GLXY

Image source: The Motley Fool. Wednesday, August 5, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. ET Head of Investor Relations - Jonathan Goldowsky Founder and CEO - Michael Novogratz Anthony Paquette Christopher Ferraro Operator: Good morning, and welcome to the Galaxy Digital Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Today's call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Jonathan Goldowsky, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Jonathan Goldowsky: Good morning, and welcome to Galaxy's Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Before we begin, please note that our remarks, including answers to your questions, may include forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those described in these statements as a result of various factors, including those identified in the disclaimers in our earnings release or other filings, which have been filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and on SEDAR+. Forward-looking statements speak only as of today and will not be updated. Additionally, we may discuss references to non-GAAP metrics, the reconciliations of which can also be found in our earnings release. Finally, none of the information on this call constitutes a recommendation, solicitation or offer by Galaxy or its affiliates to buy or sell any securities. With that, I'll turn it over to Mike Novogratz, Founder and CEO of Galaxy. Michael Novogratz: Good morning, everyone. Listen, the second quarter was transformational for Galaxy. Behind the numbers is a single idea. The economy is increasingly running on code. Finance is moving Onchain and AI is remaking every industry. Both run on infrastructure, the financial rails on one side, the power and compute on the other. Galaxy is one of the few companies building at both ends of it today. This quarter, both sides delivered. On the data center side, I couldn't be more proud of our team. We delivered Phase I at Helios on schedule and on budget, and that's not easy. The campus is now generating cash flow. We acquired 3 new data center sites, bringing our development pipeline to 5-plus gigawatts of potential power capacity and positioning Galaxy as one of the largest data center developers and operators in the world. Finally, we completed a $3.5 billion high-yield financing, the largest in our history, ensuring we have the capital to execute on our developing road map. 2026 was also an inflection point for our digital assets business. Crypto bear markets are the best time to build, and we certainly are in one. While token prices and trading activity remains subdued, we're seeing tremendous demand for the infrastructure that will power the next generation of financial markets. Today, we're working with some of the largest financial institutions in the world as they build out their digital asset capabilities. Last quarter, we signed our first major infrastructure engagement with Bank of New York, one of the largest custodians in the world to further develop its digital asset infrastructure. We believe this is just the beginning. Across both segments, the through line is the same, transforming finance and powering AI. Data centers and digital assets are each strong businesses in their own right. And today, we're building the infrastructure underneath both of them. I want to give you a few quick thoughts on clarity. Of course, everyone would have been happy if it didn't pass already. Things aren't that easy. We're all sitting here waiting to see the White House's response to the ethics compromise that's been put forward, a bipartisan compromise between Senator Gallego and Senator Tillis. It's late. It does not look like anything will happen before the recess. And so there is some hope still that these guys will get together in September. I know from speaking to Senators daily that all these issues are very close. And so we'll see where the political will turns out. If clarity doesn't pass, it's not the end of the world. We've been living without it since this business started. There has been a commitment from both the SEC Chair and the CFTC Chair that they will work really hard and quick to put out rules of the road to regulate crypto in a much more direct way. Finally, I'd love to welcome Steve Bandrowczak to our Board. Steve has built and scaled some of the world's most complex technology companies, bringing more than 3 decades of senior operating leadership across IT, infrastructure, large-scale M&A and capital allocation. This combination of operating expertise, capital discipline and deep technology experience will further strengthen our Board as we continue expanding our digital assets and trading center infrastructure platform. And with that, I'll hand it over to Tony. Anthony Paquette: Thanks, Mike, and thank you, everyone, again, for joining the call today. As in previous quarters, I'll start by walking through our consolidated financials, then dive into our operating businesses before turning it over to Chris to go into more detail -- a bit more detail on data centers. As Mike mentioned, Q2 unfolded against a challenging macro backdrop for digital assets, but our business continued to perform. It's quarters like this that building a diversified business model with recurring revenue that is uncorrelated to market activity becomes especially valuable. In Q2, Phase I of our Helios data center came online with the first 133 megawatts of critical IT delivered to CoreWeave. That's the start of a real shift in our earnings profile, which I'll speak to in a few moments. For the second quarter, we reported GAAP net loss of $85 million or $0.09 per share and firm-wide adjusted EBITDA of negative $77 million. These results were driven primarily by the depreciation of digital asset prices during the quarter with our Treasury and Corporate segment reporting an adjusted gross loss of $42 million. Combined operating businesses adjusted gross profit was $86 million and adjusted EBITDA was $1 million, both up significantly from Q1. Firm-wide operating expenses, excluding gross-up transaction costs, the impairment of digital assets and pass-through data center operator expenses were $172 million in Q2, up $25 million quarter-over-quarter, driven primarily by previously capitalized interest and depreciation expense that is now being recognized alongside data center revenue. Turning to the balance sheet. We ended the period with $10.8 billion in total assets, up 9% from the prior period. Total equity was $2.7 billion, essentially flat quarter-over-quarter, with 72% of our equity capital now allocated to our 2 operating businesses. That mix has shifted towards our operating businesses over the past year. And as we've said previously, we expect data centers to represent a growing share of our capital base as we continue to invest in the build-out. Cash and stablecoins were $2.5 billion, down 6% from Q1, reflecting cash deployed into our operating businesses during the quarter, primarily around the Helios build. We also held approximately $1.2 billion in net digital assets and investments at quarter end, down 15% from Q1, reflecting both the depreciation of crypto prices and a modest reduction in our overall net digital asset exposure. Turning to our operating results, beginning with digital assets. Crypto prices declined double digits in Q2 with a corresponding moderation in trading volumes and Onchain activity across the industry. Despite the weaker environment, our Digital Asset segment generated adjusted gross profit of $66 million, up $17 million or 34% quarter-over-quarter. Delivering top line growth despite lower digital asset prices and weaker industry activity reflects continued market share gains and further demonstrates that our earnings are becoming less dependent on the overall direction of the market. Within Global Markets, adjusted gross profit was $49 million, up significantly from Q1 despite trading volumes declining 7%, driven by strength in our electronic trading business and disciplined risk management across the desks. In lending, our average loan book increased modestly from the prior quarter despite the softer environment. That growth was driven by strong originations toward the end of the quarter, along with the successful prelaunch of our Galaxy Onchain financing rate offering, which I'll discuss in more detail in a moment. We also continue to expand in areas where we're seeing growing institutional demand. During the quarter, we launched our OTC prediction markets offering, extending our derivatives platform to enable institutional clients to implement full multi-asset hedging strategies around event-driven markets. We believe this is an area that will continue to see increasing adoption over time as more companies and institutions seek to manage business-specific risks that are difficult to hedge with traditional instruments and require 24/7 risk management. Separately, we launched the Galaxy Onchain Financing Rate, or GOFR, a fully managed risk-controlled lending solution that provides clients with efficient access to Onchain credit markets through a single Galaxy counterparty at an optimized borrowing rate. This product removes the operational complexity of interacting with decentralized protocols and has already generated nearly $300 million of loan originations, reflecting strong early demand from clients. We also brought to market the Galaxy Curator, an institutional vault curation offering built on Morpho and integrated with Fireblocks, providing more than 2,400 institutional clients with access to curated Onchain yield strategies. These launches reflect our continued focus on expanding our platform in areas where we see long-term demand while creating additional opportunities to serve clients across multiple products and businesses. Turning to Asset Management and Infrastructure Solutions. We delivered adjusted gross profit of $17 million and ended the quarter with approximately $7 billion in combined assets under management and assets under stake. This balance was down 12% from Q1, primarily reflecting lower digital asset prices and modest net outflows during the quarter. We continue to expand our investment platform with strategies focused on areas where we see long-term capital formation and believe we have a competitive edge. During the quarter, we launched the Galaxy Fintech Fund with over $100 million of assets at launch. This long/short equity hedge fund is focused on the digital asset transformation of financial services, a theme that has been central to Galaxy's business strategy since the founding of the company. We also launched Sweep, a tokenized private equity fund in partnership with State Street Investment Management and one of the few tokenized money market funds that offers 24/7 liquidity while also serving as eligible margin collateral on Galaxy's platform. Looking ahead to the second half of '26, we expect to raise the next vintage of the Galaxy Ventures franchise. Building on the early success and strong investment performance of our inaugural fund, we expect the '26 vintage to be larger and to continue to focus on blockchains, stablecoin, digital payments and tokenization. Since 2018, when we began investing balance sheet capital, our venture strategy has consistently delivered top-decile DPI relative to industry benchmarks across every vintage. That track record positions us well as we continue to scale our venture business. On to digital infrastructure. Last quarter, we discussed how every layer of the capital markets value chain is investing in infrastructure to support a financial system built on digital rails. This investment is being driven by the significant operational and economic benefits that digital infrastructure can deliver, including lower operating costs, improved capital efficiency and collateral mobility, faster settlement, broader distribution and the ability to bring new products to market more quickly. Over the past few quarters, we've seen a meaningful shift in how institutions are approaching this challenge. Increasingly, firms are moving beyond outsourcing core infrastructure to third-party providers and instead are looking to own and control the underlying technology themselves. And our platform has evolved alongside our clients' changing needs. Rather than offering a single off-the-shelf solution, we've evolved our stack into modular building blocks that enable institutions to build digital asset servicing capabilities around their own operating models, spanning custody, key management, staking, trading, settlement and wallet infrastructure. That strategy reached an important milestone in Q2 when we signed a multiyear agreement with Bank of New York, the world's largest custodian to further advance digital asset infrastructure for institutional markets. This agreement entails Galaxy serving as a design partner to BNY across the full range of digital infrastructure, including support for staking on BNY's digital asset custody platform. We already have a team of forward deployed engineers on site and look forward to deepening that relationship over time. This engagement reflects the trust that leading financial institutions are placing in our technology and engineering capabilities while also demonstrating our ability to monetize our best-in-class product and engineering talent through strategic engagements. These engagements are inherently complex, requiring extensive solution design, commercial alignment and deep technical integration over extended periods of time. We spent several years investing in these relationships. And while these engagements have long development cycles, we're encouraged to see them beginning to translate into commercial opportunities. We believe these types of strategic partnerships position Galaxy at the center of the next generation of digital infrastructure as capital markets continue to evolve. We're also continuing to expand our distribution through additional integrations. Following BlackRock's selection of Galaxy as a validator for its Ethereum staking fund last quarter, Morgan Stanley Wealth Management has now selected Galaxy to help power staking for 2 new digital asset ETPs, extending our role as a staking provider to the wealth industry. We also announced a new partnership that enables Morgan Stanley wealth clients to lend digital assets to Galaxy and receive in-kind spot crypto ETPs through a new referral program. Since Q4 of last year, we've reoriented our business around the convergence of traditional and digital financial services, a structural trend we believe Galaxy is uniquely positioned to serve. We've brought our infrastructure business onto one single platform, aligned leadership and added senior talent across product and technology to support it. Q2 showed that strategy translating into commercial results. New distribution partnerships are expanding our footprint and opening new channels for customers, which will help drive organic growth and recurring revenue over time. Turning to data centers. Q2 was the segment's first quarter of real operating financial results as we delivered all data halls to CoreWeave under the Phase I lease agreement prior to quarter end. As a result, beginning this quarter, we'll be reporting a more detailed set of metrics in our financial statements and supplements. On the consolidated income statement, you'll see leasing revenue, which reflects the total contracted rent over the life of each lease, including annual escalators recognized under GAAP on a straight-line basis. Within our data center segment reporting, you'll also see operator revenue, which is the pass-through charges we recover from our customer for power, utility and other related operating services, along with the equally offsetting associated operator expenses. As with other segments, we will report adjusted gross profit and adjusted EBITDA for data centers. Non-GAAP measures, we believe offer a clearer view of the segment's underlying performance. For data center specifically, adjusted gross profit will exclude the pass-through operator costs, thereby isolating economic profit that we actually generate from our operations. With that framework in place, data centers generated $20 million of adjusted gross profit and $11 million of adjusted EBITDA in Q2, both reflecting the phased delivery of data halls throughout the quarter. Total data center operating expenses, excluding pass-through operator costs, were $21 million in the quarter, reflecting depreciation and interest expense that began recognition as the data halls were delivered. With Phase I now fully online, beginning in the third quarter, we expect Phase I to generate its first full quarter of leasing revenue of approximately $80 million and a project level adjusted EBITDA margin of over 90%. Data center CapEx was $448 million in Q2, up from $354 million in Q1. In the coming quarters, you should expect CapEx to continue increasing alongside the pace