looking across the industry, NFN8’s situation simply reflects the growing trend of lower rewards for miners, causing miners to depend more on Bitcoin’s market price and transaction fees to cover operational costs. All of this can be traced back to the April 2024 block subsidy halving, which cut rewards from 6.25 BTC per block to 3.125 BTC. Also, hashprice has fallen to a historically low figure of $33 per petahash per day over the last couple of months, adding even more pressure on miners However, it can be argued that bankruptcies such as NFN8’s actually bode well for the larger mining ecosystem. Because it helps move assets from so-called “weaker” operators into the hands of more efficient operators. While there has been an 11% difficulty drop in mining recently, it still costs around $87,000 to mine one Bitcoin, and transaction fees as a share of miner revenue fell from 7% to 1% after 2024, making the broader picture look rather bleak. The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them .
9 Feb 2026, 18:45
Morgan Stanley’s Crucial Bitcoin Mining Analysis: Why Marathon Digital Faces Underweight Rating as Industry Shifts
BitcoinWorld Morgan Stanley’s Crucial Bitcoin Mining Analysis: Why Marathon Digital Faces Underweight Rating as Industry Shifts NEW YORK, March 2025 – In a pivotal move reshaping investment perspectives, Morgan Stanley has initiated formal coverage on three major Bitcoin mining firms, delivering a starkly divergent outlook that underscores a fundamental industry evolution. The bank’s analysis, first reported by CoinDesk, assigns an overweight rating to both Cipher Mining (CIFR) and TeraWulf (WULF) while issuing a consequential underweight rating for industry giant Marathon Digital Holdings (MARA). This decisive action signals a critical reassessment of how Wall Street values companies operating within the volatile cryptocurrency ecosystem. Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin Mining Analysis: A New Investment Framework Morgan Stanley’s report fundamentally reframes the investment thesis for public mining companies. Consequently, the bank argues these entities should be evaluated primarily as infrastructure assets , not as direct proxies for Bitcoin price speculation. Analysts posit that a mining firm constructing a data center and securing long-term power agreements essentially operates as a specialized infrastructure provider. Therefore, investors backing such a model are financing capital-intensive physical assets with contracted revenue streams, rather than making a pure bet on cryptocurrency appreciation. This framework prioritizes operational stability and predictable cash flow over exposure to Bitcoin’s notorious price volatility. Subsequently, the report suggests this infrastructure model better suits investors seeking steady returns, diverging from traders focused solely on crypto market cycles. The analysis further contends that companies remaining purely focused on Bitcoin mining as their core business face significant hurdles in generating substantial long-term returns for shareholders. Decoding the Divergent Ratings: Cipher, TeraWulf vs. Marathon Morgan Stanley’s split ratings hinge directly on how each company aligns with this infrastructure thesis. The bank established clear price targets reflecting its analysis: $38 for Cipher Mining, $37 for TeraWulf, and $8 for Marathon Digital. This valuation gap stems from distinct operational and financial strategies. Cipher Mining and TeraWulf have aggressively pursued strategies emphasizing: Low-Cost, Stable Power Contracts: Securing long-term agreements for affordable, often sustainable energy. Infrastructure Partnerships: Developing hosting sites or partnering with established data center operators. Balance Sheet Discipline: Managing debt and expansion in a capital-efficient manner. Conversely, Marathon Digital, historically one of the largest holders of Bitcoin on its balance sheet, has maintained a strategy more closely tied to direct Bitcoin accumulation and price performance. Morgan Stanley’s underweight rating implies concerns that this model carries higher risk without commensurate infrastructure-like returns, especially in a competitive mining environment post-Bitcoin halving events. The Infrastructure Investment Angle: Why It Matters Now This analytical shift arrives amid a broader maturation of the cryptocurrency sector. Following the 2024 Bitcoin halving, mining economics have intensified, forcing a relentless focus on efficiency and operational cost. Furthermore, increasing regulatory scrutiny and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations are pushing miners toward sustainable energy sources and more transparent business models. Institutional investors, a key clientele for firms like Morgan Stanley, increasingly demand investments with defensible cash flows and tangible assets, making the infrastructure narrative particularly compelling. The report’s timing is also significant. As Bitcoin establishes itself within diversified portfolios, the need to understand the underlying supporting industries grows. Analysts are no longer just asking “What is the Bitcoin price?” but “What is the quality of the network’s foundational infrastructure?” This move by a major bulge-bracket bank provides a formal rubric for that assessment, potentially influencing capital allocation across the entire sector. Industry Context and Historical Precedents Morgan Stanley’s analysis follows a volatile period for mining stocks. The sector often exhibits beta significantly higher than Bitcoin itself, soaring during bull markets and crashing during downturns. This volatility has historically deterred more conservative capital. The infrastructure model aims to dampen this volatility by anchoring valuation to physical assets and contracts. This is not the first time a traditional finance giant has applied conventional frameworks to crypto-adjacent businesses. Previously, analysts have evaluated cryptocurrency exchanges as technology platforms and blockchain developers as software companies. Applying the infrastructure lens to miners represents the next logical step in the sector’s financialization, seeking to bridge the gap between crypto-native operations and traditional equity valuation metrics. Potential Impacts and Market Reactions The immediate market reaction saw notable divergence in the stock prices of the covered companies, aligning with the ratings. Longer-term, this analysis could catalyze several industry shifts: Capital Allocation: Mining companies may face increased investor pressure to secure long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) and develop asset-heavy, utility-like business plans. M&A Activity: Firms