TeraWulf runs data centers in the US states of New York and Pennsylvania that operate mostly on low-carbon electricity. Besides mining Bitcoin, the company increasingly leases capacity for AI data centers. As of Oct 16, 2026
TeraWulf owns, develops and operates large data centers for high-performance computing in the United States, for example for artificial intelligence. The company leases capacity to large cloud companies and enterprises under long-term leases with base terms of mostly 10 to 25 years. The two main sites are in Barker in the state of New York and in Abernathy, Texas, the latter through a joint venture; for another site in Lansing in the state of New York it holds a long-term ground lease. According to the annual report, most revenue still came from Bitcoin mining, but the focus of development is the data center business. The mining machines are located at the Lake Mariner site and almost all come from Bitmain.
Automatically summarized from SEC annual report (10-K, filed Feb 27, 2026) (website of the US Securities and Exchange Commission) · reviewed Oct 17, 2026
Our own calculation from the exchange’s daily candles, as of Oct 27, 2026. “All-time” applies since the start of this series, not to the whole market. Changes in percent; the TradingView chart shows prices. “Today” = change of the last trading day versus the previous day. Not investment advice.
No buy zone
There is currently no buy zone for this symbol under our Elliott rule. One only forms when the price pulls back after a strong rise.
An observation, not investment advice
Timeframe 1 week · As of Oct 23, 2026 · display only, the rule works on 4-hour candles
Elliott count: Combination (W-X-Y-X-Z), Corrective pattern (upward), Z complete (3 of 4 guidelines) · X = 69% of W; Y = 134% of W; X = 40% of Y; Z = 50% of W–Y
Alternative (not drawn): Combination (W-X-Y), Corrective pattern (upward), Y complete (2 of 3 guidelines)
Note: Structure ambiguous: leg Y can also be read as three- or five-part.
Note: Count questionable: C in progress at 387% (C of A, limit 261.8%).
Elliott count calculated automatically by fixed Elliott rules, not investment advice – display only, our buy zones do not use it. Provisional: The count can change with new candles.
No buy zone of the rule on this timeframe – the chart shows only the Elliott count from the completed weekly candles (recalculated every day). Not a recommendation, not investment advice. Without a buy zone there is no reference for percentages – so no value axis and no prices; measurements are ratios of wave lengths.
Timeframe 1 day · As of Oct 27, 2026 · display only, the rule works on 4-hour candles
Elliott count: Impulse, Impulse pattern (downward), Wave 3 in progress (0 of 2 guidelines) · W2 = 25% of W1; W3 = 50% of W1
weak count Only a few guidelines met – the hard Elliott rules hold, but the count is still weak. Provisional – check the count yourself on the chart.
Note: Structure open: leg W2 cannot be broken down into sub-waves on this timeframe – provisional, check the count yourself on the chart.
Elliott count calculated automatically by fixed Elliott rules, not investment advice – display only, our buy zones do not use it. Provisional: The count can change with new candles.
No buy zone of the rule on this timeframe – the chart shows only the Elliott count from the completed daily candles (recalculated every day). Not a recommendation, not investment advice. Without a buy zone there is no reference for percentages – so no value axis and no prices; measurements are ratios of wave lengths.
Timeframe 4 hours · As of Oct 27, 2026
Elliott count: Impulse, Impulse pattern (downward), Wave 3 in progress (1 of 3 guidelines) · W2 = 96% of W1; W3 = 208% of W1
Elliott count calculated automatically by fixed Elliott rules, not investment advice – display only, our buy zones do not use it. Provisional: The count can change with new candles.
No buy zone of the rule on this timeframe – the chart shows only the Elliott count from the completed 4-hour candles (recalculated every hour). Not a recommendation, not investment advice. Without a buy zone there is no reference for percentages – so no value axis and no prices; measurements are ratios of wave lengths.
Timeframe 1 hour · As of Oct 27, 2026 · display only, the rule works on 4-hour candles
Elliott count: Zigzag (A-B-C), Corrective pattern (upward), C in progress (2 of 2 guidelines) · B = 73% of A; C = 65% of A
Comparison: The rule treats the last rise as the possible start of an upward impulse (without checking its history and structure). The Elliott count reads it as the first leg A of a correction.