of construction at Helios. This quarter, we also recognized a clean electricity investment tax credit of approximately $65 million. Given our Up-C corporate structure, only roughly half of this federal credit flowed through our P&L this quarter as a $32 million tax benefit on the data center segment income statement. At quarter end, the Data Center segment had approximately $2.5 billion in total assets and $1.5 billion in total liabilities, and we expect both to keep growing as we continue to scale the business. Lastly, as Mike mentioned, related to financing for Phase II of Helios, on July 28, we completed a private 144A offering of $3.5 billion of 5-year senior secured notes structured at an 85% loan to cost. Combined with the equity Galaxy has already contributed to the project, this financing funds the remainder of Phase II at Helios, which will add an additional 260 megawatts of critical IT capacity starting next year. With that, I'll turn it over to Chris for more details on data centers. Chris? Christopher Ferraro: Thanks, Tony. I'm proud to say that we delivered Phase I at Helios on schedule and on budget. In today's data center market, that's more than a construction milestone. It's proof that we can execute at scale and that credibility matters as we expand Helios, add new customers and partners and develop future campuses. Turning to Phase II. Construction is tracking well. HITT Contracting joined the project this year as our new general contractor and has been mobilized on site since April. As one of the industry's leading builders of hyperscale data centers, HITT's decision to partner with Galaxy reflects the quality of the Helios campus, our team and the opportunity we're building together. Earthwork is now complete and structural foundation work is underway. We remain on schedule and expect to commence Phase II data hall deliveries in the second quarter of 2027. Phase II comprises 8 data halls in total with 7 online by the end of 2027 and the final data hall following in early 2028. As Tony highlighted, we've now fully funded Phase II with Galaxy equity and our recent high-yield note issuance. Capital continues to find its way to well-structured contracted infrastructure like Helios, and we're grateful for the partners who supported us in getting there. The third and final phase of Helios I, which represents an additional 200 megawatts of gross power and 133 megawatts of critical IT load is expected to come online throughout 2028, rounding out Helios I's 3 phase build-out. On our remaining 830 megawatts of approved capacity at Helios II, conversations continue to advance, and we remain constructive on both the customer side and the economics. Much of the timing here comes down to where prospective customers sit in their own internal capacity planning and buying windows relative to when our available capacity at Helios is set to energize. Leases for power at this scale are increasingly being signed well ahead of energization and demand shows no signs of slowing, which gives us a strong amount of confidence in how this time line will play out for Galaxy. Furthermore, other market dynamics are at play that signal to us that sometimes patience is a virtue. New potential tenants are showing up to the market regularly now, providing a wider surface area to discuss potential long-term partnerships. New guarantee and lease wrap structures are being formalized to help better shape the risk/reward opportunity for us as a long-term infrastructure owner. And probably most importantly, while forward market demand for power and compute is stronger today than it's ever been, forward market supply of new projects, while ambitiously headlined, is very quickly being constrained now by both physical delivery and political headwinds. Make no mistake, the team here is laser-focused on evaluating all the opportunities available for Helios II. We are just balancing that with our belief that an approved project at near gigawatt scale is not an asset that we should deploy lightly. In the meantime, we've already placed deposits and issued purchase orders on more than $180 million of long lead electrical equipment, including main power transformers and switchgear. Taking these steps early helps ensure that we're proactively managing infrastructure procurement to support our energization time lines and planned ramp schedule while increasing the attractiveness and hence, the value of the project to prospective tenants. On the utility side, we're encouraged by the continued progress on WETT Pitchfork switching station, which is currently under construction and will support the energization of this 830 megawatts of additional capacity. At Helios, beyond the existing 1.6 gigawatts of approved capacity across Helios I and II, our incremental expansion opportunity now stands at 2 gigawatts, split evenly across 2 separate points of interconnection, Helios 3 and Helios 4. We submitted the required Batch Zero documentation and attestation package for Helios III and posted $50 million of financial security with the interconnecting transmission service provider ahead of ERCOT's July 24 deadline. Based on the completion of those milestones and the requirements of PGRR145, we expect the 1 gigawatt Helios III interconnection to qualify for inclusion in Batch Zero as study load. Helios IV has not yet reached those same milestones. And as a result, we expect it to move through a subsequent ERCOT batch process with energization occurring on a later time line. But we continue to invest ahead of demand because of what we're seeing in the market, strong customer interest, persistent power scarcity and continued demand for large-scale compute infrastructure. At Galaxy Power, our strategy and ambitions have always extended beyond just Helios. I'm very proud now to be able to say that over the past 2 months, we've added 3 new sites across Texas, extending our development pipeline and creating multiple avenues for future growth of the business. First of those new campuses is Merlin, where subsequent to quarter end, Galaxy executed a development agreement to acquire 500 acres of land in the McGregor Industrial Park in McGregor, Texas for the development of a new AI and HPC data center campus. Galaxy is advancing the electrical infrastructure for the campus, and we've secured an initial agreement from the utility to support construction of the required interconnection facilities. We expect the initial 74-megawatt phase to begin energization in 2028, subject to development milestones, including execution of an interconnect agreement and a supply agreement with the local utility. At Merlin, we also plan to request additional capacity through ERCOT's batch process to support development above the 75-megawatt large load threshold. We believe there's a path for Merlin to grow over time into a 500-megawatt campus as we and the utility upgrade transmission infrastructure. Merlin complements Helios and has the potential to become a strategically located AI and inference campus serving customers across the Texas Triangle, one of the fastest-growing economic corridors in the United States. In addition to Merlin and Helios, we also recently acquired 2 additional new sites in Texas for the development of AI data center campuses, Caspian and Selene. Caspian has a potential total gross power capacity of 700 megawatts and is eligible for Batch Zero baseload classification based on the milestones we've already completed, including executed interconnection agreements and the posting of known and identified required financial commitments for transmission and distribution upgrades. That puts Caspian on one of the most advanced development paths within our expansion portfolio. The lean has potential gross power capacity of 900 megawatts and is eligible to be classified as Batch Zero study load now that we've submitted the required documentation and attestation packages and posted the required financial security ahead of the ERCOT deadlines. Taken together, Helios and our 3 new campuses bring our total potential power capacity to more than 5.7 gigawatts, providing Galaxy Power a visible development pipeline for over half a decade to come. Acquiring new sites is where our experience at Helios becomes a real advantage. We've built a level of expertise in power interconnection, utility relationships, permitting and community engagement that few developers in this space can match. Texas, in particular, is core to our strategy. We know the grid. We have deep relationships with state and local government, and we operate in a regulatory environment that, despite recent trepidation over the proposed pace of growth, we believe will continue to favor data center development over the long term. Equally important, we have the capital and resources to move quickly when the right opportunities present themselves. These acquisitions have all been structured so that we commit modest capital through the interconnection approval process with the bulk of our commitments contingent upon the achievement of specific development milestones, including importantly, the actual successful long-term leasing of these sites. That kind of structure is only possible because of our credibility as a developer who has executed successfully at scale. Being a credible, well-capitalized operator is exactly why early-stage project developers and land owners are willing to transact with us in this structure, and our track record at Helios is the reason they trust us to close. Texas has become one of the most competitive data center markets in the country, driven by extraordinary demand for new large loads. As a result, the PUCT and ERCOT are understandably focused on distinguishing projects that are well developed from those that are speculative or do not or cannot meet applicable requirements. To this point, on Monday, Governor Abbott directed the PUCT and ERCOT to conduct a comprehensive audit of all data center projects seeking grid interconnection, including ownership, financing, infrastructure commitments, projected power and water use and measures to mitigate community impacts. The governor's directive is a stark reinforcement of the principles that have guided the Batch Zero process from the outset and frankly, the core principles that have always been Galaxy's North Star in our development process. The governor has consistently emphasized that protecting Texans safety and quality of life while creating jobs and advancing Texas leadership -- Texas' leadership in technology and investment are complementary priorities, and we've approached our projects with those objectives in mind from day 1. We've worked closely with our engineers, consultants and utility partners to meet the requirements established by the PUCT and ERCOT and we'll continue to comply with any additional requirements that result from this directive. Responsible development has always been our approach. The immediate impact is that we and others in the industry no longer expect communication on Batch Zero classification in the coming days. While regulatory developments continue to evolve, our focus remains on executing our long-term strategy and expanding our investment into Texas infrastructure, communities, talent and innovation. To that end, last month, we announced a 15-year naming rights partnership with Texas Tech, rebranding the home of Red Raiders Football as Galaxy Stadium beginning this season. Our partnership includes opportunities for Red Raiders student athletes to be compensated through branded campaigns and content while also strengthening a talent pipeline that's already producing results. Texas Tech graduates are already supporting our Helios campus across multiple teams, and we expect that pipeline to grow as our presence in West Texas expands. This partnership is just the beginning of a broader relationship with the university. Over time, we expect to explore additional collaboration, including AI-focused academic initiatives and workforce development programs that help strengthen the region's long-term technology ecosystem. What you're seeing is a business that's moved beyond proving it can execute. We've delivered 133 megawatts to CoreWeave on schedule in an industry where timely execution has become a meaningful differentiator. We're expanding Helios, growing a multi-campus portfolio across Texas and building lasting partnerships with the communities in which we operate. That's the foundation we're creating, not just a collection of data centers, but a scalable infrastructure platform positioned to support the next generation of AI computing for years to come. With that, I'll turn it over to the operator for questions. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question for today will come from Patrick Moley with Piper Sandler. Patrick Moley: So I wanted to ask about the additional 830 megawatts of approved capacity at Helios that's not yet under lease. I appreciate some of the color you provided there in the prepared remarks, but I was hoping you could just update us on how your conversations with potential tenants there have gone, what the composition of the tenant funnel looks like in terms of hyperscalers, neoclouds? And then maybe just level set with us and elaborate on what some of the gating factors have been to getting a tenant signed for that power. Anthony Paquette: Sure. Patrick, thanks for the question. Yes. So Helios II and the 830 megawatts of approved power capacity, we've had a number of discussions across the industry with sort of every flavor of potential end tenant that category that you can come up with. So hyperscalers, neoclouds, some of the labs themselves and some new entrants to the market as well. I think as I said in the remarks, the #1 factor for us in that today is Helios II energization schedule is currently slated for late 2028. And the industry, as you know, is in such a backlog of necessary supply to meet demand today that those -- a lot of those tenants are focused on how can I lease 2026 power, however, unrealistic that is today in terms of actual being able to deliver that. And so a lot of the conversations we've had have started with what is a process of building a long-term relationship towards a schedule for when those potential customers are looking to then turn their teams and their attention, which is limited on late 2028 power. So that's what I'd say sort of the starting of the conversation and the relationship building has been over the last number of months. Then I would overlay the other market dynamics, which I mentioned in the prepared remarks, which are pretty important, which is the dynamics in the industry are moving pretty fast, most of which are all pretty favorable for actual infrastructure land power owners. A lot of new structures have started to emerge and get crystallized, which would allow for tenants who we otherwise would have trepidation moving forward with as results -- as it relates to their business maturity and their credit quality by having larger credit quality counterparties sort of wrap those potential commitments and give us a better risk reward and allow us to commit to a long-term partnership. And so those are relatively new. You've seen a few of them come into the market. We've taken the tact of wanting to see them start to develop to work ourselves on structures that might work for us that would give us a much broader potential opportunity set at Helios II. And we thought that it was prudent to make sure that we saw -- we did the research and we saw those sort of come to market before we make the final decision on what we're going to do with the asset. Operator: The next question will come from James Yaro with Goldman Sachs. James Yaro: So Galaxy has diversified in a variety of ways that you highlighted on this call into crypto infrastructure offerings. Which products would you classify as sort of the key near-term investment and growth priorities in the digital assets business and maybe you could differentiate between trading versus crypto infrastructure. And where are you seeing the strongest early traction with some of these infrastructure products? Anthony Paquette: Yes, sure. Thanks, James. This is Tony. I'll take it. So as I mentioned, the infrastructure business, what we've really done over the last couple of quarters is bring together what was a sort of set of different products and companies that we had acquired over time into really one offering to bring it to large institutional -- large institutions that are looking to, as we've mentioned, build and own their own infrastructure. So these are really -- I think what we see as the real opportunity is these partnership level engagements. The one that we just announced with Bank of New York is the first. And there are other similar type conversations. But the way we think about it is really these are engagements where we see a deeper, longer-term relationship where we can build together