with strong infrastructure profiles may become attractive acquisition targets for traditional energy or data center companies seeking entry into the digital asset space. Financing: Debt and equity financing terms may become more favorable for miners who can convincingly pitch an infrastructure story, potentially lowering their cost of capital. Ultimately, the report challenges the entire sector to demonstrate economic resilience beyond the Bitcoin price cycle. It raises a fundamental question for management teams: Are you building a volatile trading vehicle or a durable infrastructure business? Conclusion Morgan Stanley’s initiation of coverage on Bitcoin miners with a clear preference for infrastructure-focused firms marks a watershed moment for the industry. By rating Cipher Mining and TeraWulf overweight while assigning an underweight rating to Marathon Digital, the bank has drawn a definitive line between two competing business models. This Morgan Stanley Bitcoin mining analysis provides a crucial framework for investors, emphasizing stable cash flow and tangible assets over pure cryptocurrency speculation. As the digital asset ecosystem matures, such traditional financial scrutiny will likely become the norm, reshaping how mining companies operate, compete, and attract capital in 2025 and beyond. FAQs Q1: What does an “underweight” rating from Morgan Stanley mean for Marathon Digital? An underweight rating suggests Morgan Stanley analysts believe Marathon Digital’s stock will underperform the average return of its industry peers or the analyst’s defined coverage universe over the specified timeframe. It is a recommendation to reduce or avoid holding the stock relative to other investments. Q2: Why does Morgan Stanley view some Bitcoin miners as infrastructure plays? The bank argues that miners who build data centers and secure long-term power contracts are essentially creating physical, revenue-generating assets. Investors in these companies are therefore backing the infrastructure (the data center and its contracts) rather than making a direct bet on the price of Bitcoin itself. Q3: What are the key differences between Cipher/TeraWulf and Marathon according to the report? While specifics may vary, the report implies Cipher Mining and TeraWulf have business models more aligned with low-cost, contracted infrastructure. Marathon Digital’s strategy has historically been more closely tied to holding Bitcoin on its balance sheet, making its valuation more sensitive to crypto market volatility. Q4: How might this analysis affect the broader Bitcoin mining industry? It could pressure all public miners to emphasize stable power contracts, asset-heavy balance sheets, and predictable cash flows to attract institutional investment. It may also widen the valuation gap between miners perceived as infrastructure and those viewed as pure Bitcoin plays. Q5: Is this the first time a major bank has covered Bitcoin mining stocks? No, other banks and financial institutions have provided research on mining stocks. However, Morgan Stanley’s explicit framing of the sector through an infrastructure lens and its stark rating divergence between major players represents a significant and high-profile analytical stance. This post Morgan Stanley’s Crucial Bitcoin Mining Analysis: Why Marathon Digital Faces Underweight Rating as Industry Shifts first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
9 Feb 2026, 18:30
Crypto mining companies are booming despite the slowdown of BTC
Mining companies are booming despite the slowdown of BTC and the crypto market. The leading mining stocks are still rising on expectations of their pivot into AI. Crypto mining companies are still inviting market enthusiasm, driven by their pivot from BTC mining to AI. The sector shows that relationships with crypto may be a benefit to the companies. Some are sitting on legacy BTC treasuries, acquired at a lower mining price. The companies managed to use BTC to finance their expansion into AI data centers, securing electricity for upcoming data centers. Are crypto mining companies still undervalued? The chief narrative driving BTC mining companies is that they are still undervalued. The shares of IREN and other leading crypto mining companies rallied in the past day, with most of the US-based companies in the green. Crypto mining stocks were mostly in the green, despite the ongoing BTC price weakness. | Source: CompaniesMarketCap At the same time, BTC is showing signs of being oversold and undervalued at levels just below $70,000. However, the worsening crypto sentiment may make traders shift to mining companies as a source of growth. Most mining companies are also passive treasury holders, but MARA shares have not benefited from the reserves, as they are among the worst performers. IREN still drives the strength of crypto mining stocks, currently hovering around $45.52. Will crypto miners capitulate? The rising prices of crypto mining stocks raised the issue of mining capitulation to cut losses. Currently, some miners may be producing at a cost higher than the market price. This does not apply to all miners, and some legacy operations may still be profitable. Miner reserves show the period of holding through volatility is now over. Miners hold 1.8M BTC, down from 1.89M in the past few months. The main source of selling may be the reserves of Mara, as well as Cango’s stash of over $700M in BTC. The pivot to AI and high-compute data centers may be one of the reasons to drain miner treasuries. While BTC has dropped by 50% from its highs, treasuries are still capable of supporting further expansion into new AI data centers. The capitulation may not be due to the weakness of BTC, but due to demand for AI, and potentially covering some of the debt from building data centers. Recently, Cango sold 4,451 BTC, retaining 3,645 BTC in its reserves. Other miners are mostly retaining their remaining balance, but Cango aimed to boost its balance sheet with around $305M in BTC, dedicated to capital expenses. The selling is not haphazard for now, and miners have not shown real signs of capitulation or abandoning the network. Hashrate recovered to 963 EH/s, showing the already built BTC centers are often profitable enough to keep running even at a lower price range. The winter slowdown of mining from hydroelectric power is still not a sign of capitulation, and some pools even increased their total hashrate. The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them .
9 Feb 2026, 16:55
Cipher Mining and TeraWulf are buys, MARA a sell, as Morgan Stanley begins bitcoin miner coverag
The analyst framed some bitcoin mining sites as infrastructure assets, lifting CIFR and WULF shares while MARA lags.
