2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
75 päivää sitten
‧1 t 1 min
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 4.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 28.5. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 5.8.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·7.7.Following yesterday's announcement regarding Helios, it is now transitioning from being a construction project to becoming a revenue-generating asset. Galaxy has delivered the first phase (133 MW critical IT capacity) to CoreWeave on time and according to plan, which reduces execution risk and demonstrates the company's ability to execute large AI infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, Phase II continues on schedule, while the entire contracted 800 MW facility is covered by a 15-year lease agreement expected to generate over 1 billion dollars in average annual revenue when fully built out. For investors, this means that Galaxy can increasingly be valued as a company with stable, long-term cash flows from AI data centers – in addition to its digital assets business.The short version is that the decline is not about Galaxy itself, but about their largest counterparty. The long version: On July 1, Bloomberg reported that Meta plans to build a cloud business and sell AI computing capacity to external customers. CoreWeave fell almost 14% the same day, and the entire sector of specialized AI cloud companies ("neoclouds") was sold off — Nebius dropped 17%. Galaxy's data center Helios in Texas is fully leased to a single customer: CoreWeave, which has contracted the entire site's 800 MW approved capacity. This makes GLXY a direct proxy for CoreWeave-sentiment. The market's question is therefore not "is Galaxy delivering?" but "what happens if hyperscalers start competing with neoclouds — and thus with Galaxy's sole customer?" The concern is also twofold: Meta is not only a potential competitor to CoreWeave but also one of their largest customers. The real question the market is asking is whether large AI buyers will eventually build and monetize their own capacity instead of renting. Galaxy has a 15-year lease agreement with CoreWeave with contracted cash flows. The direct threat is therefore not that revenues will disappear tomorrow. The risks are rather: 1. Counterparty risk — if CoreWeave were to face financial problems further down the line. 2. Expansion value — Galaxy has an additional approx. 830 MW of approved capacity plus larger plans under development. The value of future expansion is based on continued strong neocloud demand. It is this latter optionality that the market is now pricing down — not the existing contract.- ·29.6.Galaxy Digital has now been included in the Russell 1000 Index, which comprises approximately 1,000 of the largest publicly traded companies in the USA, based on their market capitalization.
1.7.This is a significant step forward for GLXY. Inclusion in the Russell 1000 is a major validation of their market cap and structural growth. The immediate benefit here is forced buying from passive fund managers, which usually creates a solid floor for the stock. Definitely one to keep a close eye on over the coming weeks as the rebalancing settles. Thanks for sharing! - ·27.6.I think the market still seems to have difficulty knowing how Galaxy Digital should actually be valued. If we look at the development over the last year: * CIFR: +505 % * WULF: +496 % * HUT: +542 % * IREN: +256 % * GLXY: +40 % It feels strange if one believes that Galaxy today is no longer just a crypto company. A few years ago, the investment case was almost entirely linked to: * Trading * Asset Management * Investment Banking * Crypto assets on the balance sheet But today, Helios is becoming an increasingly larger part of the story. If Galaxy succeeds in filling 1.6 GW AI capacity with hyperscalers or AI customers, how much of the company's value will actually come from AI infrastructure rather than from crypto? That makes me wonder if the market still values Galaxy as a "crypto company with a data center", while it perhaps should start valuing it as an "AI data center company with a very profitable crypto business." If one performs a sum-of-the-parts valuation, one could divide the company into: * AI data center (Helios) * Trading & Investment Banking * Asset Management * Staking * Venture portfolio * Crypto assets on the balance sheet The question then is: How much is Helios alone worth? If the market uses similar multiples as for other AI data centers, it doesn't seem unreasonable that Helios could justify a very large part of today's market capitalization on its own. Then, in principle, one gets the rest of the business at a relatively low implicit valuation. I'm not saying the market is wrong – there are, of course, reasons for the discount. AI revenues are still being built up, and Galaxy will likely continue to be considered a crypto company as long as the crypto business dominates profits. But if the AI business grows as management hopes, it feels like the market sooner or later must start comparing Galaxy with AI infrastructure companies rather than solely with crypto companies. What do you think about that? * Is Galaxy still primarily a crypto company? * Is Helios already the most valuable asset in the company? * Which companies do you actually think are the most relevant comparison objects for Galaxy in three to five years? I'm curious how others reason, because I think the market still seems to treat Galaxy as if Helios were a side project, when in fact it might be becoming the company's most important business.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
75 päivää sitten
‧1 t 1 min