Position: Wave 4 (after waves 1–2–3)
Alternative (not drawn): Combination (W-X-Y), Corrective pattern (upward), Y in progress (2 of 2 guidelines)
Before (drawn faintly): Impulse, Wave 3 complete
Note: Structure ambiguous: leg A can also be read as three- or five-part.
Note: Retracement at least 88.7% of A: flat possible (B in progress, type only with C).
Elliott count calculated automatically by fixed Elliott rules, not investment advice – display only, our buy zones do not use it. Provisional: The count can change with new candles.
Automated analysis (rule-based): the rule calculates waves and Fibonacci levels from the completed hourly candles; the chart is recalculated every hour. Not investment advice. On this timeframe the chart only shows the rule setup (swing detection 4 × ATR) – the rule itself works on 4-hour candles. Axis and values: distance from the top of the buy zone in %, no prices.
On phones the drawing toolbar is hidden – drawing works better on a desktop.
Timeframe 1 week · As of Oct 23, 2026 · from the Elliott count in the analysis chart
Weighting Main scenario: ahead (3 of 4 guidelines, strong) · Alternative: behind (2 of 3, medium) Guidelines (strength of the count)Guidelines are typical features of a count, such as usual Fibonacci lengths or a change in the form of correction. Strong means: at least three quarters met, medium: at least half, otherwise weak. Even a strong count can flip.Example: 3 of 3 guidelines → strong; 2 of 4 → medium; 1 of 3 → weak.More in the Academy: Lesson wave degrees
Weighting by guidelines met – not a probability.
As long as the weekly close stays below the end of Z, this applies: complex countermove upward (Combination W-X-Y-X-Z), Z complete – count points to falling prices.
Invalid if the weekly close is above the end of Z
If that breaks, the second reading no longer applies either: complex countermove upward (Combination W-X-Y), Y complete – then there is no valid count for now; the next candles will produce a new one.
Invalid if the weekly close is above the end of Y
Timeframe 1 day · As of Oct 27, 2026 · from the Elliott count in the analysis chart
Weighting Main scenario (0 of 2 guidelines, weak) · no alternative Guidelines (strength of the count)Guidelines are typical features of a count, such as usual Fibonacci lengths or a change in the form of correction. Strong means: at least three quarters met, medium: at least half, otherwise weak. Even a strong count can flip.Example: 3 of 3 guidelines → strong; 2 of 4 → medium; 1 of 3 → weak.More in the Academy: Lesson wave degrees
Weighting by guidelines met – not a probability.
weak count Only a few guidelines met – the hard Elliott rules hold, but the count is still weak. Provisional – check the count yourself on the chart. No visible sub-waves in: W2.
As long as the daily close stays below the start of wave 1, this applies: Downward move in five waves (Impulse), wave 3 in progress – count points to falling prices.
Invalid if the daily close is above the start of wave 1
If that breaks, this count no longer applies. Currently no alternative that follows the rules.
Timeframe 4 hours · As of Oct 27, 2026 · from the Elliott count in the analysis chart
Weighting Main scenario (1 of 3 guidelines, weak) · no alternative Guidelines (strength of the count)Guidelines are typical features of a count, such as usual Fibonacci lengths or a change in the form of correction. Strong means: at least three quarters met, medium: at least half, otherwise weak. Even a strong count can flip.Example: 3 of 3 guidelines → strong; 2 of 4 → medium; 1 of 3 → weak.More in the Academy: Lesson wave degrees
Weighting by guidelines met – not a probability.
As long as the 4-hour close stays below the start of wave 1, this applies: Downward move in five waves (Impulse), wave 3 in progress – count points to falling prices.
Invalid if the 4-hour close is above the start of wave 1
If that breaks, this count no longer applies. Currently no alternative that follows the rules.
Watcher Fibonacci target zones and levels for this count – as a help for your own review – from Watcher.
