A $3.5 billion note issue, 133 delivered megawatts, and a third consecutive quarterly loss

01Snapshot

Key figures, each tagged by provenance.

02Business model

Galaxy Digital Inc. runs two businesses that share a balance sheet and very little else. The first is an institutional digital-asset platform: trading, lending, investment banking, asset management, staking and tokenisation infrastructure, sold to institutions and reported in two segments, Global Markets and Asset Management & Infrastructure Solutions. The second is a data center developer that leases power and critical IT capacity to computing tenants under long-term contracts. A third segment, Treasury & Corporate, holds the firm's own digital asset and investment positions.

The company is the surviving structure of a reorganization completed on May 13, 2025, which moved the group from Galaxy Digital Holdings Ltd, a Cayman company quoted in Toronto, into a Delaware corporation listed on Nasdaq. Economic ownership below the corporation still sits partly in Galaxy Digital Holdings LP, and the Class B shares track that interest.

How each side is paid differs sharply, and this is the single most important structural fact about the company. Digital Assets earns spreads, fees and net interest that move with market activity and with the price of the assets themselves. Data Centers earns contracted rent under a 15-year lease, indifferent to those prices once capacity is in service. In the second quarter of 2026 the first produced $66M of adjusted gross profit and the second $20M. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

03Revenue streams

Reported revenue and the profit that survives transaction expenses are two very different figures at this company, and the gap is the point.

Galaxy's headline revenue is a gross number. Of the $8,557.3M of revenues booked in the second quarter of 2026, $8,483.0M was digital asset sales, matched by $8,439.5M of digital asset sales costs. The turnover is real but almost none of it is margin. A reader who takes revenue as a measure of the business will overstate it by two orders of magnitude, which is why the company reports adjusted gross profit alongside it. Filed 8-K financial supplement, Aug 5, 2026.

The durability ranking follows from the contracts rather than from the figures. Data Centers revenue is the only stream with a stated term and a named counterparty. Global Markets and Asset Management depend on activity levels and asset prices. Treasury & Corporate has no contractual claim on anything and swung $98M between the two quarters shown.

04Industry & market backdrop

Galaxy sits at the junction of two markets that have very little to do with each other, and its results now depend on both.

Digital assets

The second quarter of 2026 was a falling market. Galaxy attributes its loss primarily to the depreciation of digital asset prices in the period, records $181.3M of impairment of digital assets in the quarter and $465.8M in the half, and reports its own assets under management and under stake down 12% on price movement. It also states that industry-wide trading volumes fell by more than a double-digit percentage sequentially, citing The Block, while its own volumes fell 7%. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

AI and high-performance computing infrastructure

The data center side is a power-constrained market rather than a demand-constrained one. Galaxy's own disclosure describes capacity moving through the ERCOT interconnection process in Texas, with two further one-gigawatt load requests under study at Helios and additional sites acquired subject to that process. The binding constraint on the segment is the pace at which approved power is delivered, not the availability of tenants: the company states that 830 MW of approved capacity at Helios is not yet under lease and that discussions with prospective tenants continue. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

05Competitive position

Named peers on comparable metrics. Galaxy competes in two different peer sets and is unusual in belonging to both.

On the data center side the comparable set is the group of operators converting or building large power positions in the United States for computing tenants. On the digital asset side it is institutional trading and asset management platforms. Very few companies appear in both lists, which is the competitive fact worth stating: Galaxy's peers on one side are not its peers on the other, and no single multiple describes it.

Against the digital asset platforms, the comparison that matters is scale of the loan book and counterparty count, and Galaxy discloses both: an average loan book of $1,438M and 1,741 total trading counterparties at the end of the second quarter, up 1% and 3% respectively on the quarter. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026. Competitors on that side are largely private or are subsidiaries of larger institutions, and comparable figures are not published, so a like-for-like table cannot be built and is not attempted here.

06Financial performance

Multi-period. Figures in US$ thousands unless stated.

The trend is stated first: Galaxy earned money in 2023 and 2024, lost money in 2025, and has now lost money in three consecutive quarters. The losses are driven by the Treasury & Corporate position rather than by the operating businesses, which is why the quarterly swing is so wide.

