Hut 8 [HUT]
As of: 2026-07-29 · Spot: $88.165 (2026-07-29 close) · Framework: v1.5.1 / criteria.md 2026-07-29
This memo issues no position verdict — no Long, Short, Watchlist or Avoid. It scores Criteria and outputs an analysis. Whether this analysis justifies a position is a question about a particular book, and the book decides. What follows are the constraints any position would face, not a recommendation.
| Value | |
|---|---|
| Shares traded 2026-07-29 | 393,674 |
| Dollar volume | $34.71m |
| Verdict | PASS — the second-most liquid name in the cluster |
2026-07-29 was a high-volume down day across the entire complex, so this figure is generous relative to a
normal session. Liquidity constrains position sizing, never admission (criteria.md).
No options chain was pulled for HUT. Liquidity Criteria is explicit: "Any proposed options structure requires the actual chain pulled first — open interest and quoted size for the specific strikes and expiry… A vehicle that cannot be filled is not a vehicle." The HCA precedent (maximum open interest of 18 contracts across an entire March-2027 chain) is why this is a hard rule rather than a preference.
Accordingly no strikes, expiries, Greeks or structures are proposed. Doing so without the chain would
manufacture an uninvestable vehicle. Pulling the HUT chain from
data.alpaca.markets/v1beta1/options/snapshots is a prerequisite to any options expression.
Common stock only, until a chain is pulled and open interest and quoted size are verified at specific strikes.
criteria.md names inverse-volatility sizing as the active protection on the Downside Criteria, "because a
fat-left-tail name is almost always a high-volatility name and is sized down automatically."
| Value | |
|---|---|
| 252-day realised volatility (screen record) | 104.7% (scan_v3 vol_252d_pct) |
| Implication | among the highest in any book; inverse-vol sizing cuts this hard |
| One-day move, 2026-07-29 | −12.8% |
On 2026-07-29 every name in this complex fell together:
| HIVE | HUT | IREN | CORZ | BTDR | WYFI | SHAZ | CRWV | APLD | NBIS | WULF | CIFR | RIOT | MARA | CLSK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −11.1% | −12.8% | −13.5% | −12.4% | −13.1% | −12.7% | −10.9% | −9.6% | −12.7% | −13.7% | −12.8% | −13.3% | −14.0% | −11.6% | −10.8% |
Fifteen names, one factor, a 4.4pp range. Any two positions in this cluster are effectively one position.
This is a book-level exposure and correlation-limit question, not a single-name question, and it must be
resolved by portfolio-book before any HUT position is sized. Treating cluster members as independent names
would breach the correlation limit while appearing diversified.
Confirming observable: the AI/HPC line inside the Compute segment moving materially off ~$3.9m/quarter, and — necessarily — a named AI counterparty with contracted megawatts and disclosed remaining performance obligations appearing in a filing. HUT currently discloses none of those three things.
Refuting observable: a third consecutive quarter of sequential revenue decline (revenue has already gone 88.5 → 71.0), or G&A remaining above revenue (Q1 2026: $81.7m of G&A on $71.0m of revenue). Either confirms that the cost base has been built for a business that has not arrived. Separately, a bitcoin drawdown that widens the gap between the $360.9m miner purchase liability and the $210.8m of pledged bitcoin securing it would be a direct, mechanical impairment.
portfolio-book.