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·7.7.Following yesterday's announcement regarding Helios, it is now transitioning from being a construction project to becoming a revenue-generating asset. Galaxy has delivered the first phase (133 MW critical IT capacity) to CoreWeave on time and according to plan, which reduces execution risk and demonstrates the company's ability to execute large AI infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, Phase II continues on schedule, while the entire contracted 800 MW facility is covered by a 15-year lease agreement expected to generate over 1 billion dollars in average annual revenue when fully built out. For investors, this means that Galaxy can increasingly be valued as a company with stable, long-term cash flows from AI data centers – in addition to its digital assets business.The short version is that the decline is not about Galaxy itself, but about their largest counterparty. The long version: On July 1, Bloomberg reported that Meta plans to build a cloud business and sell AI computing capacity to external customers. CoreWeave fell almost 14% the same day, and the entire sector of specialized AI cloud companies ("neoclouds") was sold off — Nebius dropped 17%. Galaxy's data center Helios in Texas is fully leased to a single customer: CoreWeave, which has contracted the entire site's 800 MW approved capacity. This makes GLXY a direct proxy for CoreWeave-sentiment. The market's question is therefore not "is Galaxy delivering?" but "what happens if hyperscalers start competing with neoclouds — and thus with Galaxy's sole customer?" The concern is also twofold: Meta is not only a potential competitor to CoreWeave but also one of their largest customers. The real question the market is asking is whether large AI buyers will eventually build and monetize their own capacity instead of renting. Galaxy has a 15-year lease agreement with CoreWeave with contracted cash flows. The direct threat is therefore not that revenues will disappear tomorrow. The risks are rather: 1. Counterparty risk — if CoreWeave were to face financial problems further down the line. 2. Expansion value — Galaxy has an additional approx. 830 MW of approved capacity plus larger plans under development. The value of future expansion is based on continued strong neocloud demand. It is this latter optionality that the market is now pricing down — not the existing contract.
- ·29.6.Galaxy Digital has now been included in the Russell 1000 Index, which comprises approximately 1,000 of the largest publicly traded companies in the USA, based on their market capitalization.1.7.This is a significant step forward for GLXY. Inclusion in the Russell 1000 is a major validation of their market cap and structural growth. The immediate benefit here is forced buying from passive fund managers, which usually creates a solid floor for the stock. Definitely one to keep a close eye on over the coming weeks as the rebalancing settles. Thanks for sharing!
- ·27.6.I think the market still seems to have difficulty knowing how Galaxy Digital should actually be valued. If we look at the development over the last year: * CIFR: +505 % * WULF: +496 % * HUT: +542 % * IREN: +256 % * GLXY: +40 % It feels strange if one believes that Galaxy today is no longer just a crypto company. A few years ago, the investment case was almost entirely linked to: * Trading * Asset Management * Investment Banking * Crypto assets on the balance sheet But today, Helios is becoming an increasingly larger part of the story. If Galaxy succeeds in filling 1.6 GW AI capacity with hyperscalers or AI customers, how much of the company's value will actually come from AI infrastructure rather than from crypto? That makes me wonder if the market still values Galaxy as a "crypto company with a data center", while it perhaps should start valuing it as an "AI data center company with a very profitable crypto business." If one performs a sum-of-the-parts valuation, one could divide the company into: * AI data center (Helios) * Trading & Investment Banking * Asset Management * Staking * Venture portfolio * Crypto assets on the balance sheet The question then is: How much is Helios alone worth? If the market uses similar multiples as for other AI data centers, it doesn't seem unreasonable that Helios could justify a very large part of today's market capitalization on its own. Then, in principle, one gets the rest of the business at a relatively low implicit valuation. I'm not saying the market is wrong – there are, of course, reasons for the discount. AI revenues are still being built up, and Galaxy will likely continue to be considered a crypto company as long as the crypto business dominates profits. But if the AI business grows as management hopes, it feels like the market sooner or later must start comparing Galaxy with AI infrastructure companies rather than solely with crypto companies. What do you think about that? * Is Galaxy still primarily a crypto company? * Is Helios already the most valuable asset in the company? * Which companies do you actually think are the most relevant comparison objects for Galaxy in three to five years? I'm curious how others reason, because I think the market still seems to treat Galaxy as if Helios were a side project, when in fact it might be becoming the company's most important business.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 4.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 28.5. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 5.8.2025 |
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
75 päivää sitten
‧1 t 1 min
Uutiset
Ei uutisia tällä hetkellä