with large institutions. We do have somewhat limited resources. So we will obviously need to be selective of how we think about our partners there. But most importantly, we want to think about this as areas where we can go deeper beyond just sort of initial engagement and opportunities to build beyond. So within that, from a product perspective, we're talking about things like staking, tokenization, wallet infrastructure, vaults and curation, all of these different types of products that we've been building on our own platform and helping some of our partners develop those directly. We think we've got very unique experience and talent in this area. So obviously, it's -- there's a competitive dynamic that we want to be very thoughtful about when we're thinking about these partnerships, but we do see these opportunities and really an evolution of how this industry is maturing. Operator: The next question will come from Edward Engel with Compass Point. Edward Engel: Mind just kind of walking us through the thought process as you were financing CoreWeave Phase II and Phase III, just given that it was kind of all in one deal, does it feel like this needs to be done in one deal? Or was it you try to get ahead of the market in case there was any turbulence? Anthony Paquette: Sure. Ed, thanks for the question. So just to clarify, Phase II and Phase III were not done as one single deal. So the high-yield bond offering we did very recently was specific to Phase II, which is the largest phase of Helios I for CoreWeave. It was a $3.5 billion high-yield notes offering. Prior to raising that financing, we had already prefunded a significant amount of the necessary equity for the project. With closing of that financing, we funded the balance of the necessary equity for the project. And so Phase II is now 100% funded from a debt and equity perspective. And importantly, our prior capital planning as well as cash generation that we've had over the years and we expect to have already prefunds and the equity needs expected for Phase III. And so we have no equity need expectation to complete the project for CoreWeave and to deliver the entirety of the 800 gross megawatts to them. What you likely will see happen into the future is a final debt financing to come to associated with the Phase III project as we ramp that project up and start building for delivery. So that was the thought process. We've looked at Helios I as 3 separate phases financed all with Galaxy equity that's already requisitioned for, but with 3 separate debt financing structures. Operator: The next question will come from Greg Lewis with BTIG. Gregory Lewis: I guess I'd like to talk a little bit about the data center footprint. I mean, clearly, you guys have been going out and acquiring additional sites. We have the stuff pending Batch Zero baseload pending Batch Zero, I guess, study. Just as we think about that and to your point around prompt power, maybe not for the baseload sites, but is Galaxy exploring and looking and could we potentially see sooner rather than later some behind-the-meter power at maybe some of these sites that probably will have power in the future, but definitely not in this kind of tight window that a lot of companies or customers are looking for? Anthony Paquette: Sure. I'll take that one. So you are right. We have been very busy over the last 2 quarters building our portfolio, and we're pretty proud of it. I'm going to lead with, I think the philosophy we've had on building our power portfolio is one where the market is pretty young and dynamic and the growth expectations are larger than we've ever seen but we still want to be prudent and risk manage our exposure. And so just to level set, as we've acquired all of these projects, we've done so in a way that have back-ended Galaxy's exposure in terms of the actual cost to control the asset and not just back ended it time-wise, but back ended it in terms of actual development and milestones. And so as time passes and you see those sites start to get developed and get leased and ultimately bring to fruition, you'll see sort of the risk capital put out to Galaxy very aligned with actual -- achieving milestones that have already created value to help fund those purchase prices. So that's one. In terms of behind the meter versus front of the meter, all the sites that we have targeted are meant to be front-of-the-meter sites. We -- while we do think the Texas grid and the regulators there have a lot of work to do to figure out how to bring on all these large loads over a period of time in a safe way for Texans and for the grid to keep costs down and to make sure that we can grow responsibly, we do think that those -- all those projects with the right investment in infrastructure are deliverable on time lines that we can all see. And so we don't view what we have acquired and we brought under our control as a power potential that requires like decades of build and not visibility into delivering. On the behind-the-meter side, we have continued to do a lot of work on our side. We actually have advanced some pretty specific conversations on potential partnerships and potential projects that we would look at to do behind-the-meter. We do think behind-the-meter generation attached to data centers is going to become more prevalent, particularly as grid constraints and fear around grid expansion sort of continues to percolate. The other side of that, though, is building behind-the-meter generation alongside a data center development is a much more complicated process. It's very difficult to finance, model, build generation that oftentimes is very singularly tied to a specific data center project and then have to pace that with matching it with a customer, getting the financing to build a data center, et cetera. It adds significant cost to a particular data center development, and it adds a lot of complexity and sort of timing dependency, let alone actual operational dependency with regards to being able to maintain voltage and actually operate the data center to [ 3.9x ], [ 5.9x ] level of production while having a captive behind-the-meter source. So it's not something that we are completely closed off to. It is something that we're investing our time and research efforts into, and we're looking at. We will likely pursue something into the future. It is not our focus today. We are focused on front-of-the-meter assets. Operator: The next question will come from Bill Papanastasiou with Chardan Capital Markets. Bill Papanastasiou: I was just hoping we could double-click on the change in general contractor for Phase II. From my memory, Galaxy had partnered with Clayco in the first round at Helios. What drove that decision to change the general contractor? Anthony Paquette: Yes. So you're correct. Clayco was our GC on Phase I. They were an absolute great partner. They delivered well for us. As we've said, we and them help deliver that project on time and on budget. But there's a lot -- given their project commitments and our time line requirements and the necessary labor and workforces that were required for Phase II, which is double the size on a similar time line from Phase I. We made a decision ultimately to go ahead, and it was really a collaborative decision with Clayco to go ahead with HITT for Phase II was a top nationally recognized data center contractor, a strong track record of delivering and who themselves had aspirations to really build a much bigger presence in Texas as the focus has moved to the large-scale development in the industry in Texas. And so that's really what drove the decision. I think we worked together with Clayco and made the most sense for both parties to -- given their other commitments and their time lines to go a different direction. Operator: The next question will come from Chris Brendler with Rosenblatt Securities. Christopher Brendler: Can you give us an update on GalaxyOne? I know it's a difficult market, but if you could give us an update on how you're thinking about that business at this point, it would be great. Anthony Paquette: Yes, sure. I'll take that one, Chris. Thanks for the question. So GalaxyOne, we -- as we've talked about on previous calls, we launched this product publicly about 9 months ago. The team has been steadily releasing product features, development, et cetera. We do still have an ambitious road map in terms of what we're planning to build there. This is something the area where we focused on really being beyond just crypto. So this is truly a multi-asset class offering. We're running this part a little bit like a start-up internally in terms of launching products, releasing new features, wanting to see product market fit, wanting to see things really sort of land as we have -- as we kind of build out the product. We've seen some green shoots in there in terms of things around like equity trading. We're looking at rolling out new features like a portfolio of line of credit, things of that nature. So look, we know building a consumer franchise takes time. It is not something that happens overnight. This is a commitment that we've made, and we're investing into the product build. We have not poured a lot of money into the marketing spend, which I think is something that's pretty important when you think about consumer development even at the higher end of the spectrum where we're aiming. So the other thing I would say is we are working to sort of harmonize areas across the consumer and institutional side where we can. So when you think about things like operations, back-end technology, things that are -- that will give us operational efficiencies and scale as this business grows. That's really been one of the focuses of the team. So again, still a very small contributor to the net financial profile of the markets business where this rolls up, but something that we still have a pretty ambitious road map ahead. Operator: The next question will come from Mike Colonnese with H.C. Wainwright. Michael Colonnese: Just curious, as you guys start to scale some of your key partnerships with TradFi, how should we expect these arrangements to manifest in financial results, seeing that you'll be effectively externalizing your services to the third party? And as a follow-up to that, how soon can BNY become a material contributor for you guys? Christopher Ferraro: Yes. I'll start with that, and then Tony will probably backing up on it. In terms of the business model and what we hope we're going to see and therefore, you'll likely see, the way the mandate, at least with BNY and our pipelines are structured is a combination of really starting out with allocating our team of engineers, developers and our business folks, helping the financial institutions sort of who are complementary to us and have platforms that are complementary to our existing services and products that we offer today, help build part of their infrastructure where we get paid for that contribution along the way. But then also with a real eye towards the future of once those financial institutions have their platforms and infrastructure developed then Galaxy being a primary, if not the contributor to value-added services on top of those platforms to help service either directly or via B2B end user relationship. And so I would view it as like long-term engagements where Galaxy can allocate resources, generate pretty healthy margins during a build phase and then give us a much broader surface area to distribute our products and services through that partner's platform once we help build it. Anthony Paquette: The only thing I would add to your question about how we see it come through. So some of these engagements will come through as fee revenue through our asset management and infrastructure subsegment. Over time, as Chris was talking about, as we scale and deepen integrations with some of these partners, I think you'll see it in the form of just broadening growth across our trading businesses more broadly, asset management, asset growth broadly. That is how we sort of think about it and expect it to manifest over time. Operator: The next question will come from James Faucette with Morgan Stanley. James Faucette: I wanted to ask about the announced acquisitions and opportunities there. Obviously, really big potential projects. But how should we think about like the -- getting approvals and power to those, especially in the ERCOT process right now? I mean, have applications already been filed? What's the timing in which that would take place? Just walk us through kind of how you're thinking about that process for now and what the things that could move approvals one way or another? Christopher Ferraro: Sure. So I would say as a global comment on our tower portfolio, every one of the projects that we've identified here are projects that we, Galaxy now have ownership or site control over and have visibility on how large they can be and how we can develop and energize them over a given time period. And so the -- if we go sort of one by one, right, Helios, I think you guys in the market know a lot about Helios. Helios is an asset that we own, freehold the land rights, and we've acquired a land portfolio now that's increased 10x plus since when we initially acquired it back in 2022. Helios I is already under development. Helios II was already approved. We had site interconnection agreements. We had funded known utility upgrades to the CSPs there and had gotten approval on that 830 megawatts prior to the batch process even launching. Helios III is a future expansion for the Helios campus. That Helios III site is -- we expect to be a Batch Zero study load, meaning we've applied for a gigawatt of capacity. We expect to get a gigawatt capacity over time. But in the Batch Zero process, it's unknown how much of that 1 gigawatt ultimately based on the planning of the grid can be deliverable during a Batch Zero confirmation. You'll hear this trend over and over again as I go through them. On Helios III, we have studies approved. We submitted those attestations that were required during the batch process. We also funded the required security, which is $50,000 per megawatt, so $50 million for our 1 gigawatt application. And we did all that ahead of the deadline and in satisfaction of the PGRR14 requirements. And so from our perspective, Helios III is very clearly a project that's been studied, that has ticked all the boxes, that has long lead electrical infrastructure that's already been procured to prove and money posted for the utilities to prove that we're serious about that development. The same is true for Selene, which is a 900-megawatt project. Very similarly, we believe that's a Batch Zero studied load. We have studies that have been approved. We have attestations that have been made. We posted security for that 900 megawatts to the tune of $45 million, all ahead of the deadline. Caspian is a little different, and I put higher up in the category. Caspian is a Batch Zero baseload eligible site. What's different about that? What's different about that is in addition to having study loads, that site was already known in terms of what specific T&D infrastructure upgrades needed to be made. And therefore, we could attest to having acquired all of the electrical equipment, having had the steady state and stability studies approved and a known amount needed to be funded to the utilities, TSPs in order to upgrade the grid, and we did all that in advance of the deadline. And so Caspian in that whole portfolio is very well positioned to be a 100% allocated 700-megawatt baseload once ERCOT works through their own process and now the governor's directive to take a very serious look at auditing all of the applications that come in. So if you look through our portfolio, sort of summarizing, we're -- there are no sites in that portfolio that we have either not done the required steps in order to give us confidence that it's -- that can be developed. We've done all those steps. We put real capital to work in every one of those projects. We posted financial security and/or actual utility requirements in all those projects. And so what we're looking at today now is a process that was already known with the PUC and ERCOT and an overlay that's now been added by the governor who wants to make sure that those entities take a very serious audited look at who's participating so that folks like us and all the projects we have in that process can be prioritized and folks who haven't done all that who are going a different route who have cut corners who have either not made attestations or have made attestations that maybe are not built on strong foundations can get weeded out. And so we have to go through that process. We think it's a healthy process for the grid. It's very important that ERCOT and Texas gets it right. We just know that all the assets that we have control over that we've applied for, we've done everything -- we've crossed every