Hunter Dilba

Bitmine Immersion Technologies’ growing Ethereum (ETH) treasury is increasingly focused on staking yield, with on-chain activity now indicating that its staked Ether could generate significant annual revenue — potentially around $160 million per year at current network rates.

Expanding ETH Holdings and Staking Position

Bitmine, one of the largest publicly traded crypto treasury firms led by Tom Lee, has continued to expand its ETH holdings and actively stake a portion of its position on Ethereum’s proof-of-stake network. Recent data shows:

Bitmine’s total ETH holdings are now around 4.24 million ETH, or roughly 3.5% of Ethereum’s circulating supply.

Of that, approximately 2.01 million ETH is currently actively staked, generating yield through the network’s consensus mechanism.

Staking ETH involves locking tokens to support Ethereum’s security and transaction validation, in return for rewards paid in ETH — similar to earning interest.

Annual Revenue Potential from Staking

Based on the Composite Ethereum Staking Rate (CESR) — a benchmark rate of annualized ETH staking rewards — Bitmine’s current staked ETH position translates to roughly $160 million in annual revenue at current Ethereum prices and yield rates.

That estimate reflects only the portion already staked. According to company commentary, if Bitmine were to stake its entire ETH treasury through its planned validator infrastructure — known as the Made in America Validator Network (MAVAN) — annual staking rewards could exceed $370 million, or more than $1 million per day.

This would mark a transition from simply holding a large ETH balance to generating predictable yield through active participation in network consensus.

Strategic Shift Toward Staking Yield

Bitmine’s pivot toward staking reflects a broader trend in the crypto space, where institutional players increasingly seek to monetize large crypto treasuries rather than holding assets passively. By staking, treasury operators can:

✅ Earn recurring rewards based on ETH supply dynamics
✅ Support network security and decentralization
✅ Convert a static asset into a yield-generating income stream

Bitmine’s goal of acquiring 5% of Ethereum’s circulating supply — known internally as the “Alchemy of 5%” target — amplifies the potential scale of this revenue if fully realized.

Industry Context

Ethereum’s staking ecosystem has been growing rapidly, with total staked ETH above historic thresholds as institutional participation increases. This trend reflects confidence in proof-of-stake economics and long-term network fundamentals.

For Bitmine, staking income complements its broader treasury strategy, which also includes holdings of Bitcoin and other digital assets alongside ETH.

Final Thought

Bitmine’s shift from passive ETH accumulation to active yield generation positions it as a key institutional actor within Ethereum’s staking economy. With annualized staking revenue potential now in the hundreds of millions of dollars, this approach illustrates how large treasuries can harness protocol native economics to create sustainable income streams — a model that could influence future institutional capital flows into PoS networks.

Nie przyszedłem do Plasmy z ideologii. Przyszedłem z osiedlenia.
Stabilny ruch stablecoinów między łańcuchami pokazuje, że większość blockchainów postrzega pieniądze jako kolejny aktyw.
W przeciwieństwie do innych blockchainów, Plasma nie optymalizuje ruchu, lecz zamknięcia.
Ta subtelna różnica zmienia wszystko, w tym architekturę.

Pierwszą rzeczą, którą doświadczyłem z Vanar Chain, nie była metryka nagłówka ani nieco sprytna sztuczka marketingowa. To, co najbardziej zwróciło moją uwagę, to brak pilności w budowaniu rozwiązania wokół szybkości. Większość ekosystemów koncentruje się na stopniowych postępach w przepustowości lub obniżaniu opóźnienia. Z Vanar czułem, że próbują rozwiązać inny problem. Większość ich uwagi skupiała się na architekturze, a nie na szybkości transakcji. Zamiast tego wydawało się, że próbują określić, czy inteligentne systemy mogą pozostawać spójne w czasie. Ta różnica może mieć ogromne znaczenie, zwłaszcza gdy większość uczestników na łańcuchu stara się stać się bardziej systemami niż ludźmi.

I didn’t see Walrus as a product. I saw it as a pattern.
To begin with, it seemed indirect—through apps that manifested atypical. NFTs that didn’t shatter when hosting services altered. AI datasets that flowed immovable, frictionless, and unproven. On-chain systems that tethered large outputs and disregarded external liability. There seemed to be some intellect that sat underneath and held these structures together.
Following that trace, I got to Walrus.
What surprised me known most it’s not the price, it’s the value. Walrus does not frame themselves as a products. It’s more of an ecosystem. One that assumes the data, as applications, will outlive the trends and the chains themselves. That assumption, not externally visible, fundamentally reorients all built on top of it.
Data as a Long-Term Commitment
Most systems treat data as just another thing. You store it somewhere, reference it loosely, and hope to survive the link. In practice, this has made Web3 brittle. Applications decay not because logic fails, but because the data they depend on disappear, mutates, or become unverifiable.
Walrus treats data as an asset.
By breaking data into pieces, encoding it, and distributing it to an incentive-aligned network, it assumes information deserves the same amount of durability as capital. Storage is not cheap because there is a promise of being permanently stored. It is permanently stored because the system is constantly paying for it.
With this in mind, it is obvious Walrus is not about the amount of data it can hold, but rather about how long it can hold data. It is made for a world where data has to be accessible for a long time, and the original creator is no longer around to provide it.
A Substrate, Not a Service
Services compete against each other. Substrates last longer.
Walrus does not attempt to be different by offering user-facing features. It differentiates in how little it asks from applications. Developers can operate with little trust, users can trust the platforms, and the network itself. Walrus ensures availability, integrity, and accountability.
This is important because Web3 is progressing towards a more complex system with flooring dependencies. AI requires datasets with clear and provable history. Digital identity systems need immutable records. Decentralized systems need assets that cannot be changed when incentives shift.
Walrus positions itself beneath this complexity. It is not a marketplace; it is ground truth infrastructure.

