Mining Methodology

How Pledge scores BTC mining stocks.

This page explains the six-factor scoring model used to rank publicly traded BTC mining equities. It covers what each factor measures, how it is scored, where the data comes from, and what the methodology cannot capture.

Composite scores range from 0 to 10. 6 weighted factors sum to 100%. Last reviewed Jun 21, 2026. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Compare mining stocks Lender methodology

Scoring factors

Each factor is weighted and scored 0-10 before blending into a composite.

Total weight

100%

Factor weights sum to 100%. No hidden adjustments.

As of

Last reviewed

Jun 21, 2026. Mining data may lag real-time by days or weeks.

Limitations

Documented

Data lag, self-reported energy mix, AI pivot risk, and geographic energy risk are listed explicitly.

Scoring factors

Six weighted factors determine each mining stock's composite score.

Every factor is scored 0-10 and then multiplied by its weight. The weighted scores sum to the overall composite score (0-10). No hidden adjustments.

25% weight≥ 20%

Hashrate

The total computational power deployed in the network, measured in exahashes per second (EH/s). Hashrate is the primary indicator of mining scale and operational efficiency - higher hashrate means the company commands more of the network's output.

Evidence checked

Total hashrate in EH/s from quarterly earnings releases and SEC filings

Self-mined BTC TTM from operational updates

Hashrate growth trajectory vs. prior periods and peer benchmarks

Scoring bands

≥ 25 EH/s: 8-10 (largest scale operators, significant network influence)

15-25 EH/s: 6-7.5 (large-scale miners with strong market positions)

8-15 EH/s: 4-5.5 (mid-tier miners with meaningful but smaller scale)

< 8 EH/s: 1-3.5 (smaller miners with limited network presence)

20% weight≥ 20%

Energy Mix

The proportion of electricity sourced from renewable and low-carbon sources. A cleaner energy mix reduces long-term input cost volatility, improves ESG profile, and signals operational discipline around power procurement.

Evidence checked

Renewable energy percentage (renewablePct) from sustainability disclosures and ESG reports

Energy source breakdown (hydro, solar, wind, nuclear, natural gas, coal, grid_mix) from company disclosures

Power purchase agreement (PPA) details from press releases and investor presentations

Scoring bands

≥ 75% renewable: 8-10 (leading clean-energy profile)

50-75% renewable: 6-7.5 (above-average clean-energy sourcing)

25-50% renewable: 4-5.5 (moderate renewable mix)

< 25% renewable: 1-3.5 (heavy reliance on fossil fuels or grid electricity)

15% weight10-15%

BTC Holdings

The total bitcoin held on the corporate balance sheet and the BTC-per-share ratio. BTC on balance sheet represents a direct claim on bitcoin's future value and differentiates pure-play miners from operators that sell all mined BTC.

Evidence checked

Total BTC held (totalBtcHeld) from SEC filings, 10-K, 10-Q, and 8-K disclosures

BTC per share (btcPerShare) computed from total BTC ÷ shares outstanding

Press releases announcing BTC purchases, treasury updates, and accumulation milestones

Scoring bands

≥ 10,000 BTC held: 8-10 (substantial BTC treasury)

5,000-10,000 BTC held: 6-7.5 (meaningful BTC balance sheet)

1,000-5,000 BTC held: 4-5.5 (moderate BTC exposure)

< 1,000 BTC held: 1-3.5 (minimal or no BTC on balance sheet)

15% weight10-15%

Revenue

Trailing-twelve-month (TTM) mining revenue and the revenue growth trajectory. Revenue reflects the scale of mining operations and the company's ability to generate cash flow across BTC price cycles. Revenue growth signals execution and market share gains.

Evidence checked

Revenue TTM in USD (revenueTtmUsd) from quarterly earnings releases and SEC filings

Revenue growth vs. prior year and sequential quarters

Revenue composition (self-mining vs. hashrate hosting) from financial disclosures

Scoring bands

≥ $700M TTM revenue: 8-10 (largest revenue base in the peer set)

$400-700M TTM revenue: 6-7.5 (large-scale miners with substantial cash flow)

$200-400M TTM revenue: 4-5.5 (mid-tier miners with growing but smaller revenue base)

< $200M TTM revenue: 1-3.5 (smaller miners with limited revenue scale)

10% weight10-15%

Dilution

The trajectory of share-count growth from ATM programs, convertible note conversions, equity offerings, and stock-based compensation. Dilution erodes per-share value over time even when the company uses proceeds to buy BTC or fund operations.