Revenue rose 40% between 2024 and 2025 while adjusted gross profit fell 58%. That is not a contradiction: the revenue line is gross digital asset sales, and it grows with turnover regardless of whether the turnover is profitable. Adjusted gross profit is the figure that moved with the business.

The last five quarters

Filed 8-K financial supplement, Aug 5, 2026.

Three things are visible in that sequence. The swing between the best and worst quarter shown is $986.8M of net income on a company whose total equity is $2,720.1M. The direction of the swing follows digital asset prices. And the second quarter of 2026 is the first in which adjusted gross profit returned to positive while the net line stayed negative, because the impairment and the operating cost base sit below that measure.

Operating costs excluding transaction expenses rose year on year: compensation and benefits $84.0M against $65.0M, technology $16.3M against $11.6M, and notes interest expense $25.1M against $14.2M, the last reflecting the debt raised to build data centers. Impairment of digital assets was $181.3M against $127.5M. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

07Capital structure & dilution

Two share classes, a large and recently enlarged secured debt stack, and an automatic shelf.

Equity

Two classes were outstanding at June 30, 2026: 194,798,949 shares of Class A common stock and 196,596,698 shares of convertible Class B common stock. Class B carries a par value of $0.0000000001 and no book value; it tracks the limited partnership interests in Galaxy Digital Holdings LP held by the noncontrolling interest, and is exchangeable into Class A. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

The two classes are close to equal in number, so the distinction changes the share count by a factor of two depending on which question is asked. On a Class A basis the market capitalization at the 12 August close is $4,106M; on a fully exchanged basis it is $8,251M. This document uses the fully exchanged figure throughout, because the Class B interests are exchangeable into the listed class and the consolidated financial statements already consolidate the partnership.

Debt

Notes payable at June 30, 2026 stood at $3,262.8M, being $437.0M current and $2,825.8M non-current. That figure predates the largest financing in the company's history: on July 28, 2026 Galaxy Helios Data Centers II LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary, completed a private offering of $3.5B of senior secured notes due 2031, with proceeds to fund construction of Helios I Phase II. Filed 8-K, Jul 28, 2026 and 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

Pro forma for that issue, secured and unsecured borrowings approach $6.8B against total equity of $2.72B. The notes sit at a project subsidiary rather than at the parent, which is the standard structure for this kind of build and which matters for where the recourse runs. This document does not have the indenture terms and does not characterise the recourse.

Shelf and resale capacity

Galaxy filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR on May 8, 2026, together with a resale registration statement on Form S-3. A well-known seasoned issuer's automatic shelf carries no stated ceiling, so no dollar capacity figure can be given. Twenty-one prospectuses under Rule 424 have been filed since May 2025, the most recent on May 21, 2026. Filed SEC filing index for CIK 0001859392, searched Aug 5, 2026.

Dilution already taken

The May 2025 capital raise sold 31,600,000 shares of Class A common stock, with an option over a further 4,740,000 shares from the founder rather than from the company. Thirteen underwriters took the offering. Filed 424B4, May 30, 2025. That syndicate matters again in section 8, because most of it now publishes research on the company.

08Valuation

Multiples shown with their basis and pricing date. No target price.

Galaxy gives one forward figure of its own that a reader can use without the file deriving anything: it expects Phase I to generate quarterly leasing revenue of approximately $80M and a project-level adjusted EBITDA margin above 90% beginning in the third quarter of 2026. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026. That is the company's expectation, not this document's estimate, and it is stated here as such.

Third-party coverage

Every row is market data: attributed, dated, tagged, never adopted. Price at publication is the close on the last trading day before the action, taken from the exchange's own daily record for GLXY, and this convention governs every row in the table. Galaxy's own investor relations page, read on August 5, 2026, names sixteen firms and their analysts; it publishes no ratings or targets, and its Type and Rating columns are empty. Rows carrying a rating and a target are cited to the note that published them.

The shape of the coverage

Sixteen firms follow Galaxy according to the company's own investor relations page, read on August 5, 2026. Two ratings and targets are established here, both Buy: Rosenblatt at $35 on 3 August, reduced from $39, and Compass Point at $40 on 5 August, unchanged from its 28 July note. The spread between the two established targets is $5, or 14% of the lower. No published consensus figure is reported here, because none was retrieved from a source that attributes and dates it; the count used here is a floor rather than a current figure.

