Hut 8 vs TeraWulf
HUT and WULF side by side, both in finance services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HUT and WULF compare
Hut 8 and TeraWulf are about the same size, with market caps of $7.5B and $6.7B.
Hut 8 keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −170% compared with −411% at TeraWulf.
TeraWulf scores higher on the StockData Score (2 against 1 for Hut 8), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | HUT | WULF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.5B | $6.7B |
| Share price | $61.06 | $13.36 |
| Change, 1 year | 29.4% | −6.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −7.6% | −68.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.82 | 2.32 |
| Employees | 248 | 141 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 24.6× (better) | 34.9× |
| P/B | 4.8× (better) | 7.7× |
| FCF yield | – | −46.7% |
| Fair value | $38.34 | $4.05 |
| Margin of safety | −59.3% (better) | −230% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | – | 13.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 65.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 61.5% (better) | 25.7% |
| Operating margin | −227% (better) | −250% |
| Net margin | −170% (better) | −411% |
| FCF margin | – | −1631% |
| Return on equity | −34.5% (better) | −140% |
| Return on invested capital | −39.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | −4.0× | −2.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 9.48 (better) | 0.97 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.09 (better) | 0.08 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | – | −18.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% (better) | −18.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 78.5% | 79.6% |
| Held by insiders | 8.5% | 20.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$15.2M (better) | −$35.7M |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 17.8% | 30.9% |
Go deeper
- HUT stock overview
- HUT income statement
- HUT valuation and score
- WULF stock overview
- WULF income statement
- WULF valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.