Timeframe 1 hour · As of Oct 27, 2026 · from the Elliott count in the analysis chart
Weighting Main scenario and alternative: level (2 of 2 guidelines each, strong) – the simpler or clearer pattern counts as the main scenario. Guidelines (strength of the count)Guidelines are typical features of a count, such as usual Fibonacci lengths or a change in the form of correction. Strong means: at least three quarters met, medium: at least half, otherwise weak. Even a strong count can flip.Example: 3 of 3 guidelines → strong; 2 of 4 → medium; 1 of 3 → weak.More in the Academy: Lesson wave degrees
Weighting by guidelines met – not a probability.
As long as the hourly close stays above the end of B, this applies: sharp countermove upward in three waves (Zigzag A-B-C), C in progress – count points to rising prices.
Invalid if the hourly close is below the end of B (−2.8% from the top of the zone)
If that breaks, the second reading no longer applies either: complex countermove upward (Combination W-X-Y), Y in progress – then there is no valid count for now; the next candles will produce a new one.
Invalid if the hourly close is below the end of X (−2.8% from the top of the zone)
TeraWulf · Sector Technology · amounts in USD
Information only – does not affect the other analysis methods, not investment advice. Source: SEC filings, As of Feb 27, 2026.
Four angles on the annual figures. Each check counts how many disclosed criteria are met – criteria without data do not count. The bars show where the company ranks on each figure among the stocks we cover and within its sector.
Fiscal year to Dec 31, 2025
39.2% Fiscal year 2025
Rank 31 of 100: higher than 31% of 153 peers (All). weak.
Rank 24 of 100: higher than 24% of 57 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 56.1%
Share of revenue left after the direct cost of the products sold.
−110.5% Fiscal year 2025
Rank 9 of 100: higher than 9% of 192 peers (All). weak.
Rank 16 of 100: higher than 16% of 60 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 14.2%
Operating income divided by revenue: what the core business earns before interest and taxes.
−392.6% Fiscal year 2025
Rank 4 of 100: higher than 4% of 237 peers (All). weak.
Rank 4 of 100: higher than 4% of 63 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 12.5%
Profit after all costs, interest and taxes divided by revenue.
−10.1% Fiscal year 2025 (total assets at year end)
Rank 9 of 100: higher than 9% of 238 peers (All). weak.
Rank 17 of 100: higher than 17% of 63 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 5.9%
Net income divided by total assets at fiscal year end.
2.1% Fiscal year 2025
Rank 7 of 100: higher than 7% of 239 peers (All). weak.
Rank 2 of 100: higher than 2% of 63 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 51.6%
Equity as a share of total assets. Usually low for banks.
−702.5% Fiscal year 2025
Rank 3 of 100: higher than 3% of 213 peers (All). weak.
Rank 4 of 100: higher than 4% of 62 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 19.0%
Free cash flow divided by revenue.
−1.2B USD Fiscal year 2025
Operating cash flow minus capital expenditure on property and equipment.
+123.8% per year
Rank 97 of 100: higher than 97% of 230 peers (All). strong.
Rank 94 of 100: higher than 94% of 59 peers (Sector). strong.
Median Technology: +14.3%
Average growth per year over 3 fiscal years.
1 of 9 Fiscal year 2025
Rank 0 of 100: higher than 0% of 134 peers (All). weak.
Rank 1 of 100: higher than 1% of 44 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 6.0 of 9
Nine yes/no tests on profit, cash flow, debt, liquidity and efficiency compared with the prior year.
22.06 at fiscal year end
Rank 1 of 100: lower than 1% of 199 peers (All). weak.
Rank 1 of 100: lower than 1% of 54 peers (Sector). weak.
Median Technology: 0.41
Long-term financial debt divided by equity.
2.00 at fiscal year end
Rank 68 of 100: higher than 68% of 215 peers (All). strong.
Rank 47 of 100: higher than 47% of 63 peers (Sector). medium.
Median Technology: 2.02
Current assets divided by current liabilities.
+259.4% in 3 years
No rank: too few peers or not computed yet.