The relationship worth stating is between the covering set and the syndicate that took the company public in the United States. Thirteen firms underwrote the May 2025 Class A offering. Twelve of those thirteen appear on Galaxy's coverage list today, and twelve of the sixteen covering firms were underwriters. The exception on each side is informative: Keefe, Bruyette & Woods underwrote and does not appear on the coverage list, while Citi, Citizens JMP, Chardan and Maxim Group cover without having underwritten.

Both firms whose published actions are recorded above were underwriters, so the two established targets in this table come from houses with a disclosed prior banking relationship with the issuer. That is a statement about the two rows this document established, not about the sixteen: what the other fourteen firms disclose about this issuer has not been read, and the banking relationship recorded in the conflict column is taken from the prospectus rather than from any firm's disclosure page. Whether a firm's own disclosures say more than the prospectus does is not established here.

A reader should note what that pattern does and does not support. It does not show that the underwriting relationship moved any rating, and no such inference is drawn. It does mean that the coverage available on this company is concentrated in firms that sold its shares, and that an independent check on the two targets recorded here is not available from within this table.

09Growth drivers

Ranked by how much of the outcome each controls, and by how settleable each is.

Helios Phase I reaching a full quarter of rent

All 133 MW of critical IT load under the Phase I lease was in service at 30 June, but rent commenced progressively through the quarter, so only $18.9M of leasing revenue was booked. Galaxy states it expects approximately $80M of quarterly leasing revenue and a project-level adjusted EBITDA margin above 90% from the third quarter. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026. This is the nearest and most settleable driver in the file: the third quarter results will show it or they will not.

Helios Phase II and III delivery

Phase II is a 260 MW critical IT expansion under construction, with HITT Contracting mobilised since April 2026, earthwork complete and foundations underway. Data hall deliveries are expected to begin in the second quarter of 2027. The CoreWeave leases across Phases I, II and III total 800 MW of gross power and 526 MW of critical IT load over a 15-year base term, which Galaxy states carries anticipated average annual revenue above $1.2B. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

Converting the pipeline beyond Helios

Galaxy's stated power pipeline exceeds 5.7 GW. The components are of very different quality and the file separates them: 1.63 GW is approved capacity at Helios, of which 830 MW is not yet leased; two further one-gigawatt requests, Helios III and IV, are in the ERCOT interconnection process; and three recently acquired Texas sites, Merlin, Caspian and Selene, carry potential capacity of roughly 74 MW initially rising to 500 MW, 700 MW and 900 MW respectively, each subject to interconnection. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026.

Institutional digital asset infrastructure

The multi-year agreement with BNY, which Galaxy states oversees more than $60 trillion in assets under custody, covers staking support on BNY's digital asset custody platform, with Galaxy also acting as a design partner. Galaxy also launched an OTC prediction markets offering, the Galaxy Fintech Fund, and with State Street a tokenised private liquidity fund. Filed 8-K, Aug 5, 2026. None of these carries a disclosed revenue figure, and none is modelled here.

10Risks

Severity-ranked, most severe first.

11Bull / base / bear

Each case with its preconditions: what must be true, not what might be.

12Research summary

Galaxy is two businesses in one registrant, and the second quarter of 2026 is the first period in which that is visible in the numbers rather than in the narrative. Data Centers produced $20M of adjusted gross profit and $11M of adjusted EBITDA on 133 MW delivered to a single tenant. Digital Assets produced $66M and $(11)M. Treasury & Corporate lost $42M and $78M respectively and determined the sign of the reported result, as it has in each of the last four quarters.

The financing is now ahead of the asset. $3.5B of senior secured notes closed on 28 July against a build whose first deliveries are expected in the second quarter of 2027, on top of $3.26B of notes payable already outstanding at 30 June and total equity of $2.72B. Whether that is aggressive or merely early is the question the file cannot settle, and it is the question a reader should hold.

Three things would change the reading materially and each is settleable from a document: the third-quarter leasing revenue against Galaxy's own approximately $80M expectation; a second data center tenant for the 830 MW of approved but unleased Helios capacity; and an ERCOT determination on Helios III or IV. None requires an opinion to observe.