Economic Gravity Without Spectacle
The WAL token does not try to tell a story about a potential future. It enforces one.
Incentives are structured for uptime, correctness, and continuity. Validators are rewarded for consistency, not volume. Stakers do not speculate on attention, they back stability. Governance is slow and careful, knowing that a system on top of a storage infrastructure cannot sustain volatility disguised as innovation.
When looking at this system, its economics feel less like crypto and more like the funding of a public infrastructure, expressed as programmable logic. A set of roads does not need to be marketed. A set of power lines does not chase narratives. They endure because they are paid to endure.
Walrus adopts that philosophy unapologetically.
Where AI and Decentralization Quietly Converge
The more intriguing aspect of Walrus is visible when AI-native workflows are examined in conjunction with Walrus.

Datasets on Walrus store availability and integrity proofs. These can be referenced on-chain, programmatically monetized, and audited, earning new formats of AI coordination over time where models can be trained on data proven to be persistent and economically safe.
This is not a feature to put in a headline. This is a value of the system that, when looking ahead a sufficiently long timeframe, will be apparent.
Commercial Persistence
What Walrus ultimately optimizes for is the persistence, not just of data, but of meaning.
In decentralized systems, meaning is eroded when records disappear, links break, or contexts are lost. Walrus is one of the few systems where the persistence of meaning is treated as a moral constraint. If something is referenced, it must be available. If it is available, it must be persistent. If it is persistent, it can be verifiable, and if it is verifiable, it can be trusted over time.
This creates a strong feedback loop where the applications on Walrus are built with a long-term mindset because the infrastructure anticipates long-term scrutiny.
Few systems attempt to do this and even fewer do this as a deliberate goal.

The Calm Foresight It Provides
In this case Walrus, provides an option to not focus on al one direction.
This includes futures such as:
knowledge systems which are permanently unmodifyable,
systems of identity that contain information that cannot be changed.
digital environments whose records are never lost,
AI ecosystems that can clarify when and what it was trained on.
None of these possibilities need Walrus to capture attention. They need it to be consistent, unexciting, and unimaginative.
In the case of Walrus, this is possibly its greatest positive aspect.
Conclusion: Systems That Do Not Vanish
Most crypto systems are built for events, whereas Walrus is built for what comes after.
After the launch.
After the hype.
After the creators leave.
After the applications are upgraded.
After the ecosystem alters its direction.
After the data loses its relevance.
Considering Walrus from this viewpoint, it is apparent that its primary merit is not the most recent tech. It is the most recent alignment with waiting periods. It doesn't demand trust. It builds itself to be present when trust is required.
In an industry obsessed with velocity, that lack of trust is the most significant concern with Walrus.

@Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus $WAL

Przez długi czas entuzjaści kryptowalut wierzyli, że aktywa ze świata rzeczywistego pewnego dnia zostaną tokenizowane za pomocą tych samych ogólnych blockchainów, które zasilają większość aplikacji finansowych opartych na decentralizacji (DeFi) dzisiaj. To wydawało się logiczne; infrastruktura, która zasilała protokoły blockchain, była warstwowa z usługami, które dawały zwiększone możliwości budowania nowych usług. Po co budować nowe usługi, kiedy blockchain był niesamowicie tani? Czemu nie wykorzystać tej przestrzeni?
Jednak założenie to osłabło, gdy skonfrontowano je z faktycznym funkcjonowaniem regulowanej branży finansowej. Publiczne platformy blockchain są budowane dla najbardziej otwartych aplikacji finansowych. Mają przejrzysty stan, publiczne mempools, probabilistyczną stabilność i mają największą zdolność do budowania nowych struktur. Te komponenty działają dobrze, gdy instrument finansowy, który jest przedmiotem handlu, ma na celu spekulację. Ale gdy jest to regulowany papier wartościowy, wykorzystanie platformy jest ograniczone. Nie mogą handlować tożsamością posiadacza. Nie mogą handlować audytem instrumentu. Nie mogą handlować prawnym rozwiązaniem instrumentu. Rozliczenie obligacji nie może pozostać nierozliczone. Prawo do otrzymania dywidendy nie może być publicznie wymienione. Osoby, które utrzymują księgę, nie mogą być celem ataku.