Summary CoinShares Bitcoin Mining ETF offers regulated, actively managed exposure to Bitcoin mining companies, not direct BTC or derivatives. WGMI's performance is highly sensitive to Bitcoin's hashprice, mining difficulty, and energy costs, amplifying BTC's volatility in both directions. Current macro indicators show a slowing hashprice and mixed accumulation among BTC holders, signaling caution for new WGMI purchases. Maintain existing WGMI positions, add only on significant dips, and prioritize miners with strong operational quality until clearer positive signals emerge. Introduction In today's article, we will analyze the CoinShares Bitcoin Mining ( WGMI ) investment vehicle belonging to the category of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) products, which is owned by the digital asset firm CoinShares. This is an actively managed ETF offering direct exposure to the Bitcoin mining sector through listed shares, without investing in Bitcoin spot or derivatives. It was born in 2022 under the Valkyrie brand and, following CoinShares’ acquisition of Valkyrie’s ETF business in March 2024, is marketed today as CoinShares Bitcoin Mining ETF ( WGMI ) on the Nasdaq. The fund maintains a total fee of 0.75% and is designed for anyone looking to capture the “operational” beta of the Bitcoin ecosystem from a regulated, highly liquid vehicle with no custody costs. The fund invests at least 80% of its wealth in companies that derive at least 50% of their revenues or profits from Bitcoin mining or from key services for these miners. Importantly, the vehicle does not invest directly in BTC, either through futures or other vehicles that maintain it. This makes its performance depend on the stock market evolution of companies in the sector, which in turn is highly correlated with the price of Bitcoin, with the difficulty of mining, the energy cost, and the so-called hashprice (income per unit of power). As an active management vehicle, the ETF analyzed does not replicate an index. The fund management team selects and weighs securities within the universe described and can adjust the portfolio based on operational metrics (installed capacity in EH/s, committed capex, and debt), BTC price sensitivity, and cycle events (halvings that reduce rewards per block). CoinShares’ own documentation underscores this pure-play, regulated approach, emphasizing that the fund prioritizes renewable-energy companies, which also introduces an ESG angle. Our ETF makes money when the shares it owns go up. And those actions increase in value when the mining economy improves. This occurs when the price or hashprice of BTC increases, when the difficulty stabilizes against its own hashrate, or when the electrical cost of mining is at containment levels. On the other hand, WGMI will suffer when the price of BTC falls steadily or when the cost of energy picks up. In summary, and for the reader to understand, this vehicle constitutes a thematic bet to capture the operational lever of the Bitcoin cycle from a regulated framework. It is not a perfect substitute for BTC (nor does it purport to be), but it is a vehicle for exposure to businesses whose cash flow depends on BTC's price, energy efficiency, and hardware availability. For the reader, the key is to locate it in the satellite part of the portfolio, accept its high volatility, and understand that its behavior can amplify Bitcoin rises and falls by the cost structure and operational leverage of the miners. Analysis - Macro Fundamental In this section, we will analyze some macroeconomic indicators in detail to try to offer the reader an accurate perspective and a sound recommendation on the vehicle in question. The first metric analyzed that we propose today is the Crypto Operating Pulse, which shows us the real economic activity existing around Bitcoin. This indicator seeks to take the “operating pulse” of the ecosystem by putting together two pieces that matter a lot for the ETF. On the supply/mining side, the z-score hashprice (standardized revenues per unit of mine power compared to its average) and, on the demand/market side, the z-score of exchange futures volume (a way to measure trading intensity and risk appetite). By combining both into a composite indicator, we have a picture that reveals whether the mining business is in a positive regime—because hash rent improves and there is liquidity—or in a negative regime—because hash rent falls, the difficulty of mining rises, or the market runs out of buying power. For a Bitcoin mining ETF like the one analyzed, this pulse is more relevant than the isolated BTC price itself, since when the hashprice improves and the market is active, the miners' margins expand and their shares tend to react with leverage. For the reader to understand correctly, this indicator functions as a kind of traffic light. If the indicator is in a positive and ascending zone, it will positively influence the ETF analyzed; if, on the contrary, it is falling or close to a negative level, it would be more convenient in that case to reduce exposure to the asset. The current reading of the graph suggests a still positive but slowing pulse, with a clear divergence: the hashprice (mining) component has lost steam – under pressure from increasing difficulty and from the normalization of on-chain commissions – while the futures volume holds in a neutral/slightly constructive zone. For WGMI, this means that the engine that has the greatest impact on margins (hashprice) is slack, which is a negative environment for it. Node Analytica In this second graph, we analyze the behavior of the different cohorts that currently have Bitcoin. The heat map separates holders by portfolio sizes (from less than 1 BTC to more than 10,000) and colors periods in which each group sustainably increases its net balance (accumulation) or reduces positions (distribution). This is useful because it filters out short-term noise and reveals the “marginal buyer” of the cycle: when accumulation is concentrated in medium and large cohorts (10–100, 100–1,000, 1,000–10,000 BTC), a more reliable soil is usually formed, floating supply falls, and the market absorbs scares better; instead, when distribution spreads across several bands at once, price loses support, and rises need more buying strength. For our ETF, which does not buy BTC but businesses that live off it, this thermometer matters because it anticipates the market depth that the hashprice will sustain in the coming months and, with it, the miners' margins: an environment with wide and persistent accumulation tends to stabilize TH/s income, flatten drawdowns, and allow the miners' equity to recover multiples, while widespread distribution phases raise WGMI's negative beta against BTC and punish those who need to finance capex with capital increases. Today, the reading is heterogeneous and, precisely because of this, informative: we see active middle cohorts—tranches of 10–100 and 100–1,000 BTC show intermittent but recurrent buying pulses—a more volatile retailer ( 10,000 BTC) with a tactical bias that alternates accumulation and profit-taking windows. Node Analytica Conclusion My recommendation right now is to hold with cautious bias (add only in drops), because Operating Pulse is still positive but slows down on the mining side (the hashprice loosens, and that cools companies' margins). The demand side holds up thanks to a still decent futures volume, and, in parallel, the cohort accumulation map shows support in the middle tranches (10–1,000 BTC), suggesting pulling rises and high dispersion among efficient miners. At this point I wouldn’t pay “any price” for WGMI: I would hold a position if you’re already in, take advantage of cuts to average names of higher operational quality within the fund, and wait for a clearer signal to go on to buy. Thank you for reading.