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 4.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
Vuosittainen yhtiökokous 2026 28.5. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.4. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 21.10.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 5.8.2025 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·7.7.Following yesterday's announcement regarding Helios, it is now transitioning from being a construction project to becoming a revenue-generating asset. Galaxy has delivered the first phase (133 MW critical IT capacity) to CoreWeave on time and according to plan, which reduces execution risk and demonstrates the company's ability to execute large AI infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, Phase II continues on schedule, while the entire contracted 800 MW facility is covered by a 15-year lease agreement expected to generate over 1 billion dollars in average annual revenue when fully built out. For investors, this means that Galaxy can increasingly be valued as a company with stable, long-term cash flows from AI data centers – in addition to its digital assets business.The short version is that the decline is not about Galaxy itself, but about their largest counterparty. The long version: On July 1, Bloomberg reported that Meta plans to build a cloud business and sell AI computing capacity to external customers. CoreWeave fell almost 14% the same day, and the entire sector of specialized AI cloud companies ("neoclouds") was sold off — Nebius dropped 17%. Galaxy's data center Helios in Texas is fully leased to a single customer: CoreWeave, which has contracted the entire site's 800 MW approved capacity. This makes GLXY a direct proxy for CoreWeave-sentiment. The market's question is therefore not "is Galaxy delivering?" but "what happens if hyperscalers start competing with neoclouds — and thus with Galaxy's sole customer?" The concern is also twofold: Meta is not only a potential competitor to CoreWeave but also one of their largest customers. The real question the market is asking is whether large AI buyers will eventually build and monetize their own capacity instead of renting. Galaxy has a 15-year lease agreement with CoreWeave with contracted cash flows. The direct threat is therefore not that revenues will disappear tomorrow. The risks are rather: 1. Counterparty risk — if CoreWeave were to face financial problems further down the line. 2. Expansion value — Galaxy has an additional approx. 830 MW of approved capacity plus larger plans under development. The value of future expansion is based on continued strong neocloud demand. It is this latter optionality that the market is now pricing down — not the existing contract.
- ·29.6.Galaxy Digital has now been included in the Russell 1000 Index, which comprises approximately 1,000 of the largest publicly traded companies in the USA, based on their market capitalization.1.7.This is a significant step forward for GLXY. Inclusion in the Russell 1000 is a major validation of their market cap and structural growth. The immediate benefit here is forced buying from passive fund managers, which usually creates a solid floor for the stock. Definitely one to keep a close eye on over the coming weeks as the rebalancing settles. Thanks for sharing!
- ·27.6.I think the market still seems to have difficulty knowing how Galaxy Digital should actually be valued. If we look at the development over the last year: * CIFR: +505 % * WULF: +496 % * HUT: +542 % * IREN: +256 % * GLXY: +40 % It feels strange if one believes that Galaxy today is no longer just a crypto company. A few years ago, the investment case was almost entirely linked to: * Trading * Asset Management * Investment Banking * Crypto assets on the balance sheet But today, Helios is becoming an increasingly larger part of the story. If Galaxy succeeds in filling 1.6 GW AI capacity with hyperscalers or AI customers, how much of the company's value will actually come from AI infrastructure rather than from crypto? That makes me wonder if the market still values Galaxy as a "crypto company with a data center", while it perhaps should start valuing it as an "AI data center company with a very profitable crypto business." If one performs a sum-of-the-parts valuation, one could divide the company into: * AI data center (Helios) * Trading & Investment Banking * Asset Management * Staking * Venture portfolio * Crypto assets on the balance sheet The question then is: How much is Helios alone worth? If the market uses similar multiples as for other AI data centers, it doesn't seem unreasonable that Helios could justify a very large part of today's market capitalization on its own. Then, in principle, one gets the rest of the business at a relatively low implicit valuation. I'm not saying the market is wrong – there are, of course, reasons for the discount. AI revenues are still being built up, and Galaxy will likely continue to be considered a crypto company as long as the crypto business dominates profits. But if the AI business grows as management hopes, it feels like the market sooner or later must start comparing Galaxy with AI infrastructure companies rather than solely with crypto companies. What do you think about that? * Is Galaxy still primarily a crypto company? * Is Helios already the most valuable asset in the company? * Which companies do you actually think are the most relevant comparison objects for Galaxy in three to five years? I'm curious how others reason, because I think the market still seems to treat Galaxy as if Helios were a side project, when in fact it might be becoming the company's most important business.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt