Nancy

$DGXX: Balanced Look at the AI Infrastructure Shift. • Company Overview Digi Power X is executing its shift from crypto mining to AI infrastructure. The strategy focuses on modular ARMS 200 systems for colocation and GPU-as-a-Service (GPUaaS). • Financial Position FY2025 results show a planned revenue decline during the pivot. The company reported a GAAP net loss, largely from non-cash items, and a modestly negative Adjusted EBITDA. The company ended the year with significant liquidity, including cash reserves and digital currency holdings, along with zero debt. This position provides flexibility to support the early phase of its AI infrastructure plans. • Operational Progress The company is transitioning from planning to initial revenue in the near term. At the Alabama site, the first ARMS 200 unit is in commissioning. Management has set a goal of bringing 10 MW of GPU capacity online by Q3 2026 and indicated potential annualized revenue per MW based on current market pricing and assumed high utilization. DGXX also maintains an approved power pipeline across multiple sites. • Key Risks to Consider Execution is a major challenge: testing, cooling, uptime for enterprise clients, and operational scaling remain significant hurdles. No definitive colocation contracts are finalized, only non-binding LOIs and ongoing negotiations. The AI data center sector is highly competitive and dominated by much larger players. Revenue projections depend on optimistic assumptions around pricing and utilization. My take...🤔 DGXX has strengthened its liquidity and is advancing its modular AI plans, marking a clear evolution from its legacy mining business. However, it carries notable execution risks and volatility typical of early-stage transitions. DYOR. NFA. Just something new not hyped yet 😉 #stockmarket #investing #finance

Yesterday I posted 6 things I needed to see from $RZLV earnings. The CEO, @realDanWagner replied "think I hit all your milestones." Let's check the tape: THE HEADLINE NUMBERS - GAAP Revenue: $46.8M (guided $40M+ — beat by 17%) - H2 Revenue: $40.5M vs H1 $6.3M — 543% sequential growth -December MRR: $19.4M = $232M annualized run rate Gross Margin: 66% blended, 90%+ core software - Net Loss: $101.4M (vs $173.5M in 2024 — improved 41.5%) - EPS: -$0.38 (vs -$1.06 prior year — improved 64%) - Cash: $111.1M (vs $9.7M a year ago) - 2026 Guidance: RAISED to $360M revenue (from $350M) - ARR Exit Target 2026: $500M+ reiterated Now let me score this against my checklist: 1- Audited GAAP Revenue — DELIVERED ✅ I asked for the $40M+ guide to be confirmed. They delivered $46.8M with the 20-F filed with the SEC today. The H2 acceleration is real — $40.5M in H2 vs $6.3M in H1. December alone was $19.4M. That's not guidance anymore, that's audited GAAP revenue in an SEC filing. 2- Audit Opinion — PENDING ⚠️ The 20-F is being filed today. I need to read the auditor's report in the full filing for any qualifications, going-concern language, or material weakness disclosures. The press release doesn't address this. I'll update once I've reviewed. 3- Cash Position Post-Reward — STRONG ✅ This was a major concern. They ended 2025 with $111.1M cash (up from $9.7M). But note: this is BEFORE the $230M Reward acquisition which closed Feb 2026. They also raised $250M in January. So the math: ~$111M + $250M raised - $230M Reward = roughly $131M entering post-Reward. Management explicitly stated "zero requirement for additional operational equity." That's a direct answer to my dilution concern. 4- ARR-to-GAAP Conversion — PARTIALLY ADDRESSED ⚠️ The gap has narrowed but remains. $232M ARR vs $46.8M GAAP still shows the majority of contracted revenue hasn't been recognized under ASC 606. However, the trajectory is clear: $19.4M December MRR means they were already recognizing revenue at a $232M annual pace by year-end. The definitions page confirms the $232M contracted revenue figure is based on annualizing December's actual revenue. That's more credible than prior ARR claims. 5-Related-Party Disclosures — IN THE 20-F ⚠️ The income statement shows related-party transactions embedded in both sales/marketing ($1.8M + $1.0M) and G&A ($8.1M + $68.4M). That's $79.3M in total related-party costs disclosed on the face of the P&L. I need to read Note 14 in the full 20-F for the breakdown. This remains the area requiring the most scrutiny. 6- Organic vs Acquired — NOT BROKEN OUT ❌ The CEO letter explicitly calls this a "Roll-Up strategy" and names GroupBy, Crownpeak, and Reward as the drivers. The annual report doesn't provide an organic vs. acquired revenue split. This is still a gap. BALANCE SHEET DEEP DIVE What caught my eye: • Total assets: $611.7M (vs $21.2M prior year) — acquisitions transformed the entity • Goodwill: $168.4M (didn't exist last year) — all from acquisitions • Intangibles: $239.2M (vs $6.8M) — acquired IP and customer relationships • Deferred revenue: $46.5M (vs $1.2M) — this is bullish, it's cash collected but not yet recognized as revenue • Short-term debt: $102.1M (new) — includes Crownpeak acquisition debt of $151.9M taken on • Accounts receivable: $39.2M (vs $0.7M) — real clients owe real money • Total liabilities: $364.9M vs equity of $246.8M WHAT'S ACTUALLY NEW AND BULLISH • $46.5M deferred revenue is the single most underappreciated line item. That's cash from clients sitting on the balance sheet waiting to be recognized. It's a forward revenue indicator. • Operating loss improved 37% despite massive scaling — operating leverage is emerging • Net loss: only $34.2M was actual cash burn; the rest was non-cash items (impairments, share-based comp, extinguishment losses) • Raised 2026 guidance to $360M (from $350M) — they're getting more confident, not less • Earnings call held today at 8:30am ET — they did exactly what I asked for WHAT STILL CONCERNS ME • $63.3M impairment loss — on what? Need the 20-F footnotes • $30M loss on debt extinguishment — expensive refinancing • $102M short-term debt — needs servicing or refinancing in 2026 • Related-party transactions totaling ~$79M still embedded in operating costs • No organic/acquired revenue breakdown provided • Cash burn from operations was $63.1M — they need the December run-rate to sustain this without more capital MY UPDATED SCORECARD: ✅ GAAP revenue beat — $46.8M vs $40M guide ✅ Cash position solid entering 2026 ✅ H2 acceleration validated the hockey stick ✅ No equity dilution pledge for operations ✅ Earnings call held with Q&A ✅ 2026 guidance raised ⚠️ Audit opinion — awaiting full 20-F review ⚠️ Related-party details — need footnotes ❌ Organic vs acquired split — still missing BOTTOM LINE: The narrative just got significantly harder to dismiss. $46.8M in audited GAAP revenue with a $19.4M December run-rate and $46.5M in deferred revenue is not a story anymore — it's a business generating real, recognizable cash flows. At a ~$1.1B market cap with $360M 2026 guidance, you're looking at roughly 3x forward revenue IF they execute. The bear case isn't dead — the related-party transactions, debt load, and acquisition dependency remain real risks. But the goalposts I set yesterday? Most of them were met or exceeded. I'm reading the full 20-F tonight. If the audit is clean and the footnotes don't reveal surprises, this stock has a credibility problem — but it's the market's credibility problem, not the company's. Still long. More convicted than this morning. $RZLV @realDanWagner @RezolveAi

🧵1/2 $RZLV — I said I'd read the 20-F and listen to the earnings call. I did both. Here's my full concerns audit. For context: I've been publicly tracking $RZLV for months, posted detailed concerns, engaged directly with @realDanWagner, set specific goalposts before earnings, and now I'm scoring every open item against the actual SEC filing and yesterday's call. Let's go concern by concern. 1- GAAP REVENUE CREDIBILITY "Concern: Was the $40M+ guidance real?" ✅ RESOLVED. $46.8M GAAP revenue filed in the 20-F with the SEC. H2 delivered $40.5M vs H1's $6.3M. December alone: $19.4M. this is in the audited financials, not a press release metric. Beat guidance by 17%. On the call, Dan confirmed: "$19.4M December MRR is actually in our 20-F. This is an audited number." The biggest concern from my original analysis is now backed by an SEC filing. This one is closed. 2- AUDIT OPINION & GOING CONCERN "Concern: Clean audit or qualifications?" FLAGGED. The 20-F contains BOTH a going concern disclosure AND material weaknesses in internal controls. Here's what I found: Going Concern: The filing states "certain conditions and events raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern." HOWEVER, management then states the $250M January raise plus existing cash "provides sufficient runway for at least the next twelve months" and believes this alleviates the doubt. Material Weaknesses: Management identified four specific weaknesses: • No formal consolidation system (now implementing ERP) • Insufficient review of subsidiary financial reporting • Inadequate segregation of duties in accounting • Weak controls over business combinations, asset management, tax, and close process Critically, management states: "Notwithstanding the identified material weaknesses, the combined consolidated financial statements fairly present, in all material respects, the Company's financial position." My take: Going concern language with $111M cash + $250M just raised is standard for high growth companies burning cash. The material weaknesses are more concerning . They're admitting their internal controls weren't adequate during a year of rapid acquisitions. They're remediating (ERP system, new finance teams from Crownpeak/Reward), but these won't be resolved until controls operate effectively for a "sufficient period." This is a yellow flag, not a red flag, but it means the numbers could be subject to future revision. 3-ORGANIC VS ACQUIRED REVENUE "Concern: How much growth is real vs bought?" ✅ ADDRESSED ON CALL. Dan provided the clearest breakdown yet: • GroupBy: $18M ARR contribution • Crownpeak: ~$70M ARR (acquired December 2025) • Combined acquisitions: ~$90M of the $232M ARR exit • Remaining ~$142M: organic and partnerships He explicitly said: "The $360M does not include new acquisitions." This is the first time we've gotten this level of granularity. Two thirds organic/partnership vs one third acquired is a much healthier mix than bears assumed. 4-RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS / DBLP SEA COW "Concern: $93.9M flowing to CEO's Seychelles entity" PARTIALLY ADDRESSED. The 20-F confirms: • DBLP Sea Cow Ltd is wholly legally owned by Daniel Wagner • The Bluedot Acquisition from DBLP is disclosed as a related party transaction (819,736 shares issued) • In 2025, the company settled $6M in debt to DBLP ($5M cash + 0.8M shares) • There's a rolling consultancy agreement with DBLP paying $20K $50K/month since 2016 • P&L shows ~$79.3M in total related-party costs across sales/marketing and G&A • Share based compensation to related parties: $5.325M in 2025 (down massively from $63M in 2024) The Reward acquisition specifically: Wagner was previously a director of Reward but resigned before the deal and held no shares. The 20-F states it "did not constitute a related party transaction." My take: The related party costs dropped dramatically YoY ($5.3M vs $63M), which is a major improvement. The DBLP consultancy agreement is still active but small. The Bluedot deal remains questionable in principle but immaterial in dollar terms relative to the current scale. This concern has significantly diminished but isn't fully closed the rolling DBLP consultancy needs to end as the company institutionalizes. 5- GOVERNANCE & HEADCOUNT "Concern: 61 employees, dual Chairman/CEO, golden share" ✅ ADDRESSED. On the call, Dan stated: "We now operate out of 32 offices globally with a world-class team of over 1,000 employees." The annual report names executives from Microsoft, Google, Visa, Accenture, Tata Digital, and Deutsche Telekom.

A lot of people look at $CLSK and see a bitcoin miner trying to figure out AI. That's the wrong lens. CEO @smatthewschultz, Matt Schultz is building something structurally different — 1,809 MW of scarce power, zero ATM dilution, $2B+ liquidity, and conversations with trillion-dollar balance sheet tenants. While others race to sign deals and dilute 60-100% to fund them, Schultz said it best: 'Dilution is not a strategy, discipline is.' The market is pricing CLSK like it has no AI future. I think it's pricing in the wrong timeline. Be patient with $CLSK. The reward will be huge.