CleanSpark Raises Year-End Hashrate Guidance, Sets 2023 Outlook
The miner suffered a $29.3 million loss for the fiscal quarter, partly driven by the previously disclosed decision to sell its energy assets.

CleanSpark (CLSK) – reporting results for its fiscal third quarter – said it will sell its energy business assets in order to focus completely on bitcoin
CleanSpark got its start in 2014 providing energy products to homes and businesses. It entered bitcoin mining in 2020, according to the company website. Today, more than 90% of revenue comes from bitcoin mining, CEO Zach Bradford said during Tuesday's earnings conference call.
The firm reported a $29.3 million net loss for the third quarter of its fiscal year, in part driven by the reclassification of the energy business to be discontinued, which resulted in a $10.6 million impairment charge.
The miner’s adjusted EBITDA was $15.2 million for the quarter, down from $22.5 million in the previous quarter.
Revenue of $31 million missed analyst estimates for $34.5 million, according to FactSet data. Adjusted EBITDA of $15.2 million was down from $22.5 million the previous quarter.
The company upped hashrate guidance for year-end 2022 to 5 exahash/second (EH/s), and issued guidance for the end of 2023, when it expects to reach 22.4 EH/s.
CleanSpark differs from some other bitcoin miners as it has been a consistent seller of mined bitcoin to raise cash. It thus entered this current bear market with less debt and has been in acquisition mode. The latest deal was announced earlier Tuesday – the purchase for $25.1 million of an active 36 megawatt (MW) bitcoin mine in the U.S. state of Georgia, as well as 3,400 mining rigs currently running at the site.
More For You
Specialized AI detects 92% of real-world DeFi exploits

New research claims specialized AI dramatically outperforms general-purpose models at detecting exploited DeFi vulnerabilities.
What to know:
- A purpose-built AI security agent detected vulnerabilities in 92% of 90 exploited DeFi contracts ($96.8 million in exploit value), compared with 34% and $7.5 million for a baseline GPT-5.1-based coding agent running on the same underlying model.
- The gap came from domain-specific security methodology layered on top of the model, not differences in core AI capability, according to the report.
- The findings come as prior research from Anthropic and OpenAI shows AI agents can execute end-to-end smart contract exploits at low cost, accelerating concerns that offensive AI capabilities are scaling faster than defensive adoption.