Change in diluted share count. Negative = share buybacks, positive = new shares.
Last fiscal year compared with the one before. Returns and revenue per total assets use total assets at the start of the year; leverage = long-term financial debt divided by total assets at year end; new shares via the average diluted share count.
Price-based criteria (P/E, dividend yield) are shown to signed-in users.
Computed automatically from SEC annual reports – not investment advice. Describes the reported figures; points are not a rating of the stock. Rank 0–100 against the 239 stocks we cover and against the sector (from 5 peers); the stronger side is always on the right.
Summarized from the lights below. Describes the reported figures – not a recommendation to buy or sell.
Fiscal year 2025 (Jan 1, 2025 – Dec 31, 2025): Revenue 168.5M USD · Net income −661.4M USD · Net margin −392.6%
Where the money of a fiscal year goes and how margins, returns, balance sheet, cash flow and share count developed over up to 10 years. Each chart has one sentence saying what the trend shows.
Of 100 USD of revenue, 39.2 USD gross profit remained.
Operating loss: −110.5% of revenue
| Item | Amount | of revenue |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 168.5M USD | 100.0% |
| Gross profit | 66.0M USD | 39.2% |
| Cost of revenue | 102.4M USD | 60.8% |
| Operating expenses | 252.3M USD | 149.7% |
Taxes, interest and other items are not available separately in the SEC data; they are combined as the difference.
The operating margin fell in 2 years from −42.5% to −110.5%.
Gross marginOperating marginNet margin Margins above ±200% hidden (revenue very small relative to the result).Return on equity rose in 2 years from −77.1% to −29.6%.
Return on equityReturn on assets Return on equity hidden where equity is below 5% of total assets.The equity ratio fell in 3 years from 37.1% to 2.1%.
EquityLong-term debt in USD Long-term debt, depending on the filing, includes the current portion or leases.The current ratio rose in 3 years from 0.11 to 2.00.
Current ratioFree cash flow fell in 3 years from −95.2M USD to −1.2B USD.
Operating cash flowCapital expenditureFree cash flow in USDThe share count rose in 3 years by 259.4% – more new shares were issued than repurchased (dilution).
Diluted share countFrom annual reports filed with the SEC (10-K, 20-F, 40-F) as first reported, share count adjusted for splits; obvious filing errors (e.g. wrong unit, outliers against both neighbouring years) are hidden. Describes the reported figures – not investment advice.
How much the company returns to its shareholders – as dividends or by repurchasing its own shares – and whether free cash flow supports it.
Over 4 years, 151.5M USD went back to shareholders, 100% of it through share repurchases. Free cash flow over those years was not positive in total. This was offset by new shares issued for 372.0M USD (including employee plans).
Dividends paidShare repurchasesNew shares issued (including employee plans)Free cash flow in USDDividends paid, repurchases and new shares issued from the cash flow statement of annual reports filed with the SEC (as first reported). Describes the reported figures – not investment advice.
Price-based valuation (P/E, P/S, price/free cash flow and dividend yield per fiscal year, compared with its own average) for signed-in users. Log in
TeraWulf next to 8 stocks of the sector Technology we cover that are closest in revenue. Click a column header to sort the table.
