IREN (IREN)

Taking a deep dive into the $IREN daily chart on and the technical setup is looking incredibly precise right now. The bears have had their fun, but the structural foundations are hinting that a massive shift could be just around the corner. > A clear falling wedge pattern acted as the original breakout catalyst to kickstart the macro bullish sequence. > The deep retracement invalidates a standard Wave 4 impulse, making a major ABC corrective structure the highly probable scenario. > The current price down at 38.82 aligns perfectly with macro trendline support and the key 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level. > The daily Relative Strength Index has plummeted down to 30.58, indicating deeply oversold conditions and potential seller exhaustion at this key junction. > Holding this structural support pivot sets the stage for the next macro cycle, targeting the 161.8% extension level up near 102.37. > Institutional Ownership still growing and accumulating. The chart structure on shows a textbook alignment of wave counts, Fibonacci levels, and oversold momentum signals. Keep a very close eye on how the price handles this current accumulation zone. -BP Please note, as always this is not financial advice.

The $IREN Hunt #5: $WULF. The series continues. Last hunt: $CIFR, the control group, proof this space CAN do comp reasonably. Today we go back to the dark side, because WULF's story isn't in the comp table at all. TeraWulf. And the most creative founder-equity structure I've found: the money doesn't flow through compensation. It flows through the land. Flavor one, the visible one: comp. Per the proxy... ➟ CEO Paul Prager took 2.5M RSUs in the 2025 round. ➟ CSO Kerri Langlais 1.5M, the COO a comparable award. ➟ Prager's 2025 total comp: ~$39.4M. Roughly 1.5% of the company for the founding trio. Aggressive, but survivable. If that were the whole story, WULF might pass like CIFR did. It's not the whole story. Flavor two, the one most retail never reads: related-party land deals. October 2024: TeraWulf paid 20 million shares plus $12M cash to Riesling Power LLC, an entity controlled by its own CEO, to terminate and renegotiate the Lake Mariner ground lease. Straight from the 8-K. August 2025: TeraWulf paid another 15 million shares, roughly $95M, plus $3M cash to the same CEO-controlled entity, for an 80-year lease at Lake Hawkeye. That's 35 million shares. Roughly 9% of the company, flowing to entities controlled by the CEO in under a year. On top of comp. The company pays rent, for decades, on land its own CEO's entity controls. And the lockup on those 20M Lake Mariner shares? 5 million sellable after 12 months. ALL of them unrestricted after April 2026. Eighteen months, total. That date has already passed. Now put IREN next to that, piece by piece. The land. IREN's shareholders OWN it. Freehold sites, company-owned substations. Prince George, Childress, Sweetwater: the dirt, the buildings, the grid connections sit on IREN's balance sheet. Nobody's LLC collects rent on them for 80 years. When you buy IREN, the landlord is YOU. Forever. The equity. A fixed 18.2M shares combined, ~5.1% once, covering five years of comp, shrinking as a slice every year the share count grows. Zero additional equity until fiscal 2031, in writing. Not one share sellable before 2029, and after that the unlocks are staggered at roughly 25% a year through 2032. So run the honest comparison. One structure: ~9% of the company to CEO-controlled entities in ten months, plus annual comp on top, fully sellable within eighteen months, with the company as a rent-paying tenant on its own flagship sites. The other: ~1% a year and shrinking, all comp, zero related-party landlords, first sellable share three years out, ceiling sealed until 2031. You can dislike the size of IREN's grant. I've said so myself. But if you're angry at IREN and quiet about structures like this one, you're not doing analysis. You're doing vibes. Do you have any suggestions? Drop it in the comments. The Hunt continues. Next ticker soon. This is not financial advice. Do your own research. I am long $IREN.

“Support” https://t.co/ijB1eYGCB7

I’ve traded $iren for almost a year perfectly , maybe a little luck too - I’m buying again down here https://t.co/0S8bX1FnRd

$IREN retesting the demand zone Resistance line and the weekly cloud should act as support here at $38.82 Bitcoin miner that also serve as a high-performance AI infrastructure provider #IREN https://t.co/PQW56gUjqD

$IREN #IREN Hard to see this happening, but it is one option. https://t.co/suQsSEfarx

