Перевод на русский пока недоступен; показана английская версия.
TeraWulf Inc. (Nasdaq: WULF) company deep dive, first edition. Two PDFs — Chinese (67 pp) and English (81 pp) — each with 16 chapters plus 4 appendices, 12 figures and 56 data tables, cell-for-cell consistent across the two versions; every computed figure is derived in Appendix D. Reference date: close of 9 September 2026; financials as of 30 June 2026.
In twenty months the company turned itself from a bitcoin miner into a development-stage landlord of AI compute halls: $27.2bn of leases signed, $6.97bn raised, 73,580,000 penny warrants issued to Google. This report measures the distance between "signed" and "built": only $1.457bn (5.4%) is settled in the accounts, 102 MW (12%) is energized and billing, the remaining 737 MW needs $5.7–6.5bn with a $2.7–3.5bn gap; the Google backstop is sized to project debt, reaches zero in 2036 and covers 11.8% of contract value; Anthropic's $19bn shows no executed credit enhancement in the filings.
What the report delivers
| Chapter | Specific result |
|---|
| 3 | The contract ledger: five unfiled leases reconstructed one by one; how contract value is computed; GAAP commenced-lease receivable ÷ nominal value = 5.4%; the three states of capacity and each building's target-date drift |
| 4 | The Google recognition agreement clause by clause: triggers, three options, the six-year assumption obligation, where the fee goes; the year-by-year backstop amortization and coverage from 47.8% to 11.8%; warrant terms (exercisable before commencement, anti-dilution, pledge) |
| 6 | Power at five sites: the three 250 MW blocks confirmed in the NYISO public queue; the 482 MW supply agreement in the KY PSC docket and its two conditions precedent; $631m pledged at Muskie with no tenant; what the FERC order actually covers |
| 7, 8 | Three gross-margin bases; the net-loss-to-operating-cash-flow bridge; SBC at 235% of revenue; debt item by item with maturities; three ways to count 804m fully diluted shares; the funding gap on the company's own remaining-capex disclosure |
| 9 | Ownership, board fit, what pay is tied to, 73 Form 4s transaction by transaction, related-party dealings with the CEO's entities |
| 10, 11 | Eight peers aligned on one basis; what the price implies, reverse-engineered; short-interest structure, options skew, 13F groups and a factor regression |
| 12, 13 | Two independent valuation paths, a three-scenario price ladder, probability bases against the options-implied distribution, the bridge from spot to target; certainty-layer table, bull/bear comparison, scenario-to-action map, entry and invalidation conditions |
| 15, 16 | Eleven anti-misreading items; falsification conditions, the catalyst path with settlement direction, tracking indicators and the linchpin variable |
Audit and revisions
After drafting, four adversarial audit tracks (financials and valuation / contracts, governance and power / tradability and conclusions / presentation and wording) raised 134 challenges; 25 substantive revisions are published in Appendix C, Table 56. Three deserve stating up front: ① the downside scenario was originally taken from a static DCF that assumed full contract performance — not the downside world — and has been rebuilt; ② the funding gap was originally a rough "un-energized MW × full cost" figure and now uses the company's own remaining-capex disclosure; ③ the description of the Cayuga lease's environmental clause pointed the wrong way and has been corrected to the lease text. The report publishes its own errors.
Sources and verifiability
Primary sources: SEC EDGAR (CIK 0001083301) 10-K, 10-Q, 35 8-Ks with exhibits, DEF 14A, 80 Form 4s, 13D/13G; XBRL companyfacts; KY PSC and FERC dockets; the NYISO public queue; FINRA short-interest data; peer comparisons from seven companies' SEC filings. Every claim carries an [A]/[B]/[C]/[D] evidence grade; 25 known limitations are listed; every computed figure is reproduced with formulas and intermediates in Appendix D.
How this report was produced, and disclaimer
Compiled independently by the TopX research team from public information, then reviewed and revised before release by professional investment managers and fund managers with asset-management experience. Reviewers take part in a personal capacity, do not represent their respective employers, and provide no investment advisory services through TopXEA; TopXEA holds no investment-adviser licence in any jurisdiction. Primary filings (SEC, exchanges, company disclosures) are the first-priority source, key figures require corroboration from at least two independent sources, claims carry [A]/[B]/[C]/[D] evidence grades, and known limitations are disclosed item by item inside the report. This is research content. It does not constitute investment advice and is not tailored to any particular investor; past data and forward projections do not indicate future results. Please note before purchase: digital goods are non-refundable once delivered.
