WULF vs MARA vs RIOT vs CLSK vs CIFR

For growth investors, TeraWulf Inc.

(WULF) is the stronger pick with 102. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 38. 2% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. (MARA). CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK) offers the better valuation at 12. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) a "Buy" — based on 12 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.

Over the past 5 years, TeraWulf Inc.

(WULF) delivered a total return of +185. 8%, compared to -63. 8% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. (MARA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RIOT returned +778. 2% versus CLSK's -83. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc.

(MARA) is the lower-risk stock at 3. 11β versus Cipher Mining Inc. 's 3. 87β — meaning CIFR is approximately 25% more volatile than MARA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Riot Platforms, Inc. (RIOT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 3% for Cipher Mining Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), TeraWulf Inc.

(WULF) is pulling ahead at 102. 3% versus 38. 2% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. (MARA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CleanSpark, Inc. grew EPS 262. 3% year-over-year, compared to -1435. 7% for Cipher Mining Inc.. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

CleanSpark, Inc.

(CLSK) is the more profitable company, earning 47. 6% net margin versus -367. 2% for Cipher Mining Inc. — meaning it keeps 47. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLSK leads at 41. 6% versus -90. 6% for MARA. 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.

In this comparison, CLSK (0.

3% yield) pays a dividend. WULF, MARA, RIOT, CIFR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Riot Platforms, Inc.

(RIOT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+778. 2% 10Y return). CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK) carries a higher beta of 3. 39 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RIOT: +778. 2%, CLSK: -83. 8%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (WULF (Financial Services) and MARA (Financial Services) and RIOT (Financial Services) and CLSK (Technology) and CIFR (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.