This is the most interesting $IREN theory I've read all week, and it's exactly what I said in my sequencing post: bad news first, good news after. Follow Frans's logic. It's sharper than it first looks. If you're planning to upgrade the board in 2027-2028, the sequencing almost writes itself. You pass the founder package FIRST, with the board that will approve it. Then you replace that board with a heavyweight, independent, cloud-and-AI-credentialed one, and the optics flip completely: The guys who voted for the grant are gone, the founders are secured and locked, and the new board exists precisely to keep them in check. It's the same playbook I just said. You don't drop the comp package at $100 alongside a deal, you drop it at the bottom, eat the hate for a week, and then let the good news arrive clean. Frans is just extending the sequence one step further: after the deals come the governance upgrades. The stick, then the carrot, then the crown. Institutions would love it. The grant is already baked into every model, it's a known, sealed number until FY2031. What isn't priced is a board built for a hyperscaler. That's pure upside on the governance line. And notice how this answers the two loudest criticisms at once. "Why now, why not with a deal?" Because you don't pass a founder package through a NEW board. You pass it through the old one, then upgrade. Bad news first, good news after. Sequencing, again. "The board has no cloud/AI experience" Correct, and the fair critics have been saying it for weeks. Which is exactly why a refresh would land so well: it's the one move that converts the sector's most-cited IREN weakness into a headline strength. The founders end up financially set for generations, chained to the ship until 2033, and answering to a harder, more qualified board than the one that paid them. Honestly? That's not a governance scandal. That's a governance ladder. To be clear, as Frans says himself: this is a theory. But if you want to be a hyperscaler, with the corporate machine and the brand to match, a matching board isn't optional. It's on the agenda somewhere. Watch the board seats. That's the tell now. Do your own research. This is not financial advice. I am long $IREN.

The $IREN Hunt #4: $CIFR. This chapter is different. And that difference is the point. The Hunt isn't a hit-piece series. It's an audit. And an audit that only ever finds villains isn't an audit, it's a script. So today: the peer that mostly passes. Cipher Mining. Bitcoin miner turned AI datacenter play, AWS and Fluidstack/Google leases, ~3.2 GW pipeline. The numbers, from the filings. CEO Tyler Page received: ~1.6% of the company in 2024 (a front-loaded year), ~0.75% in 2025. ~0.75% projected (more or less) for 2026. The full exec team: roughly 2.7%, then ~1.3%, stabilizing around ~1.3% a year, with Page consistently taking just under 60% of the exec pool. Credit where due. The Hunt is honest or it's nothing: ➟ The percentages DECLINE every year. ➟ Independent chair. ➟ Clawback policy. ➟ Anti-hedging. ➟ PSUs tied to market-cap hurdles. ➟ Moderate sizes, orthodox split. Of everything I've hunted so far, this is by far the most disciplined structure. NUAI and SLNH should take notes. Now, h

I see a lot of bad-faith actors around $IREN. And plenty of honest people simply misinformed BY those bad-faith actors. That's exactly why I'm running this Hunt Series, comparing IREN against names like $NUAI, $SLNH and $HUT, straight from the filings. IREN's comp package is among the best in the sector. The cleanest. The least predatory. Just some bad actors taking the headline out of proportion, taking 5 years of compensation to scare you. Now, some will say: "why not performance-based?" Fine. Let's play that movie forward. Dan and Will set a $70 stock price hurdle, and in exchange take 5% of the company. Then a $100 hurdle, another 5%. And so on, milestone after milestone, until they've carved out the whole thing. That's the HUT model. "But but but, make them set $300!" Sure. They'll set $1,000 just to please you. Come on. In the real world, boards set REACHABLE hurdles. That's the whole game. The exec hits the realistic target, collects 5% in one slice, and then? Then the stock price can go to hell for all they care. They already collected. Look at BITF. Awards that paid out with the stock at $6. Stock at $2 right after. They did everything (X post, etc etc) to get it to $6. Cash their bonus. And who cares about the stock price later. The bonus didn't fall with it. That's the dirty secret of "performance-based": it pays on the way up and doesn't claw back on the way down. Also, without performance, names like NUAI and SLNH hand out ~10% in a single year. Now compare IREN's structure. ~1% per year, for five years. FIXED share count, so it SHRINKS as a percentage every year the company grows. Locked for six years, they can't sell a single share on the way. Nothing more until fiscal 2031, in writing. They don't get paid for touching a price target once. They don't need to care to pump the stock. They get paid for still being there in 2033, with the entire ride, up or down, on their own backs. Is it the perfect package? No. The perfect package is 0%. Sure. Dreaming is free. In the real world, this is about as clean as this sector gets. The filings say so. The Hunt continues. This is not financial advice. Do your own research. I am long $IREN.