VanEck, an asset manager, has developed a new framework that draws clear distinctions between Bitcoin miners who have truly transformed themselves into providers of artificial intelligence infrastructure and those still peddling a tale. The price is a sobering $50 billion funding gap between pipeline ambitions of the industry and its actual delivery.
A research noteGriffin MacMaster of VanEck Investments and Matthew Sigel of Digital Assets Research have developed what they call the first valuation method for companies that fall into the blurred category of companies that span both. Bitcoin mining AI Data Center Hosting.
With financial disclosures varying widely across the sector and cash flows still nascent, VanEck argues the cleanest metric available to investors right now is gross energized power — essentially, how many megawatts a company has actually switched on, not just announced.
This gap is telling. Companies that have physical leases in hand — including Cipher Mining (CIFR), Hut 8 (HUT), and TeraWulf (WULF) — are commanding valuations above 10x gross energized power.
Meanwhile, names like Marathon Digital (MARA) and CleanSpark (CLSK), which remain more closely tied to Bitcoin mining with limited contracted AI capacity, are trading at just 2–6x that same metric.
“For now, we find that the market is paying for contracted and energized capacity, while discounting everything still in the pipeline,” Analysts wrote.
VanEck cautions that signing contracts is just the start. Across the entire peer group, miners have delivered only approximately 25% of their leased capacity — a figure that the firm expects to decline further before improving, as large-scale construction projects kick off in 2027 and 2028.
VanEck says that companies which miss key construction milestones will be at greater risk. “structural de-ratings.”
These companies are also a very small group of firms that have had prior experience with building this type of infrastructure. AI customers require — making project management credentials as important as megawatt counts.
VanEck’s deal tracker signals a busy second half of 2026, with multiple companies — including Bitdeer (BTDR), HIVE Digital (HIVE), Riot Platforms (RIOT), and Core Scientific (CORZ) — in various stages of active or advanced lease negotiations. It is said that WULF was inept. “advanced negotiations” A 480MW facility in Kentucky is expected to attract a new customer by the end of second quarter.
A $221 billion build — and who can pay for it
This pivot will require a staggering amount of capital. VanEck’s estimates of the long-term investment needs for this sector are around $221 billion. Near-term requirements alone create a funding gap that is roughly 50 billion dollars above cash position.
Within the group, there is considerable dispersion. HIVE is under the greatest pressure in relation to its current market capital, due to its AI Gigafactory plans that target more than 100,000 graphics processors. IREN and KEEL are the two companies with the heaviest loads in near-term. WULF, CIFR and a few others are in a better position, as they have already signed anchor contracts that de-risk the capital raising.
There are many different ways to fund construction. Companies with Bitcoin treasury holdings — including MARA (35,303 BTC), CLSK (13,561 BTC), and HUT (13,696 BTC) — can lean on Bitcoin monetization strategies to part-fund construction.
REN has a significant near-term need for funding, but no BTC treasury is available to tap into. This leaves a smaller pool of options, namely dilutive equity issuances and incremental debt.
VanEck: The Bitcoin risk is exaggerated
It also questions the extent to which the market is able to link the price of Bitcoin with the group as a whole. VanEck says that while the group’s daily average return on BTC is around 0.55, and its average beta over a year’s time sits at about 1.05, this dynamic may be exaggerating the true Bitcoin-sensitivity of the industry for those companies who have moved away.
MARA, CLSK and RIOT are the only companies with significant exposure on their balance sheets to Bitcoin’s price fluctuations. CORZ (with BTC-sensitive value equal to 98% of market cap), CLSK (53%), and RIOT are the only companies with significant exposure on their balance sheets.
The analysis shows that a drop in Bitcoin to $50,000 would erase roughly 45% of MARA’s equity value and nearly 50% of HIVE’s, while shaving just 4% off HUT’s — underscoring how poorly the “single BTC trade” Framing captures group’s increasing divergence.
VanEck expects valuations to eventually migrate away from megawatt counts toward delivery ratios, unit economics, and ultimately discounted cash flow models — at which point these companies will begin to resemble data center REITs more than miners.
Many of these companies could be eventually sold or transformed into REITs once their AI revenue matures.
For now, VanEck sees the greatest re-rating potential in names with the widest gap between ambition and current market pricing — HIVE, KEEL, IREN, and Bitdeer — while acknowledging those same names carry the highest execution risk. WULF, CIFR and HUT are companies that have already secured anchor deals. This is a conservative way to turn this advantage into a long-term position.
“This article is not financial advice.”
“Always do your own research before making any type of investment.”
“ItsDailyCrypto is not responsible for any activities you perform outside ItsDailyCrypto.”
Source: bitcoinmagazine.com
