MARA isn't a normal company to put one fair-value number on: it holds a large bitcoin treasury (worth roughly $2.3 billion), and its reported profits swing up and down with bitcoin's price, not with how its day-to-day mining business is actually performing.
MARA's bitcoin holdings and bitcoin-driven accounting distort its reported financials so heavily that conventional valuation approaches for this business disagree with each other by a wide margin, so the estimate below is built around explicit bitcoin-price scenarios rather than a single blended figure.
Fair value here depends almost entirely on where bitcoin's price goes. At a bearish bitcoin price (~$38,000) we estimate the stock is worth around $5; near today's bitcoin price (~$63,000) around $12, almost exactly today's price; at a bullish bitcoin price (~$110,000) around $23.
Fairly Valued, but only as a snapshot tied to today's bitcoin price, this is really a leveraged bet on bitcoin, not a normal operating business, so treat any single number here with real caution.
MARA earns money mainly by using large amounts of computing power (and electricity) to mine new bitcoin, which it can hold on its balance sheet or sell. It is now also building out power infrastructure to host AI computing as a second business line, though that business has essentially no revenue yet.
We'd revisit this call if the price falls below $5.00 or rises above $23.00.
These are review triggers for us to take another look, not price targets or a promise the stock will reach them.
Peer benchmark data not available.
Energized hash rate 72.2 EH/s in Q1'26, +33% YoY (10-Q/shareholder letter, 2026-05), but MARA ended 2025 at only 53.2 EH/s vs its own mid-2025 guidance of 75 EH/s by year-end, a real guidance-credibility gap. The 12-month debate: does the AI/HPC pivot (200-600MW planned at Long Ridge, tenant leases not targeted until 2028) re-rate the stock before further BTC/hash-price pain forces more dilution or asset sales.
Q1'26 revenue $174.6M, -18.4% YoY (lower BTC price/production); FY2025 revenue $907.1M, +38% YoY. FY2025 net loss $1.3B vs FY2024 net income $541.0M, the entire swing traces to a $1.5B negative change in digital-asset fair value (FY2025) vs a large gain in FY2024; GAAP 'earnings' here are a BTC mark-to-market artifact, not an operating signal (every $10K BTC move ≈ ~$350-450M swing per company disclosure).
TTM OCF -$834.7M; TTM 'FCF' -$1.34B (stockanalysis.com), not a clean metric for a miner that both produces and trades a volatile asset on-balance-sheet. The decision-relevant cash action this quarter: MARA sold 15,133 BTC for ~$1.1B (Mar 4-25, 2026) to fund a $1.0B convertible-note buyback at a 9% discount, saving ~$88.1M and cutting convertible principal ~30% (8-K, 2026-03-26).
Total debt fell from $3,599.9M to $2,416.2M (net of OID) in one quarter via BTC-funded buybacks, not earnings (10-Q Note 13). All five convertible tranches (conversion prices $18.89-$76.17) are out-of-the-money at $11.75, near-term conversion dilution is low, though a $150M line of credit and $48.1M of Dec-2026 notes mature soon. Cash $513.7M; BTC 35,303 (10-Q, 2026-03-31) / 36,303 (bitcointreasuries.net, 2026-06-16) worth ~$2.3B. Shares outstanding still +17% YoY (stockanalysis.com) reflecting the historical ATM-funded-BTC-purchase playbook, though management states the ATM has been unused since end-2025 in favor of BTC monetization.
Q10 pack below. mNAV proxy: EV ~$6.4-6.5B vs BTC NAV ~$2.3B implies ~$4.1B assigned to mining+infrastructure, in line with CleanSpark's EV (~$4.6B, 50 EH/s, no AI pivot) and well below Riot's ~17x NTM EV/Revenue.
MARA (72.2 EH/s, ~9x NTM EV/Revenue) vs CleanSpark (50.0 EH/s, ~9x) vs Riot (42.5 EH/s, ~17x). MARA has the largest hash rate and an AI-infrastructure pipeline comparable to or larger than Riot's, yet trades near CleanSpark's multiple, plausibly explained by Riot's further-along AI narrative and MARA's guidance-miss history, not an obvious flaw.
S8 = BTC price/crypto risk appetite, transmitted near 1:1 into GAAP earnings and mining margin. BTC is ~50% below its 2025-10-06 ATH ($126,210.50), near the bottom of its 52-week range ($57,832-$126,186); 2026-07-08 risk-off (Mideast escalation) pressures both the treasury mark and equity risk appetite together.
CEO Fred Thiel sold ~27,505 shares monthly under a pre-arranged 10b5-1 plan (Jan-Jun 2026, $7.66-$14.25) plus RSU tax-withholding sales; also received a 773,861-share performance award (Feb 2026). Routine/plan-based; no open-market buying found, not a strong signal.
Catalysts. Long Ridge close (H2 2026, +65% owned power capacity, $144M disclosed annualized adj. EBITDA); first signed AI/HPC tenant lease. Risks, hash price at a 5-year low (CoinShares Q1'26); BTC re-test of bear-market lows; resumed ATM dilution; guidance-credibility gap. Q9 segments: strongest = mining block rewards $156.25M (89.5% of Q1'26 revenue, still -20.4% YoY); weakest = Other/AI revenue $951K (-66% YoY), the AI pivot has zero income-statement traction yet.
see Q6/Q7 below (verbatim).
reassess_low ≈ $6 (≈0.55x base ~$11.79), a sustained BTC re-test of the high-$30Ks/low-$40Ks or a stalled/cancelled AI pivot; reassess_high ≈ $13 (≈1.10x base), price already ahead of the base-case decomposition, worth re-checking BTC and multiple assumptions.
Mechanical model output, a screen, not a fair value.
Scenario NAV: treasury (35,303-36,303 BTC, 10-Q Mar-31-2026 / bitcointreasuries.net Jun-16-2026) plus a peer-anchored plug for the mining+AI/infrastructure business (current EV minus BTC NAV, ~$4.1B, flexed 0.6x/1.0x/1.6x across scenarios), minus net debt ($1.90B), divided by ~381.3M shares, at bear/base/bull BTC prices of $38,000/$63,000/$110,000 yields roughly $5/$12/$23 per share; price $11.75 (2026-07-08) sits almost exactly on the base case, i.e. fair ONLY conditional on today's spot BTC price and today's market-assigned multiple for the non-BTC business persisting; it is not an independent confirmation, it is a decomposition of what the market is already paying.
The mechanical screen didn't produce a comparable verdict for this stock, so there is nothing to check the research against; the view shown is from the research alone.
Confidence = 0.7 × research sub-score + 0.3 × mechanical sub-score. Mechanical sub-score rewards the Layer 1 screen for agreeing with Layer 2's direction (corroboration), not just for being conviction=NORMAL in isolation.