CORZ

Please note this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host, Jon Charbonneau, SVP, Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Great, thank you. Good afternoon, welcome to Core Scientific's first quarter 2026 earnings call. Before we begin, I need to remind you the statements made on this call other than historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are based on our current expectations. Words such as anticipates, estimates, expects, intends and believes, and similar words and expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ substantially. For further information on these risks and uncertainties, we encourage you to review the risk factors discussed in the company's reports on Form 10-Q and 8-K filed today with the SEC and the press release and slide presentation contained therein.

The forward-looking statements we make today speak as of today, and we do not undertake any obligation to update any such statement to reflect events or circumstances occurring after today. Today's presentation is available on our website, investors.corescientific.com. The content of this conference call contains information that is accurate as of today, May 6, 2026. Joining me today from Core Scientific are our CEO, Adam Sullivan, Chief Operating Officer Matt Brown, and Chief Financial Officer Jim Nygaard. We will conduct a question and answer session after management's remarks. We will now begin with remarks from Adam.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us. platform designed to support the most demanding compute workloads in the market. Over the past year, we've translated that strategy into execution, delivering high density capacity at scale across multiple states. Those sites were an important starting point, but our first customer was never Core Scientific's full story. Delivering these initial sites enhances our operating credibility and provides a significant capital foundation we need to scale meaningfully from here. We have shown clearly our ability to deliver at scale. Across five sites, we are now developing one of the largest multi-site AI infrastructure build-outs in the market. We are now earning revenue on approximately 245 MW, with another 200 MW expected to be earning revenue in the coming months. Our execution, combined with the favorable structure of our CoreWeave contracts, has enabled our next phase of growth.

Today, we closed on a $3.3 billion capital raise supported by that contract, with the proceeds to be used for future growth and the development of projects for other customers. The fact that we have five facilities fully leased and financed by our tenant is a meaningful differentiator. We have the ability to push the next phase of development in a disciplined way by securing the land, labor, and equipment to protect timelines and accelerate delivery. As these new projects are leased, we expect opportunities for further financing to continue the cycle of our forward development go-to-market strategy. Our next phase of development has already begun. In late last year, we committed existing cash on hand to purchase equipment for our other existing sites. With the new secured financing, we are now accelerating development activity across multiple sites, including Pecos, Muskogee, Hunt, Dalton phase 3, and Auburn.

This positions us differently in the market. We are not waiting for deal negotiations to conclude before advancing sites. With capital in place, we can move early, bringing RFS timelines within the 12 to 14-month timeframe that customers are actively trying to solve for. We are also scaling our campuses in a repeatable way. Today, we announced a path to approximately 1.5 gigawatts at Muskogee, closely following a similar plan at Pecos. A key enabler of that scale is power strategy. Customers are increasingly focused on solutions beyond existing grid capacity, including behind-the-meter options. We are proactively positioning our sites to support those needs, including efforts to secure natural gas infrastructure where appropriate to enable future expansion. Pecos is a clear example.

We are actively converting the site from Bitcoin mining to high density colocation, with construction already underway and a pathway to RFS within 12 months. Muskogee is another. We see a path to 1.5 gigawatts of gross power supported by grid expansion, the Polaris acquisition, and behind-the-meter solutions, and we expect to deliver additional data center capacity outside of our current contract in late 2027. Stepping back, we are executing a repeatable model, secure strategic sites, invest ahead of contracts where appropriate, and create assets that are increasingly compelling as they approach readiness. That brings me to our commercial progress. We are engaging customers from a position of strength. Because development is already underway, our timelines are not dependent on contract timing, an important distinction in this market.

As we previously discussed, we are engaged in an exclusivity process with a hyperscaler across Pecos and Muskogee. That exclusivity is now expired. Three hyperscalers immediately engaged on those same sites, and we are now in active discussions. This reinforced both the strategic value of these assets and the depth of demand for large scale, high density capacity. It also informed how we approach exclusivity going forward. While it likely remains a necessary part of some deal negotiations, it must also include clear milestones. In a market like this, we will not keep high value assets off the market longer than necessary. Our conversations with potential customers have increased significantly since the beginning of the year. Hyperscalers remain our primary focus, and we are also seeing growing engagement from chip makers, AI labs, and Neo Cloud providers.

These emerging customer segments represent meaningful opportunity, though they often require additional credit support. We are actively working with customers and financing partners on structures that can support long term financable commitments. Stepping back, our position is clear. We are building a scaled, high density digital infrastructure platform with a diversified site portfolio. We are deploying capital to secure timelines and accelerate delivery. We are also seeing strong customer demand. Based on our execution, capital position, and commercial momentum, we are confident in our ability to continue expanding and creating long term value for our customers and our shareholders. With that, I'll turn the call over to Matt Brown to provide more details on our operations and development progress. Matt.

Thanks, Adam. As we reflect on the first quarter, our operational priorities may remain clear. Execute on our existing build pipeline, bring capacity online efficiently, and position the business for the next phase of large scale expansion. Demand for high performance compute infrastructure remains strong, and we have focused on aligning our delivery timelines, supply chain readiness, and power strategies to meet that demand. I'll begin with an update on our CoreWeave dedicated facilities, where we continue to execute at pace and at scale. Today, I am pleased to announce that we have delivered 243 MW of billable capacity to CoreWeave. This includes a milestone with a full turnover of both our Marble, N.C. and Dalton, Ga. phase 1 data centers. At Marble, we completed construction and successfully transitioned the entire facility into operations, bringing 65 MW of billable capacity online.

At Dalton phase one, we likewise achieved full site handover and delivery 30 megawatts into service. These milestones reflect the team's ability to execute efficiently at scale, transition assets seamlessly from construction to revenue generation, and consistently align to customer timelines, all of which remain critical as we continue to move forward. Across our remaining contracted sites, we will continue delivering billable megawatts over the coming months while scaling execution on the CoreWeave contract, positioning us to deliver more than 450 billables by the end of the summer, while remaining on track to deliver the full 590 megawatts by the early 2027. Turning to our non-CoreWeave developments, where we are advancing our development strategy.

Our Pecos, Texas campus is one of our most significant development opportunities, with a plan to scale from 300 MW to 1.5 GW through a multi-pronged expansion strategy. At the core is our power roadmap. We've secured an additional 300 MW and are advancing a mix of grid connected and behind-the-meter solutions to support long term growth. The behind-the-meter strategy leverages low emission generation and concludes the construction of a linear gas pipeline to the campus. Together, these efforts are designed to accelerate time to power, enhance resilience, and reduce the supply chain risk while enabling us to meet hyperscale demand. In parallel, construction of our initial 431,000 sq ft, 185 MW facility is progressing from civil work into foundation phases with precast walls arriving for vertical construction.

Long lead items equipment has been secured, helping reduce execution risk and support timelines. We are also advancing infrastructure for high density colocation, including redundant fiber capacity and a new regional interconnect point in Midland, Texas, linking back to the Pecos campus. At our Muskogee, Oklahoma campus, today, we announced plans for the expansion of the site to 1.5 megawatts of gross power or approximately 1 gigawatt of leasable capacity. Similar to Pecos, this expansion will leverage a combination of behind-the-meter infrastructure and utility supply power, including the roughly 440 megawatts acquired through the Polaris transaction. With our general contractor already secured on site, we have begun development of the first 82.5 megawatt building, with initial delivery expected in the second half of 2027.

Finally, turning to other development sites, Hunt County, Texas, Dalton, Georgia, phase 3, and Auburn, Alabama, each continues to advance through pre-construction milestones and remains on track to meet their initial delivery timelines. In closing, as we look ahead, we remain confident in our ability to execute against our commitments and capture opportunities in front of us. The combination of strong demand, a growing portfolio of scale developments, and continued progress on our power infrastructure strategies position us well for the quarters ahead. With that, I'll turn it over to Jim.

Thanks, Matt. During the first quarter, we reached an important inflection point as our colocation revenue scaled to a level sufficient to cover operating costs and begin expanding margins.

This marks a meaningful milestone in our transition, with colocation now becoming an important driver of our overall financial profile. Today, we are billing for 243 MW, which equates to more than $350 million of annualized colocation GAAP revenue, with significant additional capacity expected to begin billing over the next several months. As a reminder, under GAAP, revenue from the CoreWeave contract is recognized on a straight-line basis over the 12-year lease term, effectively pulling escalators forward. From a Bitcoin mining perspective, we remain focused on optimization and are running that business to help offset contractual power costs as we continue the transition toward high-density colocation. Going forward, we expect mining activity to continue winding down over the course of the year with a meaningful step down in miners online in the second half.

Earlier this year, we monetized a significant portion of our Bitcoin holdings and currently retain only a modest amount of Bitcoin on the balance sheet. Moving on to costs. First quarter SG&A on a cash basis was just over $30 million. While we are not providing explicit SG&A guidance, we believe this level represents a reasonable baseline for corporate expenses going forward, with the potential for opportunistic investments to support growth over the next few years. Separately, you may have noticed that we increased our target cash gross profit range for the CoreWeave contract to 80%-85%, up from our original target of 75%-80%. We first introduced that target roughly 2 years ago, and today we have much greater visibility into the associated cost structure, given we are now billing for a meaningful portion of the contracted megawatts.

With that operating backdrop, let me turn to capital formation, where today marked another major milestone for Core Scientific. We closed our previously announced $3.3 billion CoreWeave project bond financing at a 7.75% interest rate, which we view as highly attractive cost of capital for a financing of this scale. After closing costs and funding the required debt service reserve account, net proceeds were approximately $2.9 billion. For additional context, the bonds include a lockbox structure, which is a cash control mechanism where project revenues are paid directly into a designated account and then applied through the indenture-defined cash waterfall, first to operating expenses, then to debt service, and finally to other uses permitted by the indenture.

Unlike a traditional project finance structure where a lockbox is created to fund a specific project under development, our structure enables the distribution of the vast majority of offering proceeds up to the corporate level to facilitate investments in a variety of new projects outside the box. Going forward, the lockbox will service the debt secured by CoreWeave contracted site assets and cash flows. From this perspective, the transaction significantly strengthens our consolidated capital position, validates the quality and predictability of our contracted cash flows, and gives us the ability to execute the next phase of our growth plan with greater flexibility, speed, and certainty. We expect to deploy roughly $2 billion of total capital expenditures in 2026.

This includes approximately $700 million for both the Hunt County, Texas, site acquisition, which closed yesterday, and the Polaris acquisition at our Muskogee, Oklahoma, site announced earlier today, as well as expenditures to begin pre-seeding approximately 1 gigawatt of new billable capacity. This includes long lead time equipment procurement and various site development and utility support activities across multiple project locations. We are strategically positioning the business to sign attractive new customer contracts with capacity outside of CoreWeave available for delivery starting in early 2027. The platform we are building together with cost-effective capital we have secured for new project equity investments is differentiated in the market, and we believe it positions Core Scientific to create meaningful long-term shareholder value. Lastly, we recently welcomed Jorge Rey as our Chief Accounting Officer, further strengthening our finance and accounting team.

Jorge brings valuable accounting and public company reporting experience, and his leadership will be important as we continue to scale the business and support our next phase of growth. I'll now turn the call over to the operator for questions.

Thank you. Our first question will come from Brett Knobel with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question and congrats on the site expansion at Texas and Muskogee. I guess maybe just on the Hyperscale exclusivity, it expired. Clearly, there's demand with additional tenants kind of, you know, backfilling that. Could you maybe shed light on, you know, why it expired, why it didn't progress? Is there anything that maybe those sites were not of interest or, you know, they weren't interested in or just, you know, some more color around that dynamic?

Absolutely. Thank you, Brett Knobel. Those sites, as you mentioned, are incredibly attractive, both Pecos and Muskogee, given their ability to scale, represent tremendous opportunity for hyperscaler. As we noted in prepared remarks, 3 hyperscalers immediately engage. They're incredibly attractive sites. Really, with the one that we're under exclusivity with, it's hard to determine the exact reasons why. For us, we got to the end of the exclusivity and we thought this is the best time for us to bring these back to market because hyperscalers were knocking at the door and asking questions about the sites, and we knew we couldn't have an opportunity to bring another hyperscaler into the fray.

We feel great about our position today, given the competitive dynamic.

Perfect. Yeah, maybe just one follow-up. You know, it seems like kind of the AI pendulum swinging into full, you know, bull mode here. You guys do have, I believe, a lot of capacity available to these kind of RFS, you know, by early 2027. Do we think we're closer to maybe a second tenant today than we were, you know, when you guys reported four Q in early March?

Yeah, I mean, when you look across our site portfolio, you know, we have 5 sites with first data halls RFS in 2027. It's incredibly unique position given the different size and scale and geography spread that we have inside our portfolio. You know, we're in conversations with all of the hyperscalers, chip makers, AI labs, neo clouds. You know, we're in a unique position here, just given the asset spread that we have. I would say definitely across the entire site portfolio, we are closer than we were before.

Awesome. Really appreciate it. Thank you, guys.

Thanks, Brett.

Our next question will come from Jon Todaro with Needham & Company.

Hey, guys, thanks for taking my question and congrats on the expansion of power. Two from me. I guess just one, going back to the other three hyperscalers you're now in conversation with. I guess just if we frame it up, was there already some dialogue at some point? I mean, obviously it's a little bit of a limited universe, but like should we be thinking it's kind of starting the process anew with them or there's already been, you know, at some point along the way, pretty far along where, you know, just we could get something maybe a bit sooner than necessarily restarting the process?

Yeah. Thanks, Jon. I mean, our relationship with these groups is not new. We are engaged with them on other sites. This was just really bringing back, you know, both Pecos and Muskogee back to the table. That's really why we are able to immediately re-engage with those customers.

Got it. Understood. That's very helpful. Just, you know, you mentioned starting some of the process on building out some of these assets. You know, it sounds like before a lease gets done at some of them. Just kind of, I guess, are there any guardrail on how much CapEx you would start putting forward before getting a lease?

Yeah, I mean, the way we're thinking about it right now is we wanna take the first data hall to full RFS. As part of that means we're securing the labor, securing the trades. We're securing long lead equipment. We're putting ourselves in a position where if a customer signs really within any time period leading up to the RFS of the first data hall, we can just continue to extend all of that labor that we have secured on site. That's kind of our guardrail right now in terms of where we sit.

We feel very confident in the strategy and the ability to show the progress that we're making across each of these sites to customers is really what's forcing the engagement here because everyone's incredibly interested in capacity that's getting delivered in 2027 right now.

Yep, understood. Thank you for that, gentlemen.

Thank you.

We'll go next to Timothy Horan with Oppenheimer.

Thanks, guys. Do you have a rough idea when you might sign a contract? Can you maybe just talk about the pricing trends, you know, at a high level?

Yeah, I mean, I would just say we're actively engaged right now across every major group, and we feel very confident based on where we sit today versus where we sat three months ago. The only thing that's changed is our assets have continued to build more value. We've continued to deploy more capital, and we've continued to get closer to the RFS date. We have high confidence in the customer conversations that we're having today. If you could just remind me, Tim, what was your second question?

Yeah, you know, you know, what are you seeing in the pricing trends or the pricing of the new contracts you expect?

Yeah. I mean, I think you could expect to see pricing continue to firm up. You know, really that's the result of both labor and equipment continuing to inflate. What you're just seeing is a similar move in pricing.

Just lastly, behind-the-meter power, can you give us just a sense of what's the lead time on that? Ultimately, how will your cost for, you know, build your own versus the grid, you know, compare?

Yeah. No, I mean, right now what we're looking at really is to deploy behind-the-meter solutions, you know, anywhere from about 12-14 months. The great part is for us is, you know, these are opportunities given the locations that we have available to us, is really gonna represent a great opportunity for continuing to expand at those sites. You know, the other site that we haven't talked about, Hunt. You know, Hunt has the opportunity to potentially bring behind-the-meter, that's something that we're still in the evaluation phase today. Haven't necessarily done as much of the due diligence that we've done across Pecos and Muskogee and the work that is currently being performed there.

Is the ultimate cost of a customer about the same as grid or a little bit more?

It's about the same. I mean, the economics for us as a developer look very similar. The cost to the end tenant to, on a blended basis, per power rate, is not materially different.

Thank you.

Michael Donovan with Compass Point has our next question.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Another question on behind the meter. The Muskogee announcement this morning referenced Oklahoma's behind-the-meter legislation. Can you explain what that legislation changes for Core Scientific's ability to develop and whether it gives Muskogee a timing or cost advantage versus opportunities in Texas?

Yeah, I mean, Kevin Stitt has been a big advocate of bringing behind-the-meter opportunities to the state of Oklahoma. You know, obviously you saw Kevin Stitt's quote in the press release today. You know, Oklahoma is focused on figuring out how to bring more generation to the state. Our ability to execute at Oklahoma, I wouldn't say it's necessarily any easier or any more difficult than our site in Pecos, but we definitely have the support of the government there to continue to bring more generation to the state.

Great. Thanks. One follow up, if I may. Have you contemplated owning the generation assets or would you be solely partnering with a power developer? How are you thinking about redundancy?

Yeah, I'll take the first part of that question and then I'll hand it over to Matt to take the question about redundancy. You know, as we evaluate the behind the meter solutions, there are potentially some solutions that we would own ourselves and there are others that we would work through a third party that would provide us a PPA and we would be paying for those over a course of time would be included in the power price. There's a few different methods that we could go down. It really just comes down to the economics question as well as who the behind the meter solution is from. Matt, you want to talk about redundancy?

To include in that is belongs the maintenance and operation of the behind-the-meter generation comes with that PPA agreement as well. From a redundancy standpoint, obviously when we're building behind-the-meter, redundancy becomes much more critical in terms of when you're building high availability services. We'll think about redundancy in terms we need to be able to support the full load of the portion of the campus that we're powering from behind-the-meter, under maintenance conditions, meaning that we need to be able to take some of that equipment offline for maintenance, maintain full load, and have redundant capacity still online and available in the event of a failure.

You can almost think about that as a minimum, an N plus 1 configuration, maybe an N plus 2 or an N plus 20% or N plus 30% type of redundancy scheme.

Great. Appreciate it, and congrats on the progress.

Thank you.

Moving on to Joseph Vafi with Canaccord.

Hey, guys. Good afternoon. Congrats on the progress. Thanks for taking the question. Just wondering how you're managing perhaps the labor side of the builds here. I'm not quite sure if you've if you're employing a few large GCs on the builds or, you know, are you looking at construction labor as any constraint in the market right now? Thank you.

Yeah. No, great question. Labor is 1 of the primary constraints of the market, if not depending on which market we're talking about. When we look at nationally, labor is a big issue. It's 1 of the reasons why we think we have an advantage by being able to proactively invest in development of these sites, being able to secure and tie up the labor through our projected RFS and scaling beyond that. In terms of how we're doing that, we have 2 large GCs sort of executing our sites and development today. Those GCs have a lot of leverage in the marketplace, being able to secure electrical contractors, mechanical contractors, civil, et cetera.

All of those, all except for probably one site, are already fully mobilized and executing our developments, as we speak.

Great. Thank you very much.

We'll go next to Paul Goodling with Macquarie Capital.

Thanks so much. Congrats on the progress. Just wanted to ask on these behind-the-meter opportunities that you've been discussing. I know you just mentioned in response to another question that you might partner with someone who would give you a PPA or you might look at an opportunity to do it yourself behind-the-meter in terms of generation. How is the air quality component of that structured, or how do you see that potentially being structured? Do you have to still go to market and apply for those emissions permits, or would a partner that you're speaking with already have that in hand? I have a follow-up. Thank you.

Yeah. No, great question. As we sort of, I mentioned in our prepared remarks is the technologies that we're gonna get behind and support for all of our behind-the-meter sites are gonna be technologies that are low emissions, generally. That will give you a little bit of insight as to what we're not thinking about from that standpoint. To go and to talk about sort of the permitting standpoint, yes. We will have to certainly go and apply for air quality permits for many of these deployments. In some cases, that will be in participation with the behind-the-meter operator or supplier. In other cases, we'll be doing that on our own.

I'll say that in both Pecos and Muskogee, we're already down, kind of, far down the path of sort of our air quality studies for the implementation of those solutions.

Got it. Thanks so much. I was just hoping you could also give a little more detail around some of the puts and takes that enabled you to raise the run rate margin profile on the existing energized and billable capacity from that 75% to 80% to 80% to 85%. Thank you.

Yeah. 2 years ago, when we signed the CoreWeave original CoreWeave contract, we had a scope of service contemplated in that deal. I think we had an element of conservatism knowing that we hadn't broken ground on the project at that point, knowing that we were gonna be deploying over a fairly lengthy period, to have a what I would call a very solid perspective on what we think we could have delivered. Once you're 2 years after the fact, you're into it, and we've got, you know, more experience under our belt on the specificity of actual heads that are gonna be devoted to the activities and the contractors that we're using and actually have deployed on site, it's really just a true up of that experience.

We feel good that we, you know, we're at a margin level that we can deliver today, and we're, we felt more confident that we could be a bit more prescriptive of where we think we're gonna end up.

Great. Thanks so much.

Our next question comes from George Sutton with Craig-Hallum.

Thank you. As you begin to market to the chipmakers and the neo clouds, I'm just curious, do you have a bifurcated sales portfolio where some of the sites and some of the maybe even parts of locations are being marketed to those folks versus the hyperscalers? How is that working through the system?

Yeah, I mean, really, we're showing both chipmakers, neo clouds, labs. We're showing them the same sites that we are also showing to hyperscalers. I mean, as we work through these processes, oftentimes, you know, they're migrating to one or another site. In reality, you know, we're showing our entire portfolios to each of the customers that come through our door.

One other question relative to the decision to execute ahead of the contracts. How does the negotiation get altered with some of these potential customers when you've, you know, you've secured the supply chain and you're kind of moving forward? Does that accelerate discussions? Does that keep them more engaged? Can you just walk through that thought process?

Yeah, I mean, it definitely keeps them more engaged. I mean, they rarely see sites that come across their desk where there's an RFS timeline really within, you know, 18 months, even more so, you know, less than that. For us, you know, being able to show photos and videos of sites with active construction going on, and the list of equipment that are on order, that dramatically changes the dynamic of the discussions, because this isn't just a, you know, a photo of a piece of land. You know, this is an active construction site, actively progressing towards building a data center.

Gotcha. Thank you, Adam.

We'll go next to Jon Hickman with Ladenburg Thalmann.

Hi. Thanks for taking my question. This is a little bit esoteric, but now that you're well into your buildout for CoreWeave, could you comment on the experience? Like, what was harder than you thought? What was easier? Where do you think you have a competitive advantage now that you've, you know, put that much, that many megawatts into production?

Yeah. No, it's actually a great question. The kind of reflecting on that, I think the thing that was much more difficult than we certainly gave it credit for was actually executing on brownfield conversions, which is why everything you see that we're doing forward is actually a greenfield site with a very highly standard basis design that allows us to get kind of leverage over our supply chain and be super predictable in terms of our build, our delivery dates. brownfield sites are highly unpredictable. They require a lot of customization. It's a lot of effort to try to retrofit an existing building. While sometimes that can be faster, it also comes with a lot more complexity.

That's what I would say is probably our biggest, one of our biggest lessons learned out of this.

Okay. Competitively, now that you've learned that, where do you think you are with other people that are trying to, I mean, there's many other competitors that are trying to build data centers?

Yeah, the great part of.

Why would I choose you, kind of?

Yeah. I think the great part of this is that we've had 5 sites not practice on, but we have been executing these high-density builds across all the CoreWeave locations. We've been able to iterate on those designs. I mean, we've executed more than 150 design changes along the way across the portfolio. That gives us a little bit of a little bit of ahead of the game in terms of what doesn't work and what works well. All of those learnings have been sort of culminated and formulated into a go forward build strategy. I think we have just the advantage of learning all those lessons firsthand in real time. We won't make those mistakes going forward.

Great. Thanks. Congratulations on the new deals.

Our next question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities.

Thank you, operator. This is Henry Hurl on for Nick Giles. I wanted to ask about the change in your approach to exclusivity. In what scenarios would you go into it? And then you also mentioned being in contact with several counterparties. Would you expect to announce exclusivity if you were to enter into one? Thanks.

Yeah. Thanks, Henry. You know, I wouldn't say that we would expect to announce, you know, in the interim between quarters. Really what we've migrated to here is moving to a milestone arrangement method, which allows us to ensure that the cadence is moving at the pace that we would expect it to in a deal that would move towards closing. That allows us to bring a site back on market if we don't feel like the pace and cadence is necessarily where we would like it to be. You know, we've migrated to this strategy. We're executing on it now, and we feel like it gives us the best shot on goal given the demand that we're seeing in the market today.

Understood. Thanks for that. Then on winding down your Bitcoin mining operations in the coming quarters, do you guys have a definitive target date to be fully out of that business, or will it kind of act as a small hedge going forward? Thanks.

No, I would say, you know, over the course of the remainder of this year, the Bitcoin mining business is going to continue to migrate lower. By the end of this year, we will only have one or potentially two sites operating Bitcoin mining.

Thank you. Continue. Best of luck.

Thanks, Henry.

Moving on to Stephen Glagola with KBW.

Hey, thanks for the question. Adam, I just, you know, wanted to touch base again on the challenges on securing the leasing commitments at Pecos and Muskogee. You know, from my standpoint, it would seem like you have strong leverage there. You know, the sites have near term power. You can point to your execution and the Core rebuild outs to date. I guess, like, maybe my question is, are you seeing, like, hyperscalers become more selective in their choice of development partners? If so, you know, how is that influencing demand or deal timing?

Yeah, I mean, I think the interesting part about this is the exclusivity that expired, that customer is still at the table and still interested in those sites. I think you are seeing that broadly across the market. You know, you're seeing, you know, repeat deals across some of the developers, especially on the private side. I would agree with that. Also, you know, they're also looking for experience in the development of this type of infrastructure. This is different than the traditional data center infrastructure. Given the experience that we have and our ability to show them 5 sites that we've built, 590 megawatts in progress of critical IT load, that's a differentiator, and that really puts us in a different bucket here.

You know, as you mentioned, we have great experience building. We have sites under construction, and, you know, it really puts us into a pretty unique category in this industry.

Thank you.

This now concludes our question and answer session. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation. This does conclude today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines. Have a wonderful day.

Greetings. Welcome to Core Scientific Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2025 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to Jon Charbonneau, Vice President of Investor Relations. Thank you. You may begin.

Great. Good afternoon, and welcome to Core Scientific's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Earnings Call. Before we begin, I need to remind you that statements made on this call other than historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. and are based on our current expectations. Words such as anticipates, estimates, expects, intends and believes and similar words and expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ substantially. For further information on these risks and uncertainties, we encourage you to review the risk factors discussed in the company's reports on Form 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K filed today with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the press release and slide presentation contained therein. The forward-looking statements we make today speak as of today only, and we do not undertake any obligation to update any such statement to reflect events or circumstances occurring after today. Today's presentation is available on our website, investors.corescientific.com. The content of this conference call contains information that is accurate as of today, March 2, 2026. Joining me today from Core Scientific are our CEO, Adam Sullivan; our Chief Operating Officer, Matt Brown; and our Chief Financial Officer, Jim Nygaard. We will conduct a question-and-answer session after management's remarks. We will now begin with remarks from Adam.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us. On our October 30 update call, we laid out 4 specific deliverables for this earnings call. First, we expect to sign at least one new customer, an important step towards diversifying our customer base. Second, we plan to sign one new power expansion contract at an existing site. Third, we expected to sign a new large land and power agreement. And fourth, we plan on making a financing announcement. These are the building blocks for our future growth, expanding contracted revenue, increasing our power optionality, widening our footprint and funding growth in a way that is responsible and repeatable. Before we talk about those 4 priorities, let's talk about execution. The complexity of these build-outs is enormous, and we've made incredible progress on our CoreWeave build-out. Despite challenges in the market and the evolving criteria for operating the newest generation of GPUs. This requires the deep bench that Core Scientific has to adapt to changes in real time. Matt will cover the details, but here are the facts. As of this week, we'll have energized approximately 350 megawatts of capacity, of which close to 200 megawatts are currently billing. This puts us well -- the halfway mark of the CORE contract. When we say energized, we mean power has been delivered and is generally within 90 days of billing. The natural lag between energization and billing commencement varies by site and customer requirements. Now let's put that in perspective. Last year, we energized as many megawatts as our closest publicly traded peers combined. We were building and delivering while they were still signing their first AI contracts. And going forward, to keep this simple and consistent, we'll report megawatts when they start billing. In this business, the market will always talk about demand. Investors should stay focused on what actually matters here, execution. Schedules will always move. It's easy at mile 2 of a marathon to say that you're on pace, but these are large and complex projects that expose who can actually execute. We've shown we can build, turn on capacity at scale and deliver for our customers. This leads directly into our pipeline. As this industry matures and evaluates opportunities against a more stringent criteria, we're confident we check those boxes through proven execution and true site readiness. And we're disciplined. We only sign contracts we know we can deliver on time and done right. That discipline is how we're building a durable, long-standing company, one defined by execution and known for being a great partner to our customers. That's what we set out to do, and it's exactly what we're doing today. And over time, that's what will separate us from the rest of the industry and position us to be a market leader for years to come. Now let me start by providing an update on the most visible item on our priority list, a new customer contract. We did not sign one by this call, and we are not satisfied with that. But the demand is there, and we have 2 sites under short exclusivity arrangements. We expect that this exercise will result in colocation leasing agreements in the near future. Our funnel is larger and broader than it was a few months ago, and we are in active discussions with hyperscalers, neoclouds and large enterprises. This is a timing issue, not a demand issue. While we are operating under the merger agreement, hyperscalers simply would not engage with us. Those conversations restarted following the termination, and we have made significant headway. Deals of this level are not a one meeting exercise. It's a rigorous multistep process. While hyperscalers have a longer contracting process, the path to project financing and delivery can oftentimes be more straightforward. The bottom line is we are engaged, moving through the process and competing for the right long-term opportunities. Now on neoclouds, there is meaningful demand across the industry. However, for those deals to work for us, there needs to be a strong balance sheet standing behind the contract. In most cases, that means a hyperscaler, chip manufacturer or another investment-grade guarantee. Putting that structure in place requires the due diligence of both the neocloud and investment-grade guarantee, which has more coordination and steps. And because these guarantees are new for many parties, they take time to negotiate and finalize. This is one reason we believe you've seen fewer neocloud deals announced across the industry recently. We are not going to compromise on counterparty strength because that protection matters over the life of the contract. Second, we said we plan to add new power at an existing site, and we delivered in Dalton, Georgia. Dalton will expand to 450 megawatts of total gross power capacity, including 120 megawatts of uncommitted leasable customer capacity. Our Dalton site is strategically located about 90 miles from Atlanta, sitting in the middle of an incredibly attractive demand corridor. We've been working towards this expansion with local stakeholders for over a year. And to support it, we've secured an additional 175 acres of land. This is what execution looks like, long-term planning, deep coordination and strong partnerships with the utilities and the local community. Late last year, we also increased leasable customer capacity in Pecos, Texas to 200 megawatts, an area that has seen significant traction for high-density compute. Given that demand, we're moving forward with the conversion of Pecos from Bitcoin mining to colocation. Pecos is in the Goldilocks zone for customer signing, meaning we've secured a general contractor, locked in long lead equipment and conversion work is underway with a time line to RFS within 12 months. This means Pecos is within a time frame that customers are actively trying to solve for right now. Stepping back, our strategy remains the same. We expect every megawatt in our portfolio to be dedicated to colocation within the next 3 years. Third, we delivered on signing a new large land and power agreement through our contract to acquire a major new site in Hunt County, Texas. This site represents approximately 265 acres that we expect can support roughly 430 megawatts of gross power capacity or 285 megawatts of customer leaseable capacity. This location is about 45 miles outside of Dallas in one of the fastest-growing colocation markets. We expect this to close by the end of Q1. And importantly, this site has a clear interconnection path. The ERCOT energization schedule was approved in 2024 and with power expected to begin coming online in 2027 and ramp through 2029. You've also seen the headlines around ERCOT. In our view, more discipline and transparency in that process is constructive. It helps reduce speculation and rewards companies with real sites, real plans and the ability to execute. We believe this makes our 2 leasable sites in Texas, both Hunt and Pecos, even more attractive in the market given the clarity around their ability to deliver. As we sit here today, our pipeline is approximately 1.5 gigawatts of customer leasable capacity. This number is not a speculative position. It is not inflated with load studies. It only includes real opportunities with a clear line of sight to development, existing power under contract, new sites like Hunt and available incremental power at both new and existing sites. Power matters, and we stay disciplined on it. But in the broader market, power is often treated as the bottleneck, and we think that can be overstated. In practice, the bigger constraints are often securing long lead equipment and lining up experienced general contractors and subcontractors. The reality is simple. We already have more power in our pipeline than we can build over the next several years. And fourth, on financing. Our balance sheet remains strong, and we have a variety of financing options that Jim will cover here shortly. Looking at 2026, our priorities are straightforward: diversify our customer base and execute on the CoreWeave contract. We are focused on delivery, disciplined growth and doing what we said we would do. I'll now turn it over to Matt to give an updated construction overview.

Thanks, Adam. Through 2025, our teams executed with intensity and precision. We stayed focused on what matters, our customers and building the infrastructure powering the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Our mission is simple: design and deliver AI factories at scale, purpose-built for accelerated computing. Every quarter felt like new architecture cycles, new GPUs, higher power densities and new cooling paradigms that created extraordinary opportunity and real complexity. We maintained operations through unprecedented weather events across multiple regions, iterated designs in real time to support the newest GPU platforms, applied lessons from prior deployments to better align infrastructure delivery with evolving customer needs. each challenge to refine the system. Each build made the thinking machine better. Now let me take a step back and frame the magnitude of what the team accomplished over the last 14 months. Alongside our design build partners, we broke ground on 5 AI factories supporting our 590-megawatt commitment to CoreWeave, 2 brownfield expansions, Denton, Texas and Marble, North Carolina; 3 greenfield campuses, Muskogee, Oklahoma, Dalton Phase 1 and Phase 2 in Georgia. In 2025, these 5 sites represented 1 million square feet of data center shell, nearly $2 billion of installed infrastructure assets, more than 5 million labor hours supported by an average of 3,300 workers on site and over $5 billion in total project investment. This is one of the most significant AI expansions underway anywhere in the world. Let's start with Texas. Our 262-megawatt 400,000 square foot Denton campus made remarkable progress. By the end of Q4, Denton delivered 67 billable megawatts across 3 buildings with roughly half the campus energized. Today, Denton North is fully operational, running production GPU workloads and represents 90 billable megawatts. At Denton South, the first 40-megawatt data hall has commenced building. And as of today, our next 41-megawatt data hall will begin the energization process. The remaining buildings on the South campus remain on track for Q2 energization with full campus completion by midyear. Denton alone currently represents approximately 130 billable megawatts, actively supporting more than 50,000 Grace Blackwell GPUs. In North Carolina, our 65-megawatt 250,000 square foot Marble data center achieved full site energization in 2025. Two of the 3 data halls were delivered by the end of the fourth quarter, representing 36 billable megawatts supporting approximately 15,000 Grace Blackwell GPUs. The third and final data hall is currently in commissioning and is expected to be delivered in the second quarter. Our customer is actively accelerating GPU deployments at the site this week. Next, at our Muskogee, Oklahoma campus, Phase 1, a 70-megawatt, 138,000 square foot data center has completed vertical construction and is now fully energized and has advanced into commissioning, remaining on track for full delivery in the second quarter. Finally, our Dalton, Georgia campus Phase 1, a 30-megawatt 52,000 square foot data center has also completed vertical construction and is now fully energized. Commissioning is progressing and preparing the facility for high-density liquid-cooled AI systems with full delivery expected in the second quarter. Then at Dalton Phase 2, a 145-megawatt 250,000 square foot data center, vertical construction is currently underway with full delivery targeted for early 2027. This facility will serve as the final AI factory supporting CoreWeave's 590-megawatt commitment. Looking ahead, I want to outline our development and go-to-market strategy, Operation Forward Observer. This strategy is straightforward, advanced development across multiple sites through the first commission data hall while simultaneously securing long lead equipment to enable rapid expansion. By progressing sites to this advanced stage before contract signing, we position our ahead of our peers and winning colocation agreements. This approach provides customers with a high degree of certainty around RFS time lines, not only for the initial delivery, but also for seamless expansion into subsequent data halls. Executing this strategy strengthens our competitive positioning, enhances our leverage in negotiating favorable terms with a broad base of creditworthy customers. Let me walk through our initial forward observer sites. First is the Hunt campus, a planned 285 leasable megawatt AI campus strategically located near the Dallas-Fort Worth market. Our development teams are actively engaged in predevelopment work to deliver the full 285 megawatts across multiple buildings with initial delivery currently planned in the second half of 2027. Next, our Pecos campus, a planned 200 leasable megawatt campus in West Texas. Our development teams are mobilized and advancing early civil work and engineering on Phase 1, which is designed to deliver 185 megawatts of leasable capacity across multiple data halls with initial delivery expected to begin in early 2027. At Dalton, Phase 3 will consist of approximately 250,000 square foot greenfield data center planned to deliver 120 megawatts of leasable capacity across multiple data halls with initial delivery targeted for the second half of 2027. The development teams are mobilized and progressing through early civil work and engineering. Finally, construction is underway on the first phase of our 30-megawatt leasable data center in Auburn, Alabama. The site remains on track for its first 10 megawatts in the second half of 2026. Auburn is designed as a Tier 3 facility with dense connectivity positioned to serve multi-tenant enterprise AI customers. Engineering, preconstruction and permitting are complete and all long lead equipment is on site. As we close, the takeaway is simple. We've built a repeatable execution engine for AI infrastructure at scale. We've delivered more than 185 meaningful billable capacity, progressed multiple campuses through energization and commissioning, reached 350 megawatts energized and expanded our development pipeline by 600 leasable megawatts to support the next wave of accelerated computing, all while continuing to enhance how we design, build and onboard customers. Entering 2026, our priorities are clear: maintain alignment with customer GPU deliveries, stay ahead of the technology curve and keep transforming megawatts in production-ready AI factories. We're proud of what the team accomplished in 2025 and even more focused on the path ahead in 2026. With that, I'll turn it over to Jim.

Thanks, Matt. 2025 was a transitional year for the company. While the vast majority of our revenue continued to come from our Bitcoin mining operations, our primary focus was on scaling the colocation business, including the ongoing build-out of capacity for CoreWeave. At the same time, mining activities continue to support the funding of the company as we progress through the transition. Although colocation revenue in 2025 was limited, we expect to reach an important inflection point in the coming months as we begin billing for additional megawatts, bringing colocation revenue to a level that will not only cover our operating costs but also drive significant margin expansion going forward. In terms of Bitcoin mining, we remain focused on operational optimization, and we'll continue to mine to cover contractual power costs. We finished the year with a very strong balance sheet with total liquidity of approximately $530 million. We also opportunistically sold just over 1,900 Bitcoin for approximately $175 million in January at materially higher prices above current market levels. At this time, we hold under 1,000 Bitcoin and expect to remain opportunistic going forward. In terms of a broader capital formation strategy, we have a full range of financing options available that we will continue to evaluate in the coming months and quarters as our needs evolve, including both sizable alternatives at the corporate level and the up to $4 billion that we can raise against our contracted capacity with CoreWeave at stabilization. These capital sources will fund investments in our pipeline sites going forward. At these sites, we will also utilize project-based financing structures with 60% to 85% advance rate on build costs, depending on customer credit quality and site characteristics. Finally, I want to address the historical restatement outlined in our 10-K filing today. In early 2025, we changed auditors to KPMG from Markham. As part of KPMG's normal audit procedures and our ongoing review of the conversion of legacy mining sites to colocation, we identified an error in our historical accounting going back to 2024 for certain property, plant and equipment that was demolished as part of those conversions. Under the historical accounting treatment, demolition costs were capitalized and existing carrying values were maintained. It was determined that these values and expenses should have been written off in certain historical periods. We have filed amended statements to correct the error. Please refer to the SEC or the Core Scientific Investor Relations website for today's filings. To clarify, there was no impact to revenue, adjusted EBITDA or our net cash flow. And while you will see a material weakness noted in our filings for the next 4 quarters, rest assured, we have taken the appropriate steps to strengthen our controls over nonroutine accounting items going forward. As we look ahead, we are incredibly excited about the trajectory of our business. The demand backdrop for high-performance infrastructure remains strong, and we've positioned Core Scientific to capitalize on that opportunity with scale, operational discipline and a clear strategic vision. We are building a differentiated data center platform with the capabilities and balance sheet strength to compete at the highest level. With an experienced and focused team, a growing pipeline and a commitment to disciplined capital allocation, we believe we are not only well positioned for the coming year, but structurally set up to create meaningful long-term value for our shareholders. With that, I'll turn the call over to the operator for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from Jon Petersen with Jefferies.

Adam, you talked about 2 deals that are, I guess, in discussion right now. Can you give us some more details on the potential sizes of those deals, maybe what locations those might be in? And then also just kind of curious your selectivity around the type of tenants that you're -- potential tenants that you're willing to talk with right now, how important credit quality is?

Yes, happy to, and thanks for the question, John. it's helpful to look back at October 30 when we first emerged from the termination of the merger agreement. One of the things that we talked about is that we were engaged with a number of different counterparties, including neoclouds. But at the time, hyperscaler customers and certain large investment-grade counterparties were not willing to speak with us during that time, which was understandable. Where we have migrated our sales pipeline over the course of the past 4 months is we've continued or we've engaged with those large counterparties once again, which has been great to see. We're in discussions across a number of them with a number of our sites. And the one thing I'll say is today, we sit with 500 megawatts under exclusivity arrangements with a large investment-grade counterparty that we're excited to continue to advance forward, and we're really looking forward to hopefully signing one of those over the near future.

Okay. All right. And as a follow-up, in your presentation, you list 700 megawatts of unannounced leasable customer power opportunities. Is that additional power you might get at existing land sites? Is that new land sites? How do we think about what that bucket is exactly?

Yes. That's really just a combination of both of those items. There are places where we may be waiting to sign certain extensions on power at an existing site due to certain collateral requirements until we're closer on customer signing or it might be sites that we have under exclusivity are completing due diligence, but have the confidence to be able to bring those to customer conversations as opportunities that we can present to them.

Our next question is from Brett Knoblauch with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Adam, on the new site in Hunt County, I think for the most part, the deals we've seen get signed kind of are on maybe sites with energized power today. Obviously, this isn't going to be energized until next year. Could you talk about maybe the level of confidence you have in being able to get a lease signed for that site, even though power is going to be delivered at a later date?

Yes. I mean, for us, really, it doesn't matter if the power is available today because it's going to take time for us to construct and build that site. So as long as the power and the ramp schedule that we've been provided by the utility matches with our construction schedule, that is acceptable to potential customers. So we feel great about the Hunt site. As we see it today that the site is not impacted by Senate Bill 6 or any of the recent ERCOT changes. And we've also been told that this project will not be restudied by ERCOT. So it gives us a lot of confidence in that site and that project. And we're excited about building out a large -- another large-scale campus just outside of Dallas.

Awesome. And then maybe just as one follow-up from a demand perspective and maybe pricing perspective, it feels like the deals kind of have gotten better month after month, quarter after quarter. Are you guys seeing that on your end when you guys are having conversations with prospective tenants? Just curious kind of your thoughts for the overall pricing environment and where we're heading.

Yes. We've definitely seen pricing continue to shift. Part of that's driven by equipment prices and labor prices continuing to rise in the market. And so you're seeing a similar move in terms of leasing economics. That's one of the reasons why we launched our project with going forward with securing long-lead equipment, securing trades at sites and beginning civil work across a number of different locations was so that we could lock in economics at those sites, essentially locking in what our costs are going to look like while we're still in an environment where we're seeing lease rates continue to move higher. So that's something that's more protective from our business, but it's also an offensive approach for us to continue to attack the market and put ourselves in a position to really compete on deals with hyperscalers because they're expecting capacity delivered sub-18 months and in some cases, sub-12 months. And so for us to be able to put ourselves in those positions, we have to be making the moves that we're making today related to really securing site readiness around these new locations.

Our next question is from Darren Aftahi, and he is from ROTH Capital Partners.

Two, if I may. Just on the Hunt County site, could you talk about what the rough payment was? And then I know you said it'd be energized 2027. How does that kind of energization scale up? And then a follow-up, Jim, you've made a comment about financing against the CoreWeave deal when there's "stabilization", can you just kind of enlighten us what that actually means and perhaps that 6 months after all the campuses are built out?

Yes. Thanks, Darren. So we'll be announcing further details related to the Hunt County site as that site gets to close later in this quarter. As it relates to energization, as we look at the megawatts, there are tail megawatts here, but really the energization schedule ramps alongside of what our construction schedule looks like. So we feel how that site looks today in terms of our site readiness and our ability to deliver against the ramp schedule provided by the utility. We think that puts that site in a very strong box in terms of checking a number of different criteria that both hyperscalers as well as other large offtake companies may have. So we're excited about that site and how that continues to move forward. I'll let Jim take the last question you had.

Thanks, Adam. When you look at the size of our contract with CoreWeave at 590 megawatts, it represents somewhere between $5 billion and $5.5 billion of total infrastructure. So when I say stabilization and I indicate the availability of capital up to $4 billion, I'm referencing the full stabilization of the contract relative to the asset base that we're constructing. The reality is that this is different than what is more commonly structured in project finance terms where you're borrowing the money upfront and building later. We have substantial availability under that asset base to borrow a good portion of that $4 billion today. But the scaling is quite fast because we are already at such a significant progress on the billing, we will get through the vast majority of that before the end of this year.

Our next question is from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities.

This is Henry Hearle on for Nick Giles. I wanted to follow up on the new Hunt County site. Specifically, what does the site kind of look like today? And are there any preliminary permits that are needed before construction can begin?

Yes. I appreciate the question. So today, the site is essentially what we have to do to kind of energize that site is there's still a substation that needs to be built. And so when we look at the kind of the utility energization schedule and the construction schedule, we feel like we can start energizing that site in late '27, but that's going to require us kind of start to get the process rolling both in terms of our preconstruction activities and getting the substation going here in pretty short order.

And then just on preliminary permits for construction, any color on that?

So we've gone through pretty much all of the EFA sort of Phase I, Phase I studies and geotechnicals for the site. We have schematic designs in place. And so we have a pretty good idea on the development strategy for that site. And it's really just a matter of finalizing design docs, getting to IFPs and then releasing those for permitting.

Our next question is from George Sutton with Craig-Hallum Capital Group.

Matt, you referenced new architectures and cooling and also new GPUs. And that sounds like a bit of a frustration. I'm just curious how -- as you're developing new sites, how much change you're seeing relative to the prior sites?

Yes. So the evolution, I think, on the technology stack, obviously, when you're building projects that are taking 12, 18 months to sort of get out of the ground and you're going through sort of multiple sort of technology changes and trying to adapt to those in real time. In our case, we went -- we started our very first data center with CoreWeave, started with H100. Then we quickly evolved into NVIDIA's first iteration of Grace Blackwells, NVL36s, then the NVL72s and then to -- from the GB200 platforms into the GB300 platforms and sort of having to adopt sort of the data halls kind of in flight to those technology iterations. And then recently, NVIDIA released its reference architecture for Rubin Vera (sic) [ Vera Rubin ]. And so we have a pretty good idea kind of what that sort of paradigm shift is going to start to look like. Both from a cooling and power distribution standpoint. And so I would say our teams are starting to factor those changes into our new projects. And so that we're both -- we're pretty future-proofed in terms of what we're expecting next to happen. And then in addition, the last thing I'll say, obviously, the Google and the TPUs and the TPUs becoming more prevalent into the market. And so we're also evaluating sort of how do we take our standardized base of design so that we have a very predictable, repeatable approach to putting product into the market that is both adaptable to what we're doing today and what we're expecting from NVIDIA tomorrow and these new chipsets coming to market like TPUs as those become more prevalent even outside the Google ecosystem that we're able to adapt our data halls to those shifts as well. So a lot of moving parts, a lot of things happening kind of in the technology ecosystem, but our engineering team and our development teams are, I think, are well ahead of the curve and thinking about how do we adapt to those.

Very helpful. And then just a follow-up for Adam. You mentioned the broader and larger funnel of groups that you're talking to, but you also have suggested that we need investment-grade guarantees at some point. How broad can that funnel really be relative to those guarantees? Are you seeing that availability?

Yes. I would say we're seeing a pretty wide range, and that range has continued to expand. It's helpful to think back on 2025. Think back at the demand from both neoclouds and from AI Labs in the first half of 2025, you essentially did not really see many new deals being announced. That changed dramatically, obviously, in Q3 as guarantees were introduced into the market. We saw some deals backed by Google. And I believe over time, we're going to continue to see the evolution of these guarantees. And the ones that we've seen so far come from wide and varying sources. We listed hyperscalers chip manufacturers and other large investment-grade guarantors. And that's really what we're seeing in the market. It's a wide range. They look different all the way from debt guarantees to full lease guarantees. So they cover the full spectrum. And I think what we're going to see over 2026 is really a centralization on terms related to those guarantees and wrappers that exist in the market. So I think some of the delay and pause that you've seen in some of the neocloud and lab signing over the course of the past 3 months has more been related to what are those guarantees going to look like because I don't think they're going to look like they have in the past. So we're in the process of negotiating with certain guarantee counterparties here, and we're hopeful that these counterparties begin to centralize on the right guarantee in order for data center developers to go out and fund these developments.

Our next question is from Mike Donovan with Compass Point.

In prepared remarks, you stated you have more power in your pipeline than you can build over the next few years. Can you share a range of megawatts you are confident you can bring online per year? And are there any areas of concern today around supply chain or labor availability?

Yes. No, I appreciate the question. So -- in terms of what we think kind of an order of magnitude of what we think we can develop, a lot of that's going to be really customer-driven. We announced in our strategy that we're progressing multiple sites through the design build process into 2027. But as customers step into those, that's really going to drive what the scalability and the pace of acceleration in terms of how many megawatts we build out. In previous quarters, I think we've guided around the idea that we could, in theory, build out as much as 500 megawatts in a single calendar year. I think that's certainly possible, but that's going to require customers stepping into these projects pretty early so that we can line up the financing and line up the supply chain in order to scale those out to that sort of order of magnitude of development. So another way of saying that is our internal capacity to take on 0.5 gigawatt in a year and 18-month time horizon is we feel really comfortable with. It's really a matter of sort of lining up economics and financing to support that strategy. Hopefully, that answers your question.

Our next question is from Jon Hickman with Ladenburg Thalmann.

Could you elaborate on your comments like right upfront, you talked about the billing. There's a 90-day delay in when you energize and when you get the bill. Is that what you were telling us?