What this document could not establish is set out in section 14 and is not small: no enterprise value is struck, fourteen of the sixteen covering firms have no established rating or target here, and what those firms disclose about this issuer has not been read.

13Null categories

Requested categories with nothing to report. Status reads Covered above, None where a named source was checked and found empty, or Not established where the category was not examined. A category nobody looked at is a gap, not an absence.

14Methodology & sources

Pricing basis, the tagging scheme, and, importantly, what was not checked.

Provenance tags

Pricing basis

Every market figure in this document is struck on the close of August 12, 2026, at which GLXY closed at $21.08 on volume of 6,059,119 shares, about 0.78 times the mean of the nine preceding sessions. The document is stamped August 13, 2026, the day after, because the 13 August session had not settled when the figures were taken.

How the earlier basis was chosen, kept as the record and no longer bearing on the figures above. The document was previously struck on the 4 August close and stamped 5 August. The two dates differed because the 5 August session had not settled when those figures were taken: Nasdaq reported the market in its pre-open state with 4 August as the previous trading date.

The trading calendar used for the coverage table is derived from the exchange's own daily record for GLXY over 253 sessions from August 1, 2025 to August 4, 2026, so a date absent from that record is a date on which nothing traded. That record has not been extended past 4 August, which is sufficient for the coverage table, whose latest dated action is earlier, and is not the pricing basis above.

Sources

Primary sources are the filings indexed under Central Index Key 0001859392, swept to August 10, 2026, at which point the index held 270 filings dated May 5, 2021 onward and reported no overflow file, so the whole record under this CIK was available to the sweep. An earlier sweep of the same index on August 5, 2026 reached 258 filings. Every form family was enumerated before filtering, and register filings were matched on both the current and legacy spellings of the Schedule 13D and 13G form strings. The predecessor entity, Galaxy Digital Holdings Ltd, CIK 0001405064, was swept separately; its 62 filings do not join this index and are described in section 13. Galaxy's investor relations coverage page was read on August 5, 2026. Two research notes, from Rosenblatt Securities dated August 3, 2026 and Compass Point dated 28 July and August 5, 2026, are the source of the ratings, targets and dates in section 8 and of nothing else in this document.

What was not checked

An unexamined area is a gap, not a clean bill. The following were not reached.

• No enterprise value is derived. Galaxy's balance sheet carries $1,933.1M of collateral payable, $1,486.9M of digital assets borrowed and $80.7M payable to customers, none of which behaves like corporate debt in an enterprise value, and the July 2026 notes postdate the balance sheet entirely. A figure assembled from these inputs would be a guess wearing a number, so the masthead field is omitted rather than filled.
• Court dockets were not searched, on CourtListener, PACER or any state portal. No statement is made here about litigation.
• The indenture for the $3.5B senior secured notes due 2031 was not read. The exhibit is filed with the 8-K of July 28, 2026. Nothing is asserted here about recourse, covenants or security.
• ERCOT interconnection queue records were not queried directly. Every capacity and approval figure in this document is the company's own statement of its position.
• The second-quarter Form 10-Q was filed on August 10, 2026, three days before this document was stamped, and the figures here have not been reconciled to it line by line. They come from the 8-K of August 5, 2026 and its exhibits, which are unaudited and which the company states are subject to its periodic reports in the event of conflict. The catalyst calendar records the filing as resolved and states that it reconciles exactly to the release; two figures were checked against the filing directly for this document, the net loss of $(85,316) thousand and the 194,798,949 Class A shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2026, and both agree. The remaining statements have not been checked.
• Fourteen of the sixteen covering firms have no established rating, target or date here, and no firm's own disclosure page was read. The conflict column in section 8 reports what the May 2025 prospectus establishes, which is a filing rather than a firm's disclosure.
• Canadian filings were not swept. Galaxy's own press release refers to forward-looking information under Canadian securities laws, which indicates a continuing obligation of some kind following the reorganization from a Toronto-quoted predecessor, but SEDAR+ was not queried and the nature and extent of any such obligation is not established here.
• Credit rating actions, index membership and short interest were not checked, as recorded in section 13.

15Document log

Newest first. The original build entry is never removed or rewritten.