比特币矿企持仓及产能报告:排名前14矿企总持有量远不及MicroStrategy

Odaily星球日报Published on 2023-11-07Last updated on 2023-11-07

Abstract

Marathon Digital的BTC持有量占所有知名矿企的35%。

原文作者 |CoinGecko Winifred Amase

编译 |Odaily星球日报 Jessica

比特币矿企持仓及产能报告:排名前14矿企总持有量远不及MicroStrategy

比特币矿企持有 BTC 数量

持有 BTC 最多的比特币矿企是 Marathon Digital Holdings,持有 13, 726 枚 BTC,占所有知名比特币矿企 BTC 持有量的 35% 。

它运营着超过 150, 000 台采矿设备,总算力为 23.1 EH/s,占全球比特币网络的 4.8% 。 Marathon Digital 市值为 16.4 亿美元。 

这家头部比特币矿企过去 12 个月 TTM 收入为 1700 万美元,较上一时期增长 47.8% 。

比特币矿企持仓及产能报告:排名前14矿企总持有量远不及MicroStrategy

目前,排名前 14 位的比特币矿企总共持有 38, 903 枚比特币。然而,这仅占比特币最大供应量(2100 万)的 0.18% ,远低于MicroStrategy 的 152, 333 比特币持有量。 

Marathon Digital、Hut 8 Mining Corp 和 Riot Platforms 是拥有比特币最多的三大上市比特币矿企。这三家公司总共持有 30, 401 BTC,占领先矿企 BTC 总持有量的 78% 。 

排名前三的比特币矿企均持有超过 3000 枚比特币。相比之下,其余 11 家公司每家持有 BTC 不足 3000 个,总计 8502 个 BTC。

Riot 市值最高,但仅持有 7309 枚 BTC

Riot Platforms 的市值是比特币矿企中最大的,达到 19.4 亿美元,比 Marathon Digital 高 18% 。尽管 Riot Platforms 公布的 TTM 收入为 2.5 亿美元,比 Marathon Digital 高出 47% 。但 Riot Platforms 仅持有 7309 BTC,约为 Marathon Digital 比特币持有量的一半。 

在持有比特币 1000 至 3000 枚档位的上市矿企中,CleanSpark(2240 BTC)的市值最高,为 6.25 亿美元,是其他两家公司(Hive Digital Technologies—— 2032 BTC、Canaan Inc.—— 1125 BTC)的两倍多。然而,Canaan Inc. 的收入最高,为 2.7 亿美元 TTM,比 CleanSpark 高 93% ,比 Hive Digital Technologies 高 226% 。

值得注意的是,CleanSpark 全年共产出了 5327 个 BTC。这表明他们在运营方面积极利用了自己的比特币持有量。相比之下,Hive Digital Technologies 在同一时期内产出 1889 枚比特币,但持有的比特币数量略高。

其余 9 家上市比特币矿企拥有的比特币数量最少,每家不到 1000 BTC。Bit Digital Inc.、Bitfarms Limited 和 Cipher Mining,它们分别持有 821、 760 和 553 BTC。

Bit Digital 因其运营着一支由 44, 886 台矿机组成的庞大车队而脱颖而出,其中约 99% 的矿机使用无碳能源。相比之下,Bitfarms 拥有 62, 300 名矿工,其中 78% 的能源来自水力发电。2023 年 9 月,尽管矿工较少且算力较低(1.19 EH/s),Bit Digital 仍产出 821 BTC,而 Bitfarms 的算力较高,为 6.3 EH/s,同月产出 411 BTC。

从持有 500 枚 BTC 以下的公司来看,DMG Blockchain Solutions 持有 468 枚比特币,而 Neptune Digital Assets Corp 持有 250 枚比特币紧随其后,比 DMG 的持有量少 46% 。Bit Mining Limited,持有 210 BTC。这三家公司市值均低于 5000 万美元。

与此同时,Argo BlockchainCore Scientific Inc. 持有的比特币最少,分别为 32 枚和 10 枚 BTC。Core Scientific 曾是最大的上市矿企,自 2022 年 12 月以来一直陷入破产程序,导致其比特币持有量下降。

注:该研究根据截至 2023 年 11 月 1 日的 SEC 文件、财务报告和最新公司新闻文章,调查了公开上市的比特币矿业公司的比特币持有量。该研究排除了无法获得公开数据的比特币矿业公司,包括但不限于私营公司、Bitdeer Technologies Group、TeraWulfBIGG Digital AssetsBitNile Holdings 和 Iris

Related Reads

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit14m ago

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit14m ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit25m ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit25m ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit1h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit1h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit1h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片