Cantor Fitzgerald Remains Bullish on Hive Digital (HIVE) With a $5 PT
Hive Digital Technologies Ltd. (NASDAQ:HIVE) is one of the 13 Crypto Stocks with the Highest Upside Potential. In a report released on June 6, Brett Knoblauch from Cantor Fitzgerald maintained a Buy rating on Hive Digital Technologies Ltd. (NASDAQ:HIVE) with a price target of $5.00.
The same day, the company announced a significant operational milestone, stating that it surpassed 10 exahash per second (EH/s) in global Bitcoin mining capacity, up from 6 EH/s at the end of the March quarter. Hive Digital Technologies Ltd. (NASDAQ:HIVE) also announced that its peak hash rate rose 58% month-over-month from 6.6 EH/s in April to 10.4 EH/s in May.
A close-up of hands typing code to facilitate the exchange of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic.
This rapid scaling was attributed to the successful energization of the company's 100 MW hydro-powered facility located in Paraguay. The milestone supports Hive Digital Technologies Ltd.'s (NASDAQ:HIVE) global position as a leading energy-efficient and fast-growing Bitcoin miner. It mined 139 Bitcoin in May, averaging 4.5 BTC per day with an average mining efficiency of 8.5 EH/s that attained a peak of 10.4 EH/s.
Based in Canada, Hive Digital Technologies Ltd. (NASDAQ:HIVE) is a cryptocurrency mining company focused on sustainable green energy. It operates green energy-powered data center facilities in Iceland, Sweden, and Canada.
While we acknowledge the potential of HIVE as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.
READ NEXT: The Best and Worst Dow Stocks for the Next 12 Months and 10 Unstoppable Stocks That Could Double Your Money.
Disclosure: None.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
35 minutes ago
- New York Times
Senator Ron Johnson Resists G.O.P. Megabill, Warning It Will Swell Debt
President Trump had some blunt advice for Senator Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin Republican who had been publicly excoriating his signature tax and spending bill as a deficit-driving debacle, at a tense White House meeting this month. Be nice, the president told the businessman-turned-ultraconservative politician. Mr. Johnson immediately toned down his vocal drumbeat of criticism against the plan. But he still looms as a significant obstacle to the sweeping domestic policy bill that Senate Republicans hope to push through next week. Not only does he declare himself adamantly opposed to the current version, he is simultaneously undercutting the party's message that the legislation will not pile on to federal deficits. He is, however, trying to be nicer about it. 'I'm a pretty flexible, reasonable guy,' the sometimes disputatious, three-term Republican referred to on Capitol Hill as 'RonJohn' told reporters on Wednesday, drawing scoffs of disbelief. 'I am!' Mr. Johnson put his accounting background to work in a dense, 30-page report he released this week that rejects claims by the administration and Republican leaders that the combination of continued tax cuts, spending reductions in the range of $1.5 trillion over 10 years and new policies will spur growth to offset lost tax revenue. Under almost any scenario, his report says, deficits will continue to soar above $2 trillion per year, for a cumulative $20 trillion or more over the 10-year life span of the bill. That is in line with — though substantially more favorable than — estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and fiscal research groups that have found that the costs of the bill would swamp any growth it could create. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US Supreme Court declines to speed up decision on taking up fight over Trump tariffs
By Andrew Chung WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Friday to speed up its consideration of whether to take up a challenge to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute. The Supreme Court denied a request by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources, that filed the legal challenge against Trump's tariffs to expedite the review of the dispute by the nation's top judicial body. The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency legal authority he had cited for them. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited for them, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Oil and gas lawsuits are threatening Trump's energy agenda