Evidence checked

Recent equity financing activity (equityFinancingRecent) from SEC filings and earnings releases

Shares outstanding trend vs. prior periods from market data and SEC filings

Active ATM program size and remaining capacity from prospectus disclosures

Convertible note overhang and warrant schedules from SEC filings

Scoring bands

Stable, decreasing, or minimal share growth (< ~5%/yr): 8-10 (best-in-class net issuer, shareholder-friendly capital management)

Moderate growth (~5-10%/yr): 6-7.5 (some dilution pressure but manageable)

Significant growth (10-20%/yr): 4-5.5 (meaningful dilution risk from ATM or convertibles)

Rapid growth (> 20%/yr): 1-3.5 (aggressive dilution from repeated equity raises)

15% weight10-15%

Management

Capital allocation track record, BTC treasury strategy execution, and operational leadership quality. Management teams that have consistently executed a BTC accumulation strategy, maintained transparent communication, and managed the capital stack responsibly score higher.

Evidence checked

Annual BTC accumulation track record from SEC filings, press releases, and BitcoinTreasuries.net cross-checks

Management commentary from earnings calls, shareholder letters, and investor presentations

Capital markets execution from SEC filings (ATM programs, convertible notes, debt management)

Operational execution on hashrate growth and fleet upgrades from quarterly operational updates

scoreMethodologyNote from company data for scoring rationale transparency

Scoring bands

Multi-year BTC accumulation track record, transparent communication: 8-10

Moderate track record of BTC accumulation with reasonable execution: 5-7.5

Early-stage or inconsistent track record: 3-4.5

Limited or untested management: 1-2.5

Composite formula

The overall score is a simple weighted sum.

No machine learning, no secret sauce. Each factor score (0-10) is multiplied by its weight, and the results are added together.

Overall = Σ (factor_score × factor_weight)

Hashrate: score × 25%

Energy Mix: score × 20%

BTC Holdings: score × 15%

Revenue: score × 15%

Dilution: score × 10%

Management: score × 15%

Example (MARA - Marathon Digital Holdings): Hashrate 7.5×25% + Energy 4.5×20% + BTC Holdings 8.0×15% + Revenue 6.5×15% + Dilution 6.5×10% + Management 7.0×15% = 6.65

MARA's published composite of 6.65 is the exact weighted sum of its factor scores in the mining data file. Comparison tables round composite scores to one decimal for display.

Data sources

Every data point is traced back to a named source.

Primary sources are SEC filings, earnings releases, and official company disclosures. Market data providers serve as cross-checks, not primary sources.

Data source

SEC EDGAR filings

10-K annual reports, 10-Q quarterly reports, 8-K current reports, and prospectuses. These are the primary source for BTC holdings, hashrate, revenue, share count, dilution, and energy disclosures for U.S.-listed mining equities.

Data source

Company press releases and investor relations pages

Official announcements of hashrate milestones, BTC purchases, energy agreements, equity offerings, and strategic updates. Cross-referenced with SEC filings when possible.

Data source

Company sustainability disclosures and ESG reports

Renewable energy mix percentages, power purchase agreement details, and environmental sustainability metrics. Energy mix is self-reported and may use different measurement methodologies across issuers.

Data source

Earnings call transcripts and shareholder letters

Management commentary on capital allocation, BTC treasury strategy, operational challenges, and growth outlook. Used to assess management quality and strategic execution.

Data source

Market data providers

StockAnalysis.com, Yahoo Finance, and CoinGecko for market prices, trading volume, shares outstanding, and valuation snapshots. Market data is treated as "partial" verification because prices move intraday.

What moves a score

Scores change when the underlying data changes or when the methodology is corrected.

These are the conditions that trigger a score review.