I can handle the first part of that. This is Matt. So kind of what we're referring to as we turn on power to a building, so we achieve basically our energization milestone of basically hydrating all the equipment with electrons. From that point, the -- each data hall within the building has to go through its subsequent commissioning phases, the fully commissioned test commission and go through all the integrated testing to operationalize each of those data halls within that structure. And so from the time we start energization to the time that we fully commission those data halls could roughly range into the 90-day time horizon for which we would expect to turn on revenue.

Okay. And then I think I missed this number, but as of the end of the year, how many megawatts had you delivered to CoreWeave?

The end of calendar year '25?

Yes.

Yes. So we had energized 213 megawatts by the end of the calendar year. And so we had fallen just slightly short of our -- 1 data hall short of our goal. But as we said in this earnings call, we have more than made our way back ahead of schedule with 350 megawatts energized and nearly 200 megawatts billing. So I think the step function of progress over the last couple of months has been pretty remarkable.

And you said that kind of by midyear, you'd have it all energized?

By the end of -- basically going into 2027 or the early part of '27, the full contracts should be fulfilled and fully delivered to CoreWeave.

Our next question is from Kevin Dede with H.C. Wainwright.

Adam, can you drill in a little bit about on Alabama? It just seemed to be a little bit of an outlier at 30 megawatts. I'm just wondering how you sort of process that in this grand scheme of landing hyperscalers.

Yes, absolutely, Kevin, and thanks for the question. The 30-megawatt site in Alabama is a site that we saw early on as a location that could move quickly. We also recognize the power constraints in Georgia and recognize the low latency that Auburn had available to it. That's a site that we believe sitting here today, based on our customer conversations is a site that has interest across a number of different potential counterparties. And it's something that we're using to customers on larger contracts. I think one thing important to note is that hyperscalers are not only focused on the larger sites and larger campuses. They're also looking for backfill across certain locations to serve certain markets. And we think Alabama and Auburn specifically serves that very well. So we're excited about that project, and we're looking forward to landing a customer there as well.

So do you think it sort of fits the bill for an inference type solution? And if that's the case, is Matt sort of reorganizing the way sites are constructed and fitting potential use case changes?

Yes. It's definitely a site that's going to be utilized for inference use cases. But Matt, I'll let you take it related to infrastructure design.

Yes. Auburn is unique from a couple of different standpoints. One, it sort of has the makings of a much more traditional multi-tenant data center, Tier 3 type facility, multiple 10,000 square foot data halls, high degrees of security and a mass amount of connectivity. So more akin to what you might find in Digital Realty or Equinix or a modern Equinix type facility. And so from that standpoint, we think we look at Auburn as really an entry point, both in terms of inferencing AI loads but also in terms of the enterprise segment as well since the enterprise segment tends to be on a smaller deal size, on smaller deal constructs with that and the needs for dense connectivity, multicarrier-neutral type environments with the type of infrastructure that's laid out there sort of makes it ideal for a number of different customer segments, both on AI and on some of the non-AI segments as well. So Auburn sort of a little unique from that standpoint. In terms of like adjusting to inferencing versus large language model sites as an example, from a technology standpoint, we don't see a ton of difference from what the density, the power density needs are between those. What we might see happening is, I think the cluster sizing might be slightly different between an inference cluster and a large language model cluster sort of driving a little bit more segmentation potentially within the campus at some point. So that's generally how -- what we think is happening today.

Okay. Adam, before I get the hook, and nobody has really asked about Bitcoin mining. And I know it's not a priority, but it's still the lion's share of revenues for a little while anyway. Can you give us some insight on how you expect this year to fall out from a hash rate perspective and whether or not you're chasing down those block miners that you thought you might look at the end of last year?

Yes, absolutely. It's been interesting to watch what's happening in the mining environment, right? We're seeing hash price go to levels that have never been seen before, dipping below $0.03 was definitely something that I think folks thought might happen probably in 2027 or 2028, just given where machine efficiency is today. For us, that business is still essentially in runoff today, right? We're trying to manage our machine fleet based on what our minimum power draw requirements are across a number of different sites. And that's something that we're going to continue to operate in that mode over the course of this year. We're really just optimizing right now to ensure that we -- that we are hitting our minimum power draw requirements across our portfolio. In terms of the block units, those units are getting installed today. And so that's something that's going to help us maintain productivity across our mining portfolio and really help us hit given that a majority of our machine fleet is anywhere from 4 to 5 years old today, really allow us to continue to hit those minimum power draw requirements profitably.

So where does Bitcoin mining stand at the end of this year, as you look at how your sites are converted?

It's something that's continuing to evolve, Kevin. We're building next door at many of these locations, which is why we've been acquiring additional land across our portfolio. So it really will come offline as we're transferring that power over to a data center.

Our next question is from John Todaro with Needham & Company.

Progress so far. There's been some conversations of NVIDIA backstopping a number of kind of neoclouds. It would just potentially open up the type of customers you guys could sign with by quite a bit. Just wondering if there's -- if that's starting to happen in some lease discussions. Any commentary there?

Yes. I think we're going to see all chip manufacturers start to begin to play the game of guarantees to help them secure their customers moving forward and really lock in architecture in the data center around their GPU chipset. So it's definitely something we've seen. I think it's something that's going to continue to evolve, as I noted earlier. But I would expect both hyperscalers and chip manufacturers continue to march down the path of looking to provide guarantees for both neoclouds as well as labs.

Okay. Understood. And then beyond just kind of maybe some of the terms, but on lease rates, as we think about some of the latest-gen architecture and maybe a little bit higher CapEx spend from the data center operator side and also maybe the use case changes that we heard in your responses to Kevin, are leasing rates going to start moving quite a bit higher from historically what we've seen signed here, ranging from you guys having one of the first leases to the more recent one with -- should we expect that to start materially moving higher?

I wouldn't not necessarily say materially moving higher. I think in the market, what we've seen our lease rates move generally a bit higher in relation to what the CapEx is on those builds. So I wouldn't say that we're sitting here today, we're going to see something material outside of the bounds of what has been signed historically. But I do believe that over the course of 2026, we may see a little bit more normalization and a touch movement higher in terms of lease rates, but that's really just driven by the fact that many of the hyperscalers price their data centers based on a yield, and they know how much their basis of design costs.

Our next question is from Ben Sommers from BTIG.

So kind of building off that last question, kind of curious if you're seeing any sort of bifurcation of kind of more urban located sites and the potential pricing there, I guess, demand profile for those sites and kind of how that could potentially lead to maybe improved pricing on a site like Hunt County that's right near one of the largest data center hubs in the U.S.

Yes. I mean, as we look at Hunt, there's definitely better pricing capacity for us and for data center developers more broadly when you're within a certain latency band back to a major metropolitan market. In relation to, I would say, more urban environments, that's not necessarily a game that we play in. That is more of the Equinix Digital Realty type model. But I would expect to see our pricing for sites that are closer to major metropolitan areas. be stronger than sites that might be further away from major metro areas. So there is that pricing bifurcation and some of that is related to dual use case when you're closer to the major metropolitan area, it can be used for both LLMs as well as inference. But the other part here is also time to RFS. It's something that we talked about in our prepared remarks. Time to RFS is really the trump card for data center developers. The closer you are to RFS, the better pricing power you have.

Awesome. Super helpful. And then just one more, if I may. Sorry if I missed this earlier. Just kind of curious on any time line around Kentucky and North Dakota on those sites and just kind of any comments on the demand for those sites for potential HPC contracts?

They're under discussions with a number of different counterparties. They're in our priority list, albeit though the projects that Matt Brown walked through earlier are our focus points today.

There are no further questions at this time. That will conclude today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and have a wonderful day.