2025-10-27 · 个股论点

指出比较IREN与NBIS毛利率需标准化，调整后NBIS表现更优。

涉及标的： $IREN $NBIS

中文翻译

你在尝试比较两个结构上截然不同的事物时误解了数据，且未对毛利率进行标准化处理。尽管遭受人身攻击，我仍在回复，因为这会误导他人。考虑到费用确认、折旧与摊销(D&A)及其他 overhead，$IREN 的利润率可能降至 60% 以下。$IREN 拥有数据中心，将大量基础设施成本（服务器、机架、设施）计入资产负债表，随后通过 D&A 计入运营支出(OpEx)，从而虚高了 92% 的毛利率数字。$NBIS 租赁容量，因此同样的成本作为租金、电力和带宽出现在销售成本(COGS)中，完全成本约为 71.2%，但正如你所说，部分基础设施计入了运营支出。$NBIS 的 20-F 文件指出：“收入成本主要包括数据中心设施的运营和托管成本，以及数据中心内的电力、公用事业和维护成本……”如果你将 $IREN 的季度 D&A（约 7520 万美元）和基础设施 overhead 重新分配到收入成本中，$NBIS 在更全面的利润率下表现更优。这是基于你的数据，尽管他们此前有过非公认会计准则(non-GAAP)分部披露。因此，声称 $IREN 93% 的毛利率并与 $NBIS 71% 的毛利率进行比较是没有意义的，因为必须对毛利率进行标准化处理。

英文原文

You're misunderstanding the data while trying to compare two structurally different things as gross profit before normalizing it. Reason I'm still replying despite personal attacks now is because this is misleading other people. With expense recognition and with D&A and other overhead, $IREN margins can drop below 60%. For $IREN owning datacenters pushes massive infrastructure costs (servers, racks, facilities) into the balance sheet and later into OpEx (via D&A), inflating that 92% gross margin number. $NBIS leases capacity, so those same costs appear in COGS, as rent, power, and bandwidth to a fuller cst 71.2%., but as you mentioned some infra goes into opex. NBIS’s 20-F: “Cost of revenues primarily consists of costs of operation and co-location of data center facilities, the electricity, utility and maintenance costs in data centers…” If you reallocate IREN’s quarterly D&A (~$75.2 M), infra overhead into cost of revenue, $NBIS outperforms with a more fully loaded margin. This is going off your data, even though they've had nongaap segment disclosures before. So trying to claim $IREN 93% gross margins and then comparing it to $NBIS 71% doesnt make sense, when you have to normalize gross margins.

在 X 上查看原推 ↗