Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) vs TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | WULF | 102.3% revenue growth vs CLSKW's 102.2% |
| Quality / Margins | CLSKW | 47.6% net margin vs WULF's -51.7% |
| Stability / Safety | CLSKW | Beta 2.34 vs WULF's 2.58, lower leverage |
| Dividends | CLSKW | 10.8% yield; 3-year raise streak; WULF pays no meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | WULF | +287.1% vs CLSKW's -34.4% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | CLSKW | -7.8% ROA vs WULF's -23.0%, ROIC 9.9% vs -10.6% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
CleanSpark is a Bitcoin mining company that operates data centers primarily powered by low-carbon energy sources. It generates revenue almost entirely from Bitcoin mining rewards and transaction fees — earning newly minted Bitcoin through its computing power contribution to the network. The company's key advantage is its focus on sustainable energy sources and strategic location in low-cost power regions, which gives it a cost edge in the energy-intensive mining process.
TeraWulf is a bitcoin mining company that develops, owns, and operates large-scale mining facilities in the United States. It generates revenue primarily from bitcoin mining rewards — converting electricity into digital assets — with additional income from hosting services for other miners. The company's competitive advantage lies in its access to low-cost, sustainable energy sources — particularly nuclear and hydroelectric power — which gives it superior mining economics.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
CLSKW leads in 4 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Valuation Metrics). WULF leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
CLSKW is the larger business by revenue, generating $766M annually — 5.5x WULF's $140M. CLSKW is the more profitable business, keeping 47.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to WULF's -51.7%.
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $766M | $140M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $117M | -$72M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$261M | -$564M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$627M | -$677M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.2% | +55.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +41.6% | -54.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +47.6% | -51.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -79.0% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.6% | -17.7% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $89M | $7.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $870M | $7.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.28x | -77.24x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 1.30x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.12x | 50.87x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.05x | 23.31x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CLSKW delivers a -18.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-19 in annual profit, vs $-2 for WULF. CLSKW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.38x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WULF's 2.01x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CLSKW scores 4/9 vs WULF's 3/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -18.9% | -2.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.8% | -23.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.9% | -10.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.7% | -15.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.38x | 2.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $781M | $217M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $43M | $274M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $824M | $491M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 25.88x | -27.06x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in CLSKW five years ago would be worth $56,818 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $21,413 for WULF. Over the past 12 months, WULF leads with a +287.1% total return vs CLSKW's -34.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WULF at 193.7% vs CLSKW's 78.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -15.8% | +27.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -34.4% | +287.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +468.2% | +2434.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +468.2% | +114.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +468.2% | +77.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +78.4% | +193.7% |
Risk & Volatility
CLSKW is the less volatile stock with a 2.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WULF's 2.58 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WULF currently trades 87.6% from its 52-week high vs CLSKW's 30.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.34x | 2.58x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.02 | $18.51 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.15 | $2.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +30.6% | +87.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.7 | 64.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 154K | 24.9M |
Analyst Outlook
CLSKW is the only dividend payer here at 10.82% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | CLSKWCleanSpark, Inc. | WULFTeraWulf Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $22.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +10.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.03 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +100.0% | +1.7% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Nov 24 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) | 100 | 439.82 | +339.8% |
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | 100 | 219.95 | +119.9% |
CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) returned +468% over 5 years vs TeraWulf Inc. (WULF)'s +114%. A $10,000 investment in CLSKW 5 years ago would be worth $56,818 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) | $82031.00 | $766M | +934076.1% |
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | $18M | $140M | +697.1% |
CleanSpark, Inc.'s revenue grew from $0M (2016) to $766M (2025) — a 176.2% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) | -31.0% | 47.6% | +253.6% |
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | -0.4% | -51.7% | -13863.9% |
CleanSpark, Inc.'s net margin went from -31% (2016) to 48% (2025).
Chart 4EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) | -1.13 | 1.12 | +199.1% |
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | -0.03 | -0.21 | -552.2% |
CleanSpark, Inc.'s EPS grew from $-1.13 (2016) to $1.12 (2025).
Chart 5Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
CleanSpark, Inc. generated $-606M FCF in 2025 (-140% vs 2021). TeraWulf Inc. generated $-292M FCF in 2024 (-120% vs 2021).
CLSKW vs WULF: Frequently Asked Questions
7 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CLSKW or WULF a better buy right now?
CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) offers the better valuation at 0.3x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) a "Buy" — based on 11 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — CLSKW or WULF?
Over the past 5 years, CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) delivered a total return of +468.2%, compared to +114.1% for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF). A $10,000 investment in CLSKW five years ago would be worth approximately $57K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLSKW returned +468.2% versus WULF's +77.6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — CLSKW or WULF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) is the lower-risk stock at 2.34β versus TeraWulf Inc.'s 2.58β — meaning WULF is approximately 10% more volatile than CLSKW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 38% versus 2% for TeraWulf Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which has better profit margins — CLSKW or WULF?
CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) is the more profitable company, earning 47.6% net margin versus -51.7% for TeraWulf Inc. — meaning it keeps 47.6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLSKW leads at 41.6% versus -54.4% for WULF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WULF leads at 55.3%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
05Which pays a better dividend — CLSKW or WULF?
In this comparison, CLSKW (10.8% yield) pays a dividend. WULF does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
06Is CLSKW or WULF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (10.8% yield, +468.2% 10Y return). TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) carries a higher beta of 2.58 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLSKW: +468.2%, WULF: +77.6%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
07What are the main differences between CLSKW and WULF?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. In terms of investment character: CLSKW is a small-cap deep-value stock; WULF is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CLSKW pays a dividend while WULF does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.