Not all Bitcoin miners are created equal when it comes to the AI pivot. Bernstein analyst Gautam Chhugani is making that case in stark numerical terms, pegging Core Scientific’s return on assets from its AI operations at 75%, while TeraWulf sits at 5% and Cipher Mining trails at 4%.

The numbers behind Core Scientific’s advantage

The 75% ROA figure for Core Scientific comes down to one thing: its hosting agreement with CoreWeave, the AI cloud computing firm that has become one of the most sought-after infrastructure partners in the space. That deal is reportedly valued at approximately $6.7 billion, a contract size that most Bitcoin miners can only dream about.

Core Scientific emerged from bankruptcy in early 2024 with infrastructure already in place, meaning it didn’t need to spend billions on new construction to start hosting AI workloads. That capex advantage is the entire ballgame.

TeraWulf and Cipher Mining, by contrast, are taking what Bernstein describes as a “power landlord” approach. They control significant power capacity and can lease it to AI tenants, but they haven’t locked in the kind of hosting arrangement that Core Scientific secured with CoreWeave. The result is stabilized ROAs of 5% and 4%, respectively.

Bernstein raised Core Scientific’s price target to $32 from $24 in June 2026, maintaining an Outperform rating.

Why Bitcoin miners became AI landlords

Bitcoin miners collectively control more than 27 gigawatts of planned power capacity. When AI training and inference workloads started demanding enormous amounts of power and cooling infrastructure, Bitcoin miners found themselves sitting on exactly what hyperscalers needed: land, power purchase agreements, cooling systems, and permitting.

Core Scientific’s early mover advantage with CoreWeave gave it a locked-in, long-duration contract at favorable terms. The company was able to repurpose existing data center infrastructure for AI workloads without the massive capital outlays that a greenfield build would require. That’s the “capex-advantaged” part of Bernstein’s outlier designation.

What the ROA gap means for investors

Core Scientific’s deal with CoreWeave is, by definition, hard to replicate. The terms Core Scientific locked in may not be available to latecomers, making the 75% ROA less of a benchmark for the sector and more of a ceiling that no one else is likely to reach anytime soon.

For TeraWulf and Cipher Mining, the power landlord model still has merit. A 4–5% stabilized ROA on massive infrastructure assets isn’t bad in absolute terms, particularly for investors looking for steady, lower-risk exposure to the AI buildout. But the growth story is fundamentally different from Core Scientific’s.

CoreWeave itself has faced scrutiny over its debt levels and capital intensity, which adds a layer of counterparty risk to Core Scientific’s contract. For crypto-native investors, the key takeaway from Bernstein’s analysis is that contract quality, capex timing, counterparty strength, and power cost structures all matter enormously. A 75% ROA and a 4% ROA can coexist in the same sector, and knowing which one you’re buying into makes all the difference.