| Symbol | Revenue (FY) | Growth 5 yrs | Gross margin | Op. margin | Net margin | ROE | Equity ratio | FCF margin | Piotroski |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RIOT Riot Platforms | 647.4M USD | +121.7% | – | −96.1% | −102.4% | −23.2% | 72.6% | −119.6% | – |
| NBIS Nebius Group | 529.8M USD | – | 68.6% | −115.5% | 15.6% | 1.8% | 37.0% | −694.8% | – |
| AAOI Applied Optoelectronics | 455.7M USD | +14.2% | 30.0% | −12.0% | −8.4% | −5.2% | 62.8% | −77.6% | 5/9 |
| AI C3.ai | 250.3M USD | +6.4% | 30.9% | −199.2% | −187.9% | −71.9% | 80.1% | −76.8% | – |
| CIFR Cipher Mining | 223.9M USD | – | 63.7% | −188.2% | −367.2% | −102.1% | 18.8% | −310.7% | 3/9 |
| WULF TeraWulf this stock | 168.5M USD | – | 39.2% | −110.5% | −392.6% | – | 2.1% | −702.5% | 1/9 |
| IONQ IonQ | 130.0M USD | – | 40.4% | −487.4% | −392.6% | −13.4% | 57.8% | −230.4% | – |
| AXTI AXT | 88.3M USD | −1.5% | 12.7% | −24.9% | −24.1% | −7.8% | 63.0% | −21.3% | – |
| ONDS Ondas Holdings | 50.7M USD | +87.9% | 39.7% | −115.1% | −260.7% | −30.2% | 38.6% | −80.4% | – |
| Median of the sector 63 symbols | 11.0B USD | +14.5% | 56.1% | 14.2% | 12.5% | 13.5% | 51.6% | 19.0% | 6/9 |
Growth 5 yrs = revenue growth per year over 5 fiscal years · Op. margin = operating margin · ROE = return on equity · FCF = free cash flow · Piotroski = F-Score (only with all 9 criteria).
Figures of the last fiscal year from SEC annual reports (peers as of Oct 28, 2026). Median across all companies of the sector we cover (from 5 stocks; several share classes of one company count once). Signed-in users also see P/E, P/S and dividend yield in the comparison. Describes the reported figures – not investment advice.
Each light follows a simple, disclosed rule. The comparison is with the sector median Sector medianThe middle value of all companies in a sector: half are above it, half below. Unlike the average, single outliers hardly distort it.Example: Margins 4%, 8%, 10%, 12%, 60% → median 10%, average 18.8%.More in the Academy: Lesson putting the P/E in context of all 97 symbols in the Technology sector on our list (current members of the S&P 500 and other lists).
+65.8% per year, last 5 years
Sector Technology: median +13.5% (88 symbols)
What does this mean? Revenue: over 5 years it grew by 65.8% per year on average – at least as fast as the median company in the sector (+13.5%).
Light rule: Green: grows at least as fast as the sector median (without a sector comparison: grows) · Yellow: grows more slowly · Red: shrinks.
– per year, last 5 years
Sector Technology: median +13.3% (62 symbols)
per share: not computable (loss in the first or last year)
What does this mean? There was a loss in the first or last year. An annual growth rate cannot be calculated meaningfully then.
Light rule: Green: grows at least as fast as the sector median (without a sector comparison: grows) · Yellow: grows more slowly · Red: shrinks.
−392.6% last fiscal year
Sector Technology: median 12.5% (97 symbols)
What does this mean? Of every 100 USD in revenue there was no profit but a loss of 392.64 USD. Five years ago the margin was −4.6%.
Light rule: Green: at least the sector median (without a sector comparison: profit) · Yellow: profit, but below the median · Red: loss.
– latest balance sheet
Sector Technology: median 0.45 (79 symbols)
What does this mean? No usable figure: reported financial debt or positive equity for the same balance sheet date is missing.
Light rule: Green: at most the sector median · Yellow: up to twice the median · Red: more than twice · Gray: without a sector comparison.
– Dividend / earnings per share
Sector Technology: median 30% (36 symbols)
What does this mean? The loaded SEC filings of the last two fiscal years contain no dividend per share. Either the company pays none, or it reports it under a different tag.
Light rule: Green: up to 60% of earnings · Yellow: up to 100% · Red: more than earnings or a dividend despite a loss · Gray for real estate (REITs). The sector median is for comparison only.
2 of 10 fiscal years with a profit
What does this mean? In 2 of the last 10 fiscal years the bottom line showed a profit. 8 years ended with a loss.