team dot every eye, and we feel very confident about where we will land as that process unfolds. Operator: The next question will come from Nathan Frankovitz with Cantor. Nathan Frankovitz: It seems like a major theme that Galaxy's positioning around is AI computing, obviously, and then the movement of financial markets Onchain. So my question is, where do you see the most tangible convergence between those 2 themes? And are there specific capabilities or customer relationships or capital advantages that would allow Galaxy's digital assets and data center businesses to create more value together than independently? Michael Novogratz: In the short term, it's not a clear answer that there's a fast pivot to do something. A, you're building long-term infrastructure for big, big hyperscaler and other clients. And so for us to take some piece of that data center would be not so relative to how big these data centers are building. What it has done for us has given us a bird's eye view of just how much capital and how fast the AI revolution is coming, how much capital is taking and how fast the revolution is coming. And understanding that really why crypto, why blockchain rails are going to become so important. But there's, in some ways, 2 very different businesses at the tail sides of one big theme. And so what's interesting is our pivot is in infrastructure in both. We really do believe that crypto is going through this transitional moment where lots of the crypto technology, the philosophy, the technology is now really applicable for all financial instruments. And so you're not going to have crypto business per se, you're going to have a digital assets business. And that pivot is both painful for some companies because you had a business that was built on a very speculative token economy that's moving into a digital asset where those tokens represent real value in real-world assets. And you can see that happening. And so I don't think it's a straight line to converge those 2 businesses, but those themes are going to stay pretty connected. And I think there's an advantage -- there's an advantage so far in our capital structure that we built a very large and ambitious data center business on the back of capital that we had raised and earned in the crypto business. And in some ways, we got to double count that capital for a while because people would only lend us money if we had enough assets, and we had those assets that were also backing our crypto business. And so as we get more capitalized, it becomes a little less important as our businesses grow. But now we've got a business that -- the data center business 12 months forward is a big cash flowing business that gives us the ability not to panic, to stay calm in the crypto transitions to figure out exactly the right moves as opposed to being forced into the moves. And so I like the barbell that we have. But again, there's not a direct, hey, let's build Galaxy data center right now. Operator: And this will conclude our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Mike Novogratz for any closing remarks. Please go ahead. Michael Novogratz: I just want to give Chris and Tony a shout out. They did, I think, a great job of explaining just how much work that we've done in the last 3 to 6 months. it's been a tremendous amount behind the curtain, if you want to think of it that way, of relationship building, of acquiring sites, financing and all that stuff takes a huge amount of effort for the whole Galaxy team. We're hoping in the next 2 quarters, the excitement around -- our excitement around what we're accomplishing is equal to this one. And we really see both these opportunities as challenging, but really potentially very lucrative in the long run. And so I appreciate your time, and we'll be back. Operator: The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect. Before you buy stock in Galaxy Digital, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Galaxy Digital wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut are built for long-term growth and could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $403,337!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,334,946!* That performance is why people listen. With a track record of beating the S&P 500 by 4x, Stock Advisor offers a distinct advantage. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built for the long haul. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 12, 2026. This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Galaxy Digital (GLXY) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript was originally published by The Motley Fool

Galaxy Digital (GLXY) shares fell more than 11% on Aug. 5 after the crypto financial services firm reported a second-quarter net loss of $85 million, weighed down by falling digital asset prices despite continued expansion of its artificial intelligence infrastructure business. The company posted an adjusted EBITDA loss of $77 million for the quarter ended June 30, improving from a $188 million loss in the first quarter, while total assets rose 9% quarter over quarter to $10.8 billion. Related: Ex-DOJ prosecutor Amanda Wick says crypto is Swift in reverse Management said the quarterly loss was "driven primarily by the depreciation of digital asset prices." Although the bottom line remained in the red, Galaxy's operating businesses improved sequentially. Adjusted gross profit swung to $43 million from an $88 million loss in Q1, supported by the first revenue contribution from its data center business. Galaxy shares were trading at $19.50 at the time of writing, down 11.92% on the day. Galaxy entered Bitcoin mining in 2022 when it acquired Argo Blockchain's Helios mining facility in Texas, describing the site as the foundation of its proprietary mining business. Since then, the company has repositioned Helios into an AI and high-performance computing campus. Jim Cramer rethinks Bitcoin after IBM CEO's three-year warning Exclusive: Peter Schiff says the Fed 'never should have stopped hiking' Morgan Stanley downgrades Circle, slashes price target by 64% During the second quarter, Galaxy completed the first phase of its 15-year lease with CoreWeave, bringing 133 megawatts of critical IT load into service. The data center segment generated $20 million in adjusted gross profit and $11 million in adjusted EBITDA — its first revenue-generating quarter. Galaxy said Phase I is expected to produce about $80 million in quarterly leasing revenue beginning in the third quarter. The company has also expanded beyond Helios, announcing on July 28 the acquisition of three Texas sites that bring its AI power pipeline to more than 5.7 gigawatts, including a 500-acre campus in McGregor. Despite its AI expansion, Galaxy remains one of the largest publicly traded crypto holders. The company holds a digital asset treasury worth roughly $1.82 billion, including 25,723 Bitcoin worth about $1.65 billion, 61,137 Ether valued at roughly $114 million, and 775,289 Solana tokens worth about $57 million, making Bitcoin about 91% of its crypto portfolio. Related: Jim Cramer rethinks Bitcoin after IBM CEO's three-year warning This story was originally published by TheStreet on Aug 5, 2026, where it first appeared in the MARKETS section. Add TheStreet as a Preferred Source by clicking here.

This article first appeared on GuruFocus. GAAP Net Loss: Reported a net loss of $85 million, or $0.09 per share, for Q2 2026. Firmwide Adjusted EBITDA: Negative $77 million for the quarter. Combined Operating Businesses Adjusted Gross Profit: $86 million, up significantly from Q1. Combined Operating Businesses Adjusted EBITDA: $1 million, up significantly from Q1. Firmwide Operating Expenses: $172 million in Q2, up $25 million quarter-over-quarter. Total Assets: $10.8 billion at quarter end, up 9% from the prior period. Total Equity: $2.7 billion, essentially flat quarter-over-quarter. Cash and Stablecoins: $2.5 billion, down 6% from Q1. Net Digital Assets and Investments: Approximately $1.2 billion at quarter end, down 15% from Q1. Digital Assets Segment Adjusted Gross Profit: $66 million, up $17 million or 34% quarter-over-quarter. Global Markets Adjusted Gross Profit: $49 million, up significantly from Q1 despite trading volumes declining 7%. Asset Management and Infrastructure Solutions Adjusted Gross Profit: $17 million. Combined Assets Under Management and Assets Under Stake: Approximately $7 billion, down 12% from Q1. Data Centers Adjusted Gross Profit: $20 million in Q2. Data Centers Adjusted EBITDA: $11 million in Q2. Data Center Operating Expenses: $21 million in the quarter, excluding pass-through operator costs. Data Center CapEx: $448 million in Q2, up from $354 million in Q1. Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit: Recognized approximately $65 million, with $32 million flowing through the P&L as a tax benefit. Data Center Segment Assets: Approximately $2.5 billion in total assets at quarter end. Data Center Segment Liabilities: Approximately $1.5 billion in total liabilities at quarter end. Phase 1 Leasing Revenue Expectation: Expected to generate approximately $80 million in Q3 2026, with a project-level adjusted EBITDA margin of over 90%. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Signs with AMPX. Is GLXY fairly valued? Test your thesis with our free DCF calculator. Release Date: August 05, 2026 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. Galaxy Digital Inc (NASDAQ:GLXY) successfully delivered Phase 1 of the Helios data center on schedule and on budget, generating cash flow and demonstrating execution capability. The company expanded its data center development pipeline to over 5.7 gigawatts of potential power capacity through the acquisition of three new sites in Texas, positioning it as a major player in the industry. Galaxy Digital Inc (NASDAQ:GLXY) completed a $3.5 billion high-yield financing for Phase 2 of Helios, fully funding the project and ensuring capital for future development. The digital assets segment showed resilience, with adjusted gross profit up 34% quarter-over-quarter despite lower crypto prices, driven by market share gains and new product launches like GOFR and Galaxy Curator. Galaxy Digital Inc (NASDAQ:GLXY) signed a multi-year agreement with Bank of New York to develop digital asset infrastructure, marking a significant milestone in institutional partnerships and monetizing its engineering talent. Galaxy Digital Inc (NASDAQ:GLXY) reported a GAAP net loss of $85 million and negative firmwide adjusted EBITDA of $77 million, driven by depreciation in digital asset prices. The company's treasury and corporate segment posted an adjusted gross loss of $42 million due to crypto market weakness, highlighting ongoing volatility in digital asset holdings. The delay in passing crypto clarity legislation in the U.S. creates regulatory uncertainty, potentially hindering growth in the digital assets business. Data center operating expenses increased by $25 million quarter-over-quarter, reflecting higher depreciation and interest costs as projects come online, pressuring near-term profitability. The Helios II 830 megawatts of approved capacity remains unleased, with tenant conversations still in early stages and timing dependent on market conditions and customer planning cycles. Q: Can you update us on conversations with potential tenants for the additional 830 megawatts of approved capacity at Helios II, the composition of the tenant funnel, and the gating factors to signing a tenant? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): We've had discussions with every flavor of potential tenant, including hyperscalers, neoclouds, and labs. The primary gating factor is that Helios II's energization is slated for late 2028, while many tenants are focused on securing 2026 power. We are building long-term relationships and observing new market dynamics, such as guarantee and lease wrap structures from larger credit counterparties, which could improve our risk-reward. We are being patient to ensure we deploy this near-gigawatt asset optimally. Q: Which products are the key near-term investment and growth priorities in the digital assets business, and where are you seeing the strongest early traction? A: Anthony Paquette (CFO): Our priority is partnership-level infrastructure engagements, like the one with Bank of New York, where we help large institutions build and own their own digital asset infrastructure. We are focusing on staking, tokenization, wallet infrastructure, and vaults. We are being selective with partners to deepen long-term relationships and expand beyond initial engagements, leveraging our unique experience and talent. Q: Can you walk us through the thought process behind financing Phase 2 and Phase 3 of Helios, and whether it needed to be done in one deal? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): Phase 2 and Phase 3 were not financed in one deal. The recent $3.5 billion high-yield offering was specific to Phase 2, which is now 100% funded. We had already pre-funded the equity for Phase 3 through prior capital planning and cash generation, so there is no equity need to complete the project. We expect to execute a separate debt financing for Phase 3 as we ramp up construction. Q: Is Galaxy exploring behind-the-meter power for its new data center sites to meet tight customer timelines? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): All our current sites are targeted for front-of-meter power. While we are researching behind-the-meter generation, it adds significant complexity, cost, and timing dependencies to data center development. We are focused on front-of-meter assets, but we have advanced specific conversations on behind-the-meter partnerships and may pursue them in the future. Q: What drove the decision to change the general contractor from Clayco to HIT Contracting for Phase 2 of Helios? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): Clayco was a great partner on Phase 1, delivering on time and on budget. However, given their other project commitments and our timeline requirements for Phase 2, which is double the size, we made a collaborative decision to bring in HIT, a top nationally recognized data center contractor with a strong track record and aspirations to build a larger presence in Texas. Q: Can you give an update on Galaxy One and how you are thinking about that business? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): Galaxy One is being run like a startup, with a focus on product development and market fit. We are seeing green shoots in areas like equity trading and are planning new features like a portfolio line of credit. We have not heavily invested in marketing, as building a consumer franchise takes time. We are harmonizing operations and back-end technology with the institutional side to gain efficiencies as the business scales. Q: How should we expect the key partnerships like BNY to manifest in financial results, and how soon can they become material contributors? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO) & Anthony Paquette (CFO): The business model involves allocating our engineering and development teams to help partners build their infrastructure, for which we get paid. This will initially appear as fee revenue in our asset management infrastructure subsegment. Over time, as integrations deepen, we expect it to broaden growth across our trading and asset management businesses. These are long-term engagements with healthy margins during the build phase, expanding our distribution surface area. Q: How should we think about getting approvals and power for the newly announced acquisitions (Merlin, Caspian, Saline) in the current ERCOT process? A: Anthony Paquette (CFO): We have completed all required steps for each site. Helios III and Saline are expected to be batch zero study loads, having submitted attestations and posted financial security. Caspian is eligible for batch zero base load classification, having completed interconnection agreements and funded known utility upgrades. We have put real capital to work on all projects. We view the Governor's audit directive as a healthy process that will prioritize well-developed projects like ours and weed out speculative ones. Q: Where do you see the most tangible convergence between AI computing and the movement of financial markets on-chain, and are there synergies between the two businesses? A: Michael Novogratz (CEO): In the short term, there is no direct convergence. The data center business gives us a bird's-eye view of the massive capital flowing into AI, reinforcing why blockchain rails will become important. The two businesses are at opposite ends of a big theme. However, the cash flow from the data center business provides us the stability to navigate crypto transitions without being forced into moves, which is a strategic advantage. For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.

The market expects Coincheck Group N.V. (CNCK) to deliver a year-over-year increase in earnings on higher revenues when it reports results for the quarter ended June 2026. This widely-known consensus outlook is important in assessing the company's earnings picture, but a powerful factor that might influence its near-term stock price is how the actual results compare to these estimates. The earnings report, which is expected to be released on August 6, might help the stock move higher if these key numbers are better than expectations. On the other hand, if they miss, the stock may move lower. While the sustainability of the immediate price change and future earnings expectations will mostly depend on management's discussion of business conditions on the earnings call, it's worth handicapping the probability of a positive EPS surprise. This company is expected to post quarterly loss of $0.04 per share in its upcoming report, which represents a year-over-year change of +42.9%. Revenues are expected to be $693.43 million, up 19% from the year-ago quarter. The consensus EPS estimate for the quarter has remained unchanged over the last 30 days. This is essentially a reflection of how the covering analysts have collectively reassessed their initial estimates over this period. Investors should keep in mind that the direction of estimate revisions by each of the covering analysts may not always get reflected in the aggregate change. Price, Consensus and EPS Surprise Estimate revisions ahead of a company's earnings release offer clues to the business conditions for the period whose results are coming out. This insight is at the core of our proprietary surprise prediction model -- the Zacks Earnings ESP (Expected Surprise Prediction). The Zacks Earnings ESP compares the Most Accurate Estimate to the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the quarter; the Most Accurate Estimate is a more recent version of the Zacks Consensus EPS estimate. The idea here is that analysts revising their estimates right before an earnings release have the latest information, which could potentially be more accurate than what they and others contributing to the consensus had predicted earlier. Thus, a positive or negative Earnings ESP reading theoretically indicates the likely deviation of the actual earnings from the consensus estimate. However, the model's predictive power is significant for positive ESP readings only. A positive Earnings ESP is a strong predictor of an earnings beat, particularly when combined with a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold). Our research shows that stocks with this combination produce a positive surprise nearly 70% of the time, and a solid Zacks Rank actually increases the predictive power of Earnings ESP. Please note that a negative Earnings ESP reading is not indicative of an earnings miss. Our research shows that it is difficult to predict an earnings beat with any degree of confidence for stocks with negative Earnings ESP readings and/or Zacks Rank of 4 (Sell) or 5 (Strong Sell). For Coincheck Group N.V., the Most Accurate Estimate is higher than the Zacks Consensus Estimate, suggesting that analysts have recently become bullish on the company's earnings prospects. This has resulted in an Earnings ESP of +45.46%. On the other hand, the stock currently carries a Zacks Rank of #3. So, this combination indicates that Coincheck Group N.V. will most likely beat the consensus EPS estimate. While calculating estimates for a company's future earnings, analysts often consider to what extent it has been able to match past consensus estimates. So, it's worth taking a look at the surprise history for gauging its influence on the upcoming number. For the last reported quarter, it was expected that Coincheck Group N.V. would post a loss of$0.01 per share when it actually produced a loss of -$0.06, delivering a surprise of -500.00%. Over the last four quarters, the company has beaten consensus EPS estimates two times. An earnings beat or miss may not be the sole basis for a stock moving higher or lower. Many stocks end up losing ground despite an earnings beat due to other factors that disappoint investors. Similarly, unforeseen catalysts help a number of stocks gain despite an earnings miss. That said, betting on stocks that are expected to beat earnings expectations does increase the odds of success. This is why it's worth checking a company's Earnings ESP and Zacks Rank ahead of its quarterly release. Make sure to utilize our Earnings ESP Filter to uncover the best stocks to buy or sell before they've reported. Coincheck Group N.V. appears a compelling earnings-beat candidate. However, investors should pay attention to other factors too for betting on this stock or staying away from it ahead of its earnings release. Among the stocks in the Zacks Financial - Miscellaneous Services industry, Galaxy Digital Inc. (GLXY), is soon expected to post loss of $0.35 per share for the quarter ended June 2026. This estimate indicates a year-over-year change of -537.5%. This quarter's revenue is expected to be $10.47 billion, up 20.9% from the year-ago quarter. The consensus EPS estimate for Galaxy Digital Inc. has been revised 55.6% lower over the last 30 days to the current level. However, a lower Most Accurate Estimate has resulted in an Earnings ESP of -39.13%. When combined with a Zacks Rank of #5 (Strong Sell), this Earnings ESP makes it difficult to conclusively predict that Galaxy Digital Inc. will beat the consensus EPS estimate. The company beat consensus EPS estimates in each of the trailing four quarters. Stay on top of upcoming earnings announcements with the Zacks Earnings Calendar. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Coincheck Group N.V. (CNCK) : Free Stock Analysis Report Galaxy Digital Inc. (GLXY) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

Wall Street expects a year-over-year decline in earnings on higher revenues when Galaxy Digital Inc. (GLXY) reports results for the quarter ended June 2026. While this widely-known consensus outlook is important in gauging the company's earnings picture, a powerful factor that could impact its near-term stock price is how the actual results compare to these estimates. The earnings report, which is expected to be released on August 5, might help the stock move higher if these key numbers are better than expectations. On the other hand, if they miss, the stock may move lower. While the sustainability of the immediate price change and future earnings expectations will mostly depend on management's discussion of business conditions on the earnings call, it's worth handicapping the probability of a positive EPS surprise. This company is expected to post quarterly loss of $0.20 per share in its upcoming report, which represents a year-over-year change of -350%. Revenues are expected to be $10.76 billion, up 24.3% from the year-ago quarter. The consensus EPS estimate for the quarter has been revised 55.56% lower over the last 30 days to the current level. This is essentially a reflection of how the covering analysts have collectively reassessed their initial estimates over this period. Investors should keep in mind that the direction of estimate revisions by each of the covering analysts may not always get reflected in the aggregate change. Price, Consensus and EPS Surprise Estimate revisions ahead of a company's earnings release offer clues to the business conditions for the period whose results are coming out. Our proprietary surprise prediction model -- the Zacks Earnings ESP (Expected Surprise Prediction) -- has this insight at its core. The Zacks Earnings ESP compares the Most Accurate Estimate to the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the quarter; the Most Accurate Estimate is a more recent version of the Zacks Consensus EPS estimate. The idea here is that analysts revising their estimates right before an earnings release have the latest information, which could potentially be more accurate than what they and others contributing to the consensus had predicted earlier. Thus, a positive or negative Earnings ESP reading theoretically indicates the likely deviation of the actual earnings from the consensus estimate. However, the model's predictive power is significant for positive ESP readings only. A positive Earnings ESP is a strong predictor of an earnings beat, particularly when combined with a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold). Our research shows that stocks with this combination produce a positive surprise nearly 70% of the time, and a solid Zacks Rank actually increases the predictive power of Earnings ESP. Please note that a negative Earnings ESP reading is not indicative of an earnings miss. Our research shows that it is difficult to predict an earnings beat with any degree of confidence for stocks with negative Earnings ESP readings and/or Zacks Rank of 4 (Sell) or 5 (Strong Sell). For Galaxy Digital Inc., the Most Accurate Estimate is lower than the Zacks Consensus Estimate, suggesting that analysts have recently become bearish on the company's earnings prospects. This has resulted in an Earnings ESP of -140.00%. On the other hand, the stock currently carries a Zacks Rank of #5. So, this combination makes it difficult to conclusively predict that Galaxy Digital Inc. will beat the consensus EPS estimate. Analysts often consider to what extent a company has been able to match consensus estimates in the past while calculating their estimates for its future earnings. So, it's worth taking a look at the surprise history for gauging its influence on the upcoming number. For the last reported quarter, it was expected that Galaxy Digital Inc. would post a loss of$0.59 per share when it actually produced a loss of -$0.49, delivering a surprise of +16.95%. Over the last four quarters, the company has beaten consensus EPS estimates four times. An earnings beat or miss may not be the sole basis for a stock moving higher or lower. Many stocks end up losing ground despite an earnings beat due to other factors that disappoint investors. Similarly, unforeseen catalysts help a number of stocks gain despite an earnings miss. That said, betting on stocks that are expected to beat earnings expectations does increase the odds of success. This is why it's worth checking a company's Earnings ESP and Zacks Rank ahead of its quarterly release. Make sure to utilize our Earnings ESP Filter to uncover the best stocks to buy or sell before they've reported. Galaxy Digital Inc. doesn't appear a compelling earnings-beat candidate. However, investors should pay attention to other factors too for betting on this stock or staying away from it ahead of its earnings release. Another stock from the Zacks Financial - Miscellaneous Services industry, Upstart Holdings, Inc. (UPST), is soon expected to post earnings of $0.58 per share for the quarter ended June 2026. This estimate indicates a year-over-year change of +61.1%. Revenues for the quarter are expected to be $354.89 million, up 37.9% from the year-ago quarter. The consensus EPS estimate for Upstart has remained unchanged over the last 30 days. However, a lower Most Accurate Estimate has resulted in an Earnings ESP of -13.79%. When combined with a Zacks Rank of #3 (Hold), this Earnings ESP makes it difficult to conclusively predict that Upstart will beat the consensus EPS estimate. Over the last four quarters, the company surpassed consensus EPS estimates two times. Stay on top of upcoming earnings announcements with the Zacks Earnings Calendar. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Galaxy Digital Inc. (GLXY) : Free Stock Analysis Report Upstart Holdings, Inc. (UPST) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

Image source: The Motley Fool. Thursday, May 14, 2026 at 5 p.m. ET Chief Executive Officer — Pyahm Samani Chief Investment Officer — Ryan Navi Chief Financial Officer — Brazier Christopher General Counsel — Georgia Quinn Pyahm Samani: Thank you, Georgia, and good afternoon, everyone. Our second fiscal quarter was defined by disciplined execution. Against the backdrop of continued market volatility, we took decisive steps to strengthen Forward's capital foundation, improve our cost structure and deepen our engagement across the Solana ecosystem. In March, we completed a strategic share repurchase that reduced our common shares outstanding by 7.4%, accessing $40 million of institutional debt from Galaxy Digital on highly advantageous terms and implemented a cost reduction initiative that has yielded material operating expense savings through disciplined cost management. Together, these actions reflect the long-term mindset that we bring to managing Forward: disciplined capital allocation, compounding SOL per share, which is currently above 44% on an annualized basis -- on an annualized in-the-money basis, and positioning the business to grow and diversify alongside the Solana ecosystem. These 2 themes, our continued conviction in the Solana ecosystem, particularly its accelerating momentum across stablecoins, payments and real-world assets, and the opportunities we see to deepen Forward's engagement with the Solana ecosystem to grow and diversify our revenue are where I want to focus our time today. Starting with the network. Solana's transition from promising technology to real financial infrastructure has accelerated meaningfully in recent months. For stablecoins and payments, Solana is emerging as the default settlement layer for dollar-denominated value on chain. According to a Messari report published in early March, total payment volume on Solana grew more than 8x year-over-year, which is nearly 3x the median growth rate of comparable fintech and blockchain platforms. The Solana Foundation's launch of Payments.org in late February and the Solana developer platform in March, which brings together Mastercard, Worldpay, Western Union and other global payments partners has consolidated what had been a fragmented set of partnerships into a single institutional-grade payment stack. Western Union is expected to go live with its U.S. dollar payment token, USDPT on Solana in the first half of this year, connecting on-chain dollar transfers to Western Union's network of more than 360,000 physical cash locations worldwide. On real-world assets, in January, Ondo Finance launched over 200 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs on Solana, joining an ecosystem where tokenized equities had already processed over $3 billion in transaction volume. Forward was amongst the first public companies to put its SEC-registered shares on chain through Superstate, and we view the rapid expansion of tokenized equities on Solana as further validation of the thesis that Solana is becoming the settlement layer for capital markets. In March, the SEC approved NASDAQ's proposal to trade tokenized securities alongside their traditional counterparts on the same order book, covering Russell 1000 stocks and major ETFs. As a NASDAQ-listed company that already has its shares tokenized on Solana, we view this as a powerful convergence. The infrastructure that Forward helped pioneer is now being adopted by the exchanges themselves. On the infrastructure side, the rollout of Firedancer, Jump Crypto's independent validated client for Solana, represents a landmark moment for the network's decentralization and resilience. Firedancer's testnet results showed throughput exceeding 1 million transactions per second, and the client is now phased -- and now phased in mainnet deployment. This is exactly the kind of foundational infrastructure maturation that institutional participants need to see before committing capital at scale. At the network level, Solana continues to lead across the metrics that matter: decentralized exchange volume, real economic value generated, active users and developer engagement. These fundamentals reinforce our view that it is not just another blockchain; it is the execution layer for what we often call the Internet capital markets. Before we move on to Forward's strategic initiatives, I want to address a topic that's gotten a lot of attention lately: the security incidents involving Drift Protocol on Solana and more broadly, the other exploits we've seen as a crypto industry across a number of other networks. The key point here is that the incident involving Drift was a social engineering attack, not an explicit exploit of the Solana protocol or contract code itself. That actor is targeted with privileged access through reception, not through any underlying vulnerability in the network. To be clear, Solana's core Layer 1 network has not experienced a consensus level breach. The base protocol has continued to operate with full uptime, strong validated decentralization and no cryptographic vulnerabilities. Think of it this way. A breach at a company running on AWS does not mean AWS is broken. The same logic applies here. If anything, these incidents reinforce how seriously we take operational security in managing our own holdings. As the Solana ecosystem continues to accelerate, so do the opportunity for Forward to leverage protocols in the network to drive revenue growth. As such, priorities for 2026 are focused on 2 initiatives: First, deepening our engagement with the Solana ecosystem in ways that grow and diversify our revenue; and second, using our strengthened balance sheet to lower cost structure and accelerate SOL per share growth. On the ecosystem engagement front, we've made meaningful progress on initiatives we've discussed previously. First, tokenized FWDI. Forward remains one of the only public companies with SEC-registered shares that live on a public blockchain through Superstate's Opening Bell platform. There are currently more than 6.9 million shares of FWDI tokenized on Solana and the communal pool where FWDI can be utilized as collateral for on-chain loans is approximately at 91% utilization. The next initiative I'd like to talk about is our Forward Validator and fwdSOL. Today, over 6.9 million SOL are staked to Forward Validator and it is the eighth largest validator in the Solana network by stake weight. Our proprietary liquid staking token, fwdSOL, has become a cornerstone of our capital market strategy. It is collateral supporting our $40 million institutional debt facility with Galaxy, which Ryan will discuss more in detail. On the revenue front, I want to highlight Forward Industries' minority investment in deployment of capital in OneRe, a Solana-native reinsurance protocol that is building infrastructure to bring the traditional risk transfer markets on chain. Since launch, OneRe has attracted meaningful liquidity, onboarded its first reinsurance counterparties and built a real reputation as one of the more interesting DeFi-native risk protocols on Solana. What's compelling here is that Forward participates in OnRe, both as an investor and as a participant in the OnRe protocol by purchasing ONyc tokens. So we have direct upside as the protocol grows and generates fee revenue. That also adds USD-denominated noncorrelated revenue for Forward, which helps diversify our revenue base beyond SOL. Each of these initiatives is designed to accomplish the same thing: turn Forward from a passive treasury holder into an active participant in the Solana economy, generating yields above the native staking rate, expanding our surface area on chain and creating durable sources of revenue beyond staking alone. With that, I'd like to turn the call over to Ryan Navi, Forward's Chief Investment Officer, to further discuss our strategic initiatives and treasury performance during the quarter. Ryan? Ryan Navi: Thank you, Kyle, and good afternoon, everyone. Since stepping into the CIO role in December, I focused on building out a comprehensive plan to drive meaningful SOL per share growth, lower our cost of capital and position Forward as the Berkshire Hathaway of Solana in the long term. Today, I'd like to walk through our progress on all 3, starting with treasury performance, moving through our capital structure actions during the quarter and closing with how we're positioning Forward for the future. As of March 31, 2026, Forward held a little over $7 million Solana with nearly all of our holdings generating native staking yields between 6.5% and 7.2%. Cumulative staking rewards since our inception in September 2025 have now exceeded 200,000 Solana. 25.1% of our Solana is now represented as fwdSOL, our proprietary liquid staking token developed with Sanctum. fwdSOL is what allows us to continue earning native staking yield while simultaneously using our holdings productively as collateral, and it is the foundation of the institutional debt facility I'll discuss in more detail later. Turning to SOL per share. We continue to compound our fully diluted SOL per share from 0.0604 in September 2025 to 0.0624 as of December 31, 2025, and to 0.0669 as of March 31, 2026. That reflects annualized SOL per share growth of 29.1% on a fully diluted basis since the launch of our treasury strategy. On an in-the-money share basis, our annualized SOL per share growth exceeds 44%. Our fully diluted share count as of March 31, 2026, was 105,231,015 shares, comprised of 76,314,617 common shares net of treasury, 25,759,600 warrants, 1,599,066 options and 1,557,732 unvested, restricted and performance stock units. The reduction in common shares outstanding from 84.9 million to 76.3 million reflects our March repurchase of 6.2 million shares and our ongoing share repurchase program, which reduced our basic shares outstanding by 10.1%. As of March 31, 2026, Forward's MNAV was 0.827, calculated using the closing price of Solana on March 31 of $83.12, total SOL holdings of 7,044,079, plus our cash balance less debt towards closing price of $4.43 and a fully diluted share count of 105,231,015 shares. The most consequential actions during the quarter were in our capital structure. In March, we completed 2 highly strategic transactions that, taken together, represent the disciplined capital allocation we believe is required to deliver long-term value to our shareholders. This, in turn, gave us the balance sheet strength to capitalize on opportunities like our investment and deployment into OnRe, which provides Forward with upside as the tokenized RWA ecosystem on Solana grows and adds a USD-denominated revenue stream for the company. First, we entered into a Master Digital Currency Loan Agreement with our long-standing partner, Galaxy Digital, and drew on an initial $40 million facility collateralized by fwdSOL with a weighted average interest rate of 3.4% and a weighted average maturity of 5 months. I really want to underscore how compelling these terms are. At a 3.4% weighted average interest rate, this facility represents access to capital at a cost that is, in our view, not only highly advantageous, relative to what is available to most companies in our sector, but also most publicly traded small- to medium-sized market cap companies. Our extremely attractive cost of capital is the direct product of the strength of both our balance sheet and our team's approach to risk management. Given the recent drawdown of Solana in conjunction with our shares trading at a discount to NAV, we made the conscious decision to lower our cost of capital via nondilutive financing, meaning that we're able to access liquidity without issuing equity or selling our SOL holdings. It's also important to note that approximately 40% of this facility is evergreen in nature, which means it automatically renews and does not require active refinancing. This provides us with a stable recurring capital base and means the effective refinancing burden on the remaining portfolio is both manageable and well within our liquidity planning horizon. Second, on March 19, we announced the deployment of $27.4 million of that $40 million credit facility to repurchase 6.2 million shares of our common stock at $4.44 per share. This transaction reduced our basic shares outstanding by 7.4% and our fully diluted shares outstanding by 5.5%, which drove an immediately compelling SOL per share accretion of 8.0% on a common share basis and 5.8% on a fully diluted basis. Third, on May 5, we announced our investment and deployment into OnRe. Alongside RockawayX, the global multi-strat digital asset investment firm, Forward co-led OnRe's $5 million Series A at a $25 million post-money valuation and has begun deploying capital into ONyc, OnRe's yield-bearing token on Solana. ONyc provides Forward with real-world cash flows that are both complementary and uncorrelated to Solana. By gaining exposure to reinsurance through a tokenized on-chain structure, we're unlocking a new layer of durable dollar-denominated income while remaining fully aligned with the Solana ecosystem. Together, the series of transactions gives us 3 things: dramatic SOL per share growth, a robust balance sheet to continue operating and investing in the business and most importantly, an enhanced capital structure that lowers our cost of capital, which unlocks a wider opportunity set to pursue strategic transactions beginning with OnRe that will deliver greater SOL per share growth and value to shareholders over the course of 2026. Looking ahead, we will continue to focus on driving efficiencies across the business while executing on 3 strategic priorities. First, continuing to leverage our advantageous access to capital through the Galaxy facility and new potential relationships to further optimize our capital structure and lower our cost of capital, which will further accelerate our ability to compound SOL per share. Second, identifying and executing on select opportunities that accelerate our SOL per share growth above the baseline native Solana staking rate while also pushing the Solana ecosystem forward as a whole. This includes evaluating M&A, strategic investments, structured transactions and scaling our on-chain operating initiatives. OnRe is a good example of this. It's a Solana-native reinsurance protocol that's grown quickly and already showing real traction. Forward is in as both an investor and a liquidity provider, but we have direct upside as OnRe scales, and we're generating USD-denominated revenue in the process. Third, positioning Forward to not only provide sustainable best-in-class SOL per share growth, but also to continue to grow the absolute scale of our treasury. We believe the foundation we've built, coupled with our leading scale, robust balance sheet, improved cost structure and deep partnerships with Galaxy, Jump and others will enable us to execute on our 2026 growth and profitability objectives on our way to building the Berkshire Hathaway of Solana. I'll now welcome and pass the call over to our newly appointed Chief Financial Officer, Mark Brazier, to walk you through our GAAP financial results and the cost reduction plan. Mark? Brazier Christopher: Thank you, Ryan, and good afternoon, everyone. I'm very pleased to address you all for the first time as Forward's new Chief Financial Officer. As many of you may be aware, I joined Forward approximately a month ago on April 13, succeeding Kathy Weisberg, who continues to serve the company as Director of Financial Reporting. I would like to take a moment to thank Kathy for her leadership during a truly transformational period for Forward and for the strong expertise and partnership she continues to offer. By way of introduction, I bring with me more than 25 years of experience across both digital assets and traditional finance, most recently as Chief Financial Officer and Head of Regulatory at XBTO Global and previously as Chief Financial Officer at Stablehouse. I'm excited to join the team at such a pivotal moment in the company's history and in particular, to help execute against the cost discipline and capital structure priorities Ryan just outlined. Now I'd like to turn to our financial results for the second quarter of fiscal year 2026. As a reminder, all comparisons and variance commentary refer to the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 unless otherwise specified. Revenue in the second quarter of fiscal year 2026 increased more than 4x to $13.0 million compared to $3.1 million in the prior year period. Gross margin expanded materially to 70.0% in the second quarter of fiscal year 2026 compared to negative 5.7% in the second quarter of fiscal year 2025. These increases were primarily driven by staking revenue generated through Forward's Solana treasury strategy. Selling, general and administrative expenses during the second quarter of fiscal year 2026 was $6.6 million compared to $7.2 million in the first quarter of fiscal year 2026, an early but meaningful indication that the cost reduction plan we announced in March is beginning to take effect. Year-over-year increase of $5.0 million was primarily driven by higher operational costs associated with Forward's transition to its Solana treasury strategy. As of March 31, 2026, our cash position was $16.6 million compared to $25.4 million as of December 31, 2025. The sequential decrease primarily reflects the use of $47.1 million to repurchase 9,214,655 shares during the quarter. Institutional debt outstanding as of March 31, 2026, was $40.0 million at a weighted average interest rate of 3.4% and a weighted average maturity of 5 months. With regards to the cost reduction plan, we are continuing to implement measures to reduce our SG&A spend. Our targeted quarterly SG&A run rate, excluding stock-based compensation, is approximately $4.8 million, down from $7.2 million in Q1 and $5.8 million in Q2. The primary drivers of that reduction are renegotiated fees under our services agreement with Galaxy Digital, lower outside legal and marketing spend, reduced third-party vendor costs and broader operational efficiencies, all part of the SG&A reduction initiative that we commenced at the end of 2025. That said, our SG&A will still remain subject to certain variable costs, most notably the asset management fee we pay Galaxy, which is tied to a percentage of our AUM. We remain committed to evaluating our cost structure on an ongoing basis and identifying additional efficiencies throughout the year. I'd also like to reiterate the current GAAP accounting treatment for our SOL holdings. Current accounting standards for digital assets require changes in the fair value of SOL and Forward SOL to be recorded as components of operating income or loss. These fluctuations do not impact our cash balance, yield generation or our ability to continue compounding SOL per share. This accounting distinction is essential in evaluating our financial performance, which is driven by strategy execution, not short-term market volatility. As a result of this treatment, in the second quarter of fiscal year 2026, Forward recognized a loss on digital assets of approximately $201.7 million and an impairment charge of approximately $85.1 million related to our Forward SOL holdings, leading to a net loss of $283.1 million compared to a net loss of $585.7 million in the prior quarter and $1.5 million in the second quarter of fiscal year 2025. Again, this loss was primarily driven by the decline in the price of SOL and therefore, the fair value of our SOL holdings. I will now pass the call back to our General Counsel, Georgia Quinn, to cover regulatory updates. Georgia Quinn: Thank you, and welcome, Mark. I'd like to briefly address several regulatory developments that occurred during the quarter because they are directly relevant to how investors should evaluate Forward and our strategy. The first calendar quarter of 2026 was one of the most consequential quarters for U.S. digital asset regulation ever. I'll touch on 3 developments in particular. First, on March 11, the SEC and CFTC executed a memorandum of understanding, establishing a formal framework for coordination on matters of shared regulatory concern. The MOU committed both agencies to streamline regulatory reporting, coordinated examinations and harmonized oversight, and it laid the procedural groundwork for the joint guidance that followed and creates the necessary foundation from which to begin joint rule-making once the clarity or its progeny legislation is passed. Second, on March 17, the SEC issued a commission-level interpretive release titled Application of the Federal Securities Laws to Certain Types of Crypto Assets, with the CFTC joining and confirming it will administer the Commodity Exchange Act consistent with the SEC's interpretation. The release establishes a 5-category taxonomy for digital assets and clarifies the application of federal securities laws to airdrops, protocol mining, protocol staking, among other activities. We believe 2 elements of this guidance are particularly important for Forward and our shareholders. First, the interpretive release is consistent with our view that Solana, the digital asset at the core of our treasury, is a digital commodity rather than a security. It is also consistent with the view that protocol-staking activities of the type conducted through our validator infrastructure are not, in and among themselves, securities transactions. We want to be clear that this guidance is interpreted in nature and does not carry the weight of statutory law, but it represents a meaningful step towards the regulatory clarity that has long been needed in our industry. Third, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, which passed the House in July 2025, remains under consideration in the Senate. The Clarity Act would, if enacted, codify a comprehensive market structure framework allocating jurisdiction between the SEC and the CFTC for digital asset markets. While the legislative process is ongoing, and we cannot predict the timing or final form of any legislation, we are encouraged by continued bipartisan engagement on this bill, the MOU previously noted, and we believe that the statutory clarity will further reinforce the foundation on which our strategy is built. Although not during our reporting period, on April 13, the SEC staff also issued guidance that, pursuant to certain guidelines, the providers of user interfaces to crypto services, both centralized and decentralized, may receive transaction-related compensation without being subject to broker-dealer registration. This provides comfort to developers trying to bridge traditional finance and digital assets by creating user-friendly and educational experiences, enabling users to access on-chain finance. I'll add one final note. None of what I've just described changes our underlying strategy, our compliance posture or our disclosure obligations. While we are pleased to see the continued progress toward regulatory clarity and the motivation of lawmakers and regulators to engage with the industry, we have built Forward to operate a public company standard of governance and transparency regardless of the regulatory environment, and we will continue to do so. This concludes our prepared remarks. Before I pass it back to the operator to open up the call for live Q&A, we'd first like to address a few of the questions that have come in via e-mail over the past few weeks. Georgia Quinn: Ryan, to start, can you please share more about the OnRe transaction? Specifically, how was the transaction financed? Can you explain the deployment into the ONyc tokens? And how much was deployed? Can you share any color on the yield Forward is earning, relative to the cost of capital for the deployment? Ryan Navi: Yes, sure. So the OnRe deal has 2 parts. First, Forward completed a minority investment into OnRe's $5 million Series A, which we co-led with RockawayX. Second, we deployed $16 million into ONyc, OnRe's yield-bearing token on Solana. For reference, ONyc provides us non-correlated U.S. dollar-denominated revenue tied to reinsurance. The cash for both investments was funded from $40 million in new evergreen loans with an interest rate of 2%. So if ONyc yields, let's say, 12%, we pick up 10 points of net spread with assets and liabilities well matched. With respect to the expected yield on ONyc, the trailing yield has been roughly 10%, and we think the upper bound is probably in the mid-teens. So for modeling purposes, something around 12% plus or minus, we believe, would be appropriate. And in terms of the overall deal rationale, importantly, we have equity upside in OnRe as it scales, while we are also simultaneously diversifying our revenue at an attractive net yield, which should make both our business and capital structure more durable over time. And for those who are interested, you can refer to our Q for further detail. Georgia Quinn: Okay. Thanks for that, Ryan. And next question is also for you. You mentioned strategic transactions that accelerate SOL per share growth. Can you share your framework for evaluating those opportunities, including potential M&A? And how do you think about balancing accretion versus flexibility? Ryan Navi: Yes, this is a great question. So we evaluate each investment opportunity on a relative value risk-adjusted basis. So depending on the market environment, we may prioritize buying more SOL, buying our stock, minority investments or M&A. On the SOL side, if our MNAV remains dislocated, we will likely continue buying our stock. If our MNAV is closer to 1, we'll be more focused on scaling SOL and potential debt M&A. For non-debt M&A and minority investments, we are looking for opportunities to deploy our balance sheet in high-quality real-world assets on Solana that are above the native SOL staking yield, as Kyle mentioned in the prepared remarks. Additionally, we want to ensure we get equity upside as we use our balance sheet to create our own catalysts and looking to produce win-win outcomes for Forward. OnRe and ONyc are great examples of this. On the accretion versus flexibility part of the question, we've done a great job preserving flexibility to play offense. And now in this dislocated environment, we can take full advantage, which is evidenced by our annualized 44% SOL per in-the-money share accretion this quarter. Even though we are now starting to take on some debt, we are still lowly levered, roughly in the low teens on a percentage basis and retain significant financial flexibility. So spot and MNAV remain extremely dislocated. We will continue to be on the offensive while mitigating less tail risk. Georgia Quinn: Okay. Thank you. So this question is for the team. Could the team speak to the strategic logic behind the March transactions? Specifically, what led the team to prioritize a share repurchase at this moment? And how should investors think about the interplay between the Galaxy facility, the buyback and the cost reduction plan? Ryan Navi: So I'll take the piece on the debt facility and the buyback, and then Mark, maybe you can handle the cost reduction plan. So on the first 2 pieces, given we're SOL and our stock is trading, we decided to pursue non-dilutive financing, and we structured this master loan agreement with Galaxy, which we believe is very attractive for Forward. We will continue to use this as a tool to actively lower our cost of capital, which we believe will further accelerate our compounding of SOL per share. The March share buyback was a direct result of the dislocation of our MNAV at the time of the repurchase. And given stock prices of SOL, we decided to repurchase the stock using the Galaxy facility without selling any of our SOL holdings while still keeping all of our stake in yield. Mark, over to you on the cost reduction. Brazier Christopher: Yes. Thanks, Ryan. So on the $2.4 million reduction from our $7.2 million in Q1 to our run rate quarterly target of $4.8 million, it's really driven by several sort of distinct and largely permanent changes to our cost structure. As I mentioned earlier, the largest driver to this is renegotiated services agreement with Galaxy, which significantly reduced the fees we paid for their accounting and operational support. We've also materially reduced outside legal and marketing spend, and we've rightsized our third-party vendor and technology costs, and we've implemented a leaner organizational structure overall, I suppose. We do believe the new targeted run rate is both durable and sustainable. But having said that, it is important to note that we do have some variable cost elements to our OpEx, primarily the asset management fee that we pay to Galaxy that is tied to a percentage of our AUM. It's probably also important to note that the cost reduction initiatives that we put in place are structural reductions, not onetime cuts or deferrals. Currently, we have no major reinvestment requirements that would cause these costs to increase on a go-forward basis. And in fact, as our revenue grows with our stake in yield revenue, particularly, we expect operating leverage to improve further, meaning the absolute cost base would hold steady even as our top line expands. So I suppose it's important to reiterate, we will not cut costs where it matters strategically, but we are committed to running a lean, disciplined and fiscally conservative operation that compounds value for shareholders. And I believe the target run rate that we've forecast reflects that philosophy and practice. Georgia Quinn: Okay. Thanks, guys. And Ryan, this last one is for you. Given the current discount to NAV, how should shareholders think about future capital allocation between share repurchases, SOL accumulation and strategic deployment on chain? Ryan Navi: Yes. So for stock for SOL purchases, we're always looking for ways to drive greater SOL per share, and that's on a risk-adjusted basis. Future capital deployment is highly market environment-dependent. But at a high level, we will continue to capitalize on major dislocations of our stock via those share repurchases. But as our MNAV normalizes, we do expect to focus more of our attention back to SOL accumulation. So it is worth noting, we do not view the stock buyback and SOL accumulation as mutually exclusive. As for strategic deployment on chain, not all DeFi is created equal, and we're selective about deployment on chain. We believe in using on-chain rails for superior cost and time performance, but also carefully consider various risks, namely smart contract risk. Notably, tokenized real-world assets pose an interesting opportunity set for us. Unlike truly decentralized digital assets, tokenized RWAs carry an important structural protection. In the event of a smart contract exploit, an issuer can remedy the situation through a burn and remit process. That's a meaningful distinction in our opinion that reduces the risk profile. Tokens like ONyc have a durable option yield source and provide noncorrelated U.S. dollar-denominated yield, which we believe will be a big growth vector for both us and the Solana ecosystem as a whole. Georgia Quinn: Okay. Thank you. That concludes our pre-submitted questions. Now I'd like to pass it over to the operator to open up the call for live Q&A. Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our first question today is coming from Fedor Shabalin from B. Riley Securities. Fedor Shabalin: My first question is about Solana accumulation -- tuck-in accumulation. You emphasized SOL per share accretion as a North Star metric. But can you walk us through your current framework for incremental SOL acquisition beyond taking rewards? I know you already touched on buybacks partially, but I just want to figure out the trajectory going forward in the near term. Ryan Navi: Sure. So in general, again, if our MNAV is significantly below 1x, we do view the buyback as a relatively low risk-adjusted way for us to drive meaningful SOL per share accretion. I think there are also novel ways for us to start accumulating Solana through the use of derivatives, other mechanisms as well, potentially buying [ lock-SOL ] at a discount, all of which we're always exploring. I think the ONyc token is also an interesting example to kind of give you the framework. If we can get our overall dollar-denominated revenue base sufficiently high to offset all of our cash costs, inclusive of interest expense, personnel, et cetera, then we actually have a very strong resilient base for us to further compound SOL per share, agnostic of SOL price. So I kind of think about that as like the baseline layer, which OnRe and ONyc is the first step in that direction. But I think the rest in terms of SOL versus the stock buyback, it's always going to be a relative value equation. Again, it's not mutually exclusive between one or the other. And candidly, the stock repurchase obviously has some limitations in terms of our percent of daily trading volume. So as we start to exit this bear market, most likely entering into a new bull market in the coming quarters, we will likely look to SOL accumulation as the main instrument to express that view. I'm not sure if I totally answered your question, feel free to follow up. Fedor Shabalin: No, that's clear. And a quick follow-up on -- so quarter-to-date, Solana is up. And the question is, has the high collateral value on fwdSOL -- has it created any incremental capacity under the Galaxy facility? And are there any conditions under which you would expand the draw? Ryan Navi: Yes. So there are definitely provisions in there, without giving specific metrics, that may or may not be publicly available, where if the value of the collateral gets sufficiently high, we have the ability to take some collateral back to maintain specific LTV ratios. With that said, yes, it does increase our borrowing capacity, full stop, on a dollar basis. And we would look to utilize based on the opportunity set that is presented to us. But yes, long-winded answer is saying, as Solana price goes up, our borrowing capacity increases commensurately. And again, we're actively working on optimizing our weighted average cost of capital. And just given where Solana is and where our stock is, we still think nondilutive forms of financing, especially at this interest rate at 2% plus, make a ton of sense for us. I think once Solana and our stock and NAV recovers, we'd look to do more of the traditional convertible debt. Convertible debt potentially press down-the-road issuances. But at this current time, you are correct. This is our main tool. Operator: Our next question today is coming from Devin Ryan from Citizens Bank. Neo Eloff: This is Neo Eloff on for Devin Ryan. My first question is on agentic AI in the blockchain space and how this will ramp up activity. I guess I would love to hear your guys' thoughts on the topic and how you expect this to evolve in kind of the coming months, whether through trading, payments or lending. And then if you could touch on how you think SOL is well positioned here maybe relative to some of the other blockchains? Pyahm Samani: Yes. Kyle here. Happy to chime in on this one. So I think the first part of the question is kind of just like broadly, how do we think about agentic payments? And then secondly, kind of how Solana is positioned for that. So let's touch on the first part first here. The opportunity for agents is like, I think, quite exciting, more in the domain of payments than trading, not to say that it's bad for trading, but like there's already obviously lots of programmatic trading in the world, right? Market makers, HFT, all that stuff. Today, all of that stuff lives on Solana in a pretty real way. The Solana blockchain today is the most liquid and highest volume place you can trade, for example, the SOL-USD pair as well as now Bitcoin and [ Eth ] are now actually more liquid on Solana blockchain than they are in, for example, Binance or Coinbase. That only happened as of the last few weeks. The reason that's happening is because of kind of this new innovation called Prop AMMs that basically allow market makers to quote tighter in more interesting ways. The agentic part of all of that is actually going to be a little bit upstream, which is basically you can now use AI agents to actually build these Prop AMMs. And I can actually say I'm doing that from firsthand experience. It's actually publicly documented on Twitter that I am now running a Pop AMM on chain. And I've been doing that. What's really cool is I'm not -- I couldn't have built something like that before. So the big unlock for Prop AMM -- excuse me, for agentic trading is actually making it easier for people like myself to actually trade natively on chain. And I've been doing it now for probably 6 weeks or so. And I can tell you the tools are phenomenal. They work really well, and I can quote really effectively on chain. There's actually a new start-up building on Solana called [ Hadron ] Finance that is working to take these ideas and make this accessible to truly everybody. So that's kind of the trading side of things. The stuff happening there is really cool. The payment side of things is probably more high profile and probably more interesting for the long-term story. And I think kind of the right way to think about that is in 2 major buckets. One is imagine you're talking to your AI agent, think ChatGPT, Claude, whatever, and you want to buy something. Being able to do that payment instantly for effectively 0 cost is quite compelling. There's an open standard called x402 written by Coinbase as well as another one called MPP written by Visa, both of which are live on the Solana blockchain today. And there's a ton of developers now building on top of those open protocols. I expect to see the usage of that start to really ramp up in the back half of this year as the kind of major consumer applications start to adopt this stuff. The other real use case for agentic payments is kind of like think of large-scale micro payments. And I think this is particularly compelling, given the rise of agentic coding. Today, if you're using Claude or Codex to build a new application, you can ask it to go and spin up some service, whether it's MongoDB or Supabase or Twilio or whatever, implementing all of those using agentic micro payments for basically -- which you use, a type of billing models. Usage-based billing models is a really compelling story for both the developers as well as for the merchants because the merchants get paid in real time. Again, I think this is going to really take off in the back half of this year as the model providers start to incorporate the stuff. So we're really excited about the growth of all of this. That's, I think, the first part of the question. Second part of the question then is really basically how is Solana positioned. And I think here, really unequivocally, Solana is in the best position of all the major chains. What agentic payments fundamentally need is they need high throughput, globally available, cheap, fast transactions. Today, Solana wins on basically all of those fronts. And also the last one is on and off-ramps. And this is actually probably the one that people don't appreciate who look at this, but it's actually maybe the most important. What I mean by on and off-ramps is, today, if you are Cloudflare, if you are Amazon, if you are any of these companies who want to start implementing a lot of these ideas, it's not enough that, like, there is a stablecoin on chain. You need to know that as that stablecoin gets moved around from user to user to user, that those people can on and off-ramp that stablecoin quickly and easily, irrespective of which jurisdiction they are in. And so what's so powerful on Solana is, today, Solana integrates with every major on and off-ramp in the world, every major custodian, every major wallet, every major market maker. And so it effectively guarantees you're going to have the most liquidity to get those stablecoins on and off chain or to move them wherever else you might need to move them beyond the straight performance stuff. I think you can see the early signs of Solana winning this today with the adoption of their -- with x402 on Solana as well as MPP. There's some good dashboards out there that show this data, although it is still pretty early. Neo Eloff: Then if I could ask one more question on just kind of asset allocation. As you think about upcoming quarters, is there a long-term target rate you're looking at for, say, native SOL staking versus Forward SOL staking versus kind of other initiatives you're looking at? Ryan Navi: Sure. This is Ryan. I'll take that. So currently, our Forward SOL is roughly 25% of our total holdings today. I would expect that to increase over time as we functionally use our liquid-staking token as probably the most efficient form of collateral. So there isn't like a set number target percentage-wise, but I would expect that number to increase over time as we utilize and deploy. And was there a second part of your question, sorry? Neo Eloff: No, no, no. It was just, I guess, native SOL versus Forward versus kind of like other initiatives. Ryan Navi: Yes. So I mean, the way that our framework roughly is, we have the $7 million of Solana which, again, we're extremely convicted and bullish on for all the reasons that Kyle just mentioned. It generates a 7% native staking yield, which is kind of like the engine and kind of our baseline IRR for the business. So with deals like OnRe and ONyc, we're actively layering on things that are above that native staking rate of return. So in this case, let's say, 12%. And because we're able to borrow against our LST at such attractive terms, it's extremely accretive for our business. And because we're borrowing dollars and deploying in also USD-denominated cash flows, our assets and liabilities are a lot better matched. So to just walk through an example, if we post $1 of collateral of fwdSOL, earning 7%, let's hold prices constant, and we're borrowing, let's say, $0.50 on the $1, just to keep the math simple, or paying 2%, we're actually only paying $1 of interest expense there, and we're still earning the $7 of SOL staking rewards. So our net on the total collateral package is still $6. So it is a small hit to our all-in yield on our assets, but we now have $0.50 of collateral that's unencumbered dollars that we can deploy as we wish. And in the example of ONyc, if it's 12%, we're picking up 10 percentage points of spread on that $0.50. So it's actually $5 on top of the $7, we're actually able to increase that up to $12 and it's done in a thoughtful asset liability match way that does not increase our left tail. So again, we don't have specific percentages, but we are actively diversifying and looking to increase our diversification into real-world assets on the Solana ecosystem. Operator: Your next question today is coming from Sam Dufault from Oak Ridge Financial. Sam Dufault: Kind of going off to OnRe, I was wondering if you guys were able to maybe list any specific companies currently facing risk with OnRe and maybe how big that underwriting book is today to generate that 10% spread that was just mentioned? Ryan Navi: Yes. I don't know if we're at liberty to discuss specific counterparties on OnRe's behalf. But what I can tell you that is publicly available is that their ONyc token, post our deal announcement, has now increased to almost $175 million of public float. At the time of our deal, the pro forma amount was $150 million. So in just a week, already showing 10% growth in the total flow, which is great. So glad to see that we were right in our analysis that we could at least start to create our own catalyst with the OnRe equity platform. Specifically, I think they're accessing the same traditional reinsurance providers that you may or may not have heard of. But again, I don't think it's appropriate to necessarily go into their counterparties since it's their information to share. Sam Dufault: Yes. No, that's totally understandable. And then just on the non-debt M&A, any other opportunities in the pipeline that you guys see opportunistically to kind of gain SOL per share going forward? Ryan Navi: So I think from a non-debt M&A perspective or minority investment perspective, again, we're always looking at all available companies and opportunities. I would say more RWAs, that could be reinsurance, that could be royalties, that could be asset-backed finance, the list goes on, the premise though is looking for these opportunities where we can do the following. We can use our balance sheet as a tool to create a catalyst for the company that we are actively investing in, both as an equity partner and as an LP effective investor. So again, just to reiterate on OnRe, we have upside on equity with OnRe via our Series A investment, but then we also effectively [ LP'd ] into their ONyc token or provide liquidity to their ONyc token, which achieves our stated objective of earning above-the-native staking yield. And again, because we're borrowing dollars at 2%, highly accretive, extremely attractive for us and actually makes the business more durable while also increasing our U.S. dollar cash flow. Sam Dufault: Great. And then on one of the slides, it mentioned 44% annualized growth rate on that SOL per share. Are you guys able to break out how much of that was based off of the buybacks or the -- on the M&A strategies at all? Ryan Navi: Maybe Mark can provide the specific numbers, but I can tell you the vast majority of that is going to be driven from the March share repurchase transaction that we publicly announced. So I would say the lion's share is definitely going to be from share repurchases this quarter. Brazier Christopher: Yes. It's -- like Ryan said, the lion's share is going to be share repurchases, not just the share transaction in March, but also our programmatic share repurchases that we've been doing over the course of the last couple of months. So that's going to be the lion's share of it. Sam Dufault: Great. And then just one quick clarification question. I saw that some of the Galaxy third-party-related expenses are being reduced going forward. Are there specific material relationships between the 2 firms that are maybe ending? Or is the relationship going on as similar quarters, just the reduced expenses? Brazier Christopher: Yes. So we have a services agreement with Galaxy that is going to come to an end in June, and that's for certain operational resources that they've been providing to Forward, namely sort of financial and accounting services. And then the other relationship we have with them is them as our asset manager servicer. So we have an asset management agreement with them that will continue. That's a long-term agreement. And like I said, that is a variable cost within our SG&A that's -- the fees are based on a percentage of our AUM. So those are the 2 material relationships we have with Galaxy. Operator: We reached the end of our question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the floor back over to Kyle for any further or closing comments. Pyahm Samani: All right. Well, everyone, thank you so much for joining us for our Q1 (sic) [ Q2 ] 2026 earnings call. The company is doing phenomenal, getting everything in line after the PIPE transaction last year, delivering great SOL per share results and starting to make strategic acquisitions and investments, as Ryan and Mark talked about. Thank you all for your time, and we'll talk to you soon. Operator: Thank you. That does conclude today's teleconference and webcast. You may disconnect your line at this time, and have a wonderful day. We thank you for your participation today. Before you buy stock in Forward Industries, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Forward Industries wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $472,205!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,384,459!* Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 999% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 208% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of May 15, 2026. This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability. The Motley Fool recommends Forward Industries. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Forward (FWDI) Q2 2026 Earnings Transcript was originally published by The Motley Fool