Energy has been a highlight of the Trump 2.0 presidency. But the administration needs more cooperation from Lansing and Baton Rouge to bring its ambitious goals to fruition. Michigan and Louisiana may not have a lot in common, but there are few places in the U.S. more critical to the Trump administration's energy agenda. Michigan, an industrial powerhouse, needs abundant affordable energy to fuel the 'manufacturing boom' that the White House is promising. Louisiana, a leading liquid natural gas exporter, is key to Team Trump's goal to make the U.S. the signature supplier of energy to domestic industries and foreign allies. Yet politicized lawsuits against oil and gas companies are proliferating in both states, backed by rivals and fair weather friends whose lawfare crusades are undercutting President Trump's energy dominance agenda. For Michigan's Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Louisiana's Republican Gov. Jeff Landry, it's time to decide whether to get behind America First energy policies or side with powerful forces within their states that are pushing in the opposite direction. Whitmer, widely viewed as a 2028 Democratic presidential hopeful, nonetheless quotes Trump's call for a 'golden age of American manufacturing.' During her tenure as governor, Michigan has leaned into aspirational net-zero timelines, discouraged in-state gas production and created roadblocks to energy infrastructure. But there's also the legal offensive. Michigan's Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) continues to defend her six year-old lawsuit to shut down Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline, which supplies more than half of Michigan propane use, while she taps contingency lawyers to sue oil and gas companies for far-flung climate-related damages. That's not the posture of a state preparing to power an industrial renaissance. Meanwhile, Landry touts Trump's energy dominance agenda, yet at the same time supports dubious claims against oil and gas companies in his state. As state attorney general, Landry entered a joint prosecution agreement with trial lawyers seeking to hold the oil and gas industry liable for 2,000 square miles of Louisiana wetlands and barrier islands lost to coastal erosion since the 1930s. As governor, he has taken in more campaign contributions from trial lawyers than his Democratic predecessor. The support has paid dividends. A lawyer from the Landry administration backed up the trial lawyers who recently won a $744.6 million verdict against Chevron in a coastal erosion case. Although research shows that leveeing of the Mississippi is the main culprit, oil and gas companies are now defending 43 lawsuits in Louisiana blaming them for coastal land loss. Despite the obvious federal issues at play, the trial lawyers behind the cases are trying to keep the litigation in friendly state courts — precisely the kind of jurisdictional charade that Trump's order against state interference with American energy dominance was designed to prevent. Just this week, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review whether these cases belong in federal court where the oil and gas companies can get a fair hearing. If Landry and the trial lawyers dodge federal jurisdiction, it will be 'pay, baby, pay,' not 'drill baby drill' for oil and gas companies — much to the chagrin of the Trump administration and the detriment of the nation's energy consumers. Unless Team Trump follows through on its promise to defend domestic energy producers from state overreach, U.S. energy dominance will remain elusive. Taking on deep blue states over their climate lawfare is a solid first step, but it's not enough. The next time that Whitmer visits the Oval Office, Trump should remind her that Michigan consumes almost five times more energy than it produces. If the manufacturing golden age returns to Michigan, the demand side of that equation will only rise. The state's leadership needs to bury its green utopianism, drop its anti-pipeline crusade, and start producing more reliable and affordable energy needed to power autonomous vehicles, chip fabs, AI data centers and other industries that Whitmer is trying to attract. Likewise, Team Trump needs to tell Landry to put the energy dominance agenda ahead of his alliance with powerful trial lawyers. If Landry is unwilling to pull out of the retroactive cases against oil and gas companies, the Trump Department of Justice should intervene and defend federal energy policy interests against Louisiana's egregious overreach. For Louisiana's liquefied natural gas sector to propel U.S. energy dominance in the future, the state needs a predictable legal system, not one where industry is at the mercy of politically-connected trial lawyers. The key to the Trump administration's early energy successes has been the rollback of federal rules like the Biden administration ban on liquefied natural gas exports. Unleashing American energy over the long term, however, requires the states to push in the same direction. For states like Michigan and Louisiana, that doesn't require a new vision. It means having the political courage to make it real. Michael Toth is a practicing lawyer and a research fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at Austin.