Review trigger

Hashrate changes materially

New fleet deployments, major equipment failures, or hosted hashrate contract changes alter the hashrate score. Quarterly earnings releases typically update operational hashrate.

Review trigger

Energy mix changes

New renewable power purchase agreements, grid reliance shifts, or sustainability disclosure updates change the energy score. Renewable percentage changes are reviewed when disclosed.

Review trigger

BTC holdings change materially

Large BTC purchases or sales by the company change the BTC-holdings score. Treasury updates, SEC filings, and press releases are monitored for material balance sheet changes.

Review trigger

Share count changes significantly

ATM program executions, convertible note conversions, or equity offerings change the dilution score and may affect other factor scores.

Review trigger

Operating business or revenue changes materially

AI infrastructure pivots, business acquisitions, or significant revenue growth or shrinkage change the revenue score and can signal management strategy shifts.

Review trigger

The methodology is corrected

If a scoring rule or weighting is adjusted, the change is noted on this page with an explanation of why.

Limitations

What this methodology does not capture.

A scoring model is only as good as its inputs. These are the known gaps - they are documented here rather than averaged away.

Mining data lags real-time by days or weeks depending on SEC filing and earnings release timing; hashrate and BTC holdings may not reflect current operations.

Market data (market cap, share price, trading volume) is a point-in-time snapshot and may not represent current conditions.

Energy mix percentages are self-reported by the companies and may use different measurement methodologies across issuers.

Scores for mining companies with less than one year of public trading history are inherently less reliable.

The methodology does not capture regulatory risk (DOJ, SEC, or foreign regulatory investigations), credit risk, or legal risk beyond what is publicly disclosed.

BTC price cycles heavily influence revenue, operational profitability, and hashrate economics - a low score in a bear market may not persist in a bull market.

Debt levels and credit risk are not explicitly scored as separate factors, though high leverage indirectly affects dilution and management scores.

Geographic energy risk (ERCOT grid volatility, Texas natural gas dependence, foreign regulatory changes) is not scored separately.

Companies that pivot toward AI data center infrastructure (e.g., CORZ) introduce technology and execution risk that the current mining-focused model does not fully capture.

Use these pages alongside the methodology.

The mining methodology connects to the mining comparison page, the treasury methodology, the equity methodology, and the lender methodology.

Mining

Compare mining stocks

Side-by-side comparison of BTC mining equities with sortable scores, hashrate, energy mix, and BTC holdings.

Treasuries

Treasury methodology

The scoring model for BTC treasury products like preferred stock and equity vehicles.

Equities

Equity methodology

The scoring model for Bitcoin treasury equities - NAV premium, BTC per share, leverage, dilution, operating business, liquidity, and management.

Lenders

Lender methodology

The main methodology page covers BTC-backed lending scores, verification rules, and disclosure boundaries.

Not investment advice. Pledge provides comparison data for educational purposes only. All comparison data is a dated snapshot checked Jun 21, 2026. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Affiliate disclosure. Pledge currently does not earn affiliate or referral fees from any product listed on this page. If that changes, monetized links will carry a clear ↗ AFFILIATE marker.

Operational data lag. Mining data (hashrate, BTC holdings, energy mix) lags real-time by days or weeks depending on SEC filing and earnings release timing. Always check the most recent company disclosures.

Market data. Market data (share price, market cap, trading volume) is a point-in-time snapshot and may not represent current conditions. Scores reflect the last verified data point, not live market data.

Compare Other Bitcoin Products

Loans

APR, safety, custody compared

Wallets

Keys, recovery, hardware support

ETFs

Expense ratio, AUM, liquidity

Custodians

Insurance, security, regulation

Digital Money

Backing, exit path, yield treatment

How Pledge scores BTC mining stocks.

Composite scores range from 0 to 10. 6 weighted factors sum to 100%. Last reviewed Jun 21, 2026. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Scoring factors

Each factor is weighted and scored 0-10 before blending into a composite.

Total weight

100%

Factor weights sum to 100%. No hidden adjustments.

As of

Last reviewed

Jun 21, 2026. Mining data may lag real-time by days or weeks.

Limitations

Documented

Data lag, self-reported energy mix, AI pivot risk, and geographic energy risk are listed explicitly.