Light rule: Green: profit in every year · Yellow: one loss year · Red: several loss years (at least 3 years needed).
| Year | End | Revenue | Net income | Margin | Earnings per share | Dividend per share | Payout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Dec 31, 2025 | 168.5M | −661.4M | −392.6% | −1.66 | 0.00 | – |
| 2024 | Dec 31, 2024 | 140.1M | −72.4M | −51.7% | −0.21 | 0.00 | – |
| 2023 | Dec 31, 2023 | 69.2M | −73.4M | −106.1% | −0.35 | 0.00 | – |
| 2022 | Dec 31, 2022 | 15.0M | −90.8M | −603.9% | −0.82 | 0.00 | – |
| 2020 | Dec 31, 2020 | 13.4M | −439.3K | −3.3% | −0.22 | – | – |
| 2019 | Dec 31, 2019 | 17.6M | −813.6K | −4.6% | −0.41 | – | – |
| 2018 | Dec 31, 2018 | 18.2M | 139.5K | 0.8% | 0.07 | – | – |
| 2017 | Dec 31, 2017 | 17.2M | −226.1K | −1.3% | −0.11 | – | – |
| 2016 | Dec 31, 2016 | – | −65.1K | – | −0.03 | – | – |
| 2015 | Dec 31, 2015 | – | 135.0K | – | 0.07 | – | – |
| Quarter | End | Revenue | Net income | Margin | Earnings per share | Dividend per share | Payout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q2/26 | Jun 30, 2026 | 44.8M | −939.9M | −2,099.6% | −1.94 | 0.00 | – |
| Q1/26 | Mar 31, 2026 | 34.0M | −427.6M | −1,257.3% | −1.01 | 0.00 | – |
| Q4/25* | Dec 31, 2025 | 35.8M | −126.6M | −353.2% | – | 0.00 | – |
| Q3/25 | Sep 30, 2025 | 50.6M | −455.1M | −899.7% | −1.13 | – | – |
| Q2/25 | Jun 30, 2025 | 47.6M | −18.4M | −38.6% | −0.05 | 0.00 | – |
| Q1/25 | Mar 31, 2025 | 34.4M | −61.4M | −178.5% | −0.16 | 0.00 | – |
| Q4/24* | Dec 31, 2024 | 35.0M | −29.2M | −83.5% | – | 0.00 | – |
| Q3/24 | Sep 30, 2024 | 27.1M | −22.7M | −84.0% | −0.06 | – | – |
| Q2/24 | Jun 30, 2024 | 35.6M | −10.9M | −30.6% | −0.03 | – | – |
| Q1/24 | Mar 31, 2024 | 42.4M | −9.6M | −22.7% | −0.03 | 0.00 | – |
| Q4/23* | Dec 31, 2023 | – | −10.5M | – | – | 0.00 | – |
| Q3/23 | Sep 30, 2023 | 19.0M | −19.1M | −100.8% | −0.09 | – | – |
* Q4 derived: fiscal year minus the 9-month value (EPS cannot be derived this way); may be distorted by restatements.
How we calculate: values as first reported to the SEC (later corrections are left out), a fixed order of reporting tags per figure, partial sums are never added up. Growth per year Growth per year (CAGR)The average annual growth rate over several years, as if the value had grown equally strongly every year. Individual good or bad years even out in it.Example: Revenue €100m → €161m in 5 years → (161 ÷ 100) to the power of 1/5 − 1 = 10% per year.More in the Academy: Lesson debt, dividends and growth over 5 years (otherwise 3 years). Quarters are labeled by the calendar quarter in which they end.
| Period | Purchases | Sales | Net |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 months | $189.9K1 person | $5.3M3 people | −$5.1M |
| 6 months | $189.9K1 person | $19.0M3 people | −$18.8M |
| 12 months | $440.5K1 person | $36.1M5 people | −$35.6M |
Source: mandatory filings with the SEC (Form 4), open-market purchases and sales only. General information, not investment advice.
ATR ATR (Average True Range)The average range per trading day over the last 14 days. It makes distances comparable, whether a stock costs 10 or 1,000.Example: ATR 2.50 at a price of 100: 0.4 ATR is 1.00, i.e. 1%.More in the Academy: Lesson ATR and moving averages as price values only when logged in.
Latest news
No posts on WULF yet – log in to join the discussion.
Posts are opinions of users and only visible after logging in. Community rules