iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) Stock Analysis
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF
▾ What's in the 46/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend). See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read IBIT (Bitcoin fund)
IBIT holds Bitcoin on your behalf — it is not a business, so there are no cash flows to value. Its price tracks Bitcoin. What matters is your view on Bitcoin, the fund's fee, and how close the price trades to the value of the coins it holds.
-
1
Why normal valuation doesn't apply ↓
Bitcoin has no earnings or cash flow — a DCF, P/E or book-value model tells you nothing here. Your return is ~100% the coin's price.
-
2
Anatomy of a share ↓
What one share actually represents in terms of the fund's holdings.
Standard DCF doesn't fit IBIT well — but that's expected for this kind of business. The Bank / Insurance Valuation Lens below uses the metrics actually used by analysts who value investment banking. Reverse DCF + Football Field also work as cross-checks.
How to value IBIT
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF isn't a business — it's a fund that holds Bitcoin on your behalf. There are no revenues, earnings, or cash flows to discount, so a DCF, P/E, or book-value model tells you nothing. Each share represents a fixed slice of the fund's Bitcoin, so the price simply tracks the price of Bitcoin (minus a small annual fee). An intrinsic-value "verdict" would be meaningless here, so we don't show one.
- Your view on Bitcoin — that's ~100% of the return. This page can't tell you whether Bitcoin itself is cheap or expensive.
- Expense ratio — the annual fee skims your holding every year. Spot Bitcoin funds range from ~0.12% to ~1.5%; for a long hold, lower is better.
- Premium / discount to NAV — aim to pay close to the value of the coins the fund holds, not a markup over them.
- Structure & custody — a modern spot ETF vs an older trust, and who actually custodies the coins.
Crypto is highly volatile and speculative. Educational only — not investment advice.
How does IBIT stack up against its closest peers?
We take the 8 same-industry companies most similar to IBIT (similar size) and check what investors are paying for each dollar of their revenue (or profits). If IBIT is much more expensive on the same yardstick, that's a red flag — unless you have a specific reason it deserves a premium. For a leveraged business, FCF yield (in the table) is usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 8 same-industry peers; implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IAU | ISHARES GOLD TRUST | Investment Banking | $70.6B | — | 34.4% |
| GLDM | World Gold Trust | Investment Banking | $74.2B | — | 11.5% |
| PHYS | Sprott Physical Gold Trust | Investment Banking | $16.4B | — | 36.3% |
| SVXY | ProShares Trust II | Investment Banking | $16.3B | — | 10.5% |
| YCS | ProShares Trust II | Investment Banking | $15.8B | — | 10.8% |
| PSLV | Sprott Physical Silver Trust | Investment Banking | $14.8B | — | — |
| FBTC | Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund | Investment Banking | $13.6B | — | — |
| UGL | ProShares Trust II | Investment Banking | $13.2B | — | 13.0% |
Quality & solvency checks
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
Altman Z was calibrated on industrial firms and doesn't apply to banks or insurers — their balance sheets are dominated by loans/securities, not working capital. See the Bank Valuation Lens above for P/B, ROE and ROA — the metrics regulators and analysts actually use to assess bank solvency.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
Piotroski F was built for non-financial firms (gross margin, asset turnover, current ratio all assume an industrial cost structure). For banks, the equivalent quality signals are efficiency ratio, net interest margin, and provision coverage — see the Bank Valuation Lens above.
A standard DCFDCF — Discounted Cash Flow — sums up all future cash a business will produce, adjusted for the fact that future dollars are worth less than dollars today.
Why it matters: It is the most fundamentally honest valuation method when applicable — but only works for companies with predictable, positive cash flow.
Reference: Best for: mature, profitable businesses. Fails for: pre-profit growth, banks, REITs.
Full explanation → valuation is not meaningful for IBIT because it is an ETF, not an operating company, and its operating cash flow is negative. Investors are betting on the future price appreciation of Bitcoin, which the ETF holds. The #1 quantifiable risk is the volatility and speculative nature of Bitcoin's price movements.
As of 3 months ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What's free cash flow / what do these mean?
Revenue per share — how much the business earns from customers, divided by the number of shares outstanding. Top of the income statement.
Earnings per share — profit left after operating costs, interest, and taxes, per share. Two versions appear on this page and are not interchangeable: GAAP diluted EPS uses the company's weighted-average diluted share count during the reporting period (this is the "earnings" in "price-to-earnings"); net income per current share divides annual net income by today's share count. They differ whenever the share count has changed.
Owner-earnings free cash flow per share — the cash the business produces for shareholders. Savng's owner-earnings FCF subtracts capital expenditures and stock-based compensation from operating cash flow (SBC is a real dilution cost even though it's non-cash). This is deliberately more conservative than "standard" FCF, which subtracts only capital expenditures — so our figure is lower than the headline FCF you'll see elsewhere. FCF funds dividends, buybacks, debt repayment, and acquisitions; a company can report positive earnings yet negative FCF.
Debt per share — total interest-bearing borrowings divided by shares. High debt-per-share next to thin FCF-per-share is a fragility signal.
What you actually need to decide
Every stock price is a disagreement. Here's the single thing that must go right for the bulls, the single thing that breaks the thesis, and the concrete signposts to watch so you can update your view as real results arrive.
- Bitcoin's price performance
- Net inflows/outflows into the ETF
- Regulatory developments for cryptocurrencies
The trend, in plain numbers (FY2024 → FY2025, latest reported)
Straight from the financial statements — no model, no opinion. For a small or unprofitable company, the direction of these numbers usually tells you more than any single valuation.
- Free cash flow is negative at -$19.91B — the cash burn narrowed vs last year.
- Swung to a loss of -$8.97B (from a profit the prior year).
Management & Leadership
iShares is a family of exchange-traded funds managed by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager. Larry Fink has served as Chairman and CEO of BlackRock since its inception in 1988, overseeing its growth into a global financial powerhouse.
What They Make
IBIT is an exchange-traded fund (ETF) that holds Bitcoin, providing investors with exposure to the cryptocurrency's price movements without directly owning it. Its customers are investors seeking a regulated and accessible way to invest in Bitcoin.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
What we use instead: earnings (P/E, EV/EBIT) — computed from the figures this company does report, shown in the sections below. Those numbers are unaffected by the missing cash-flow data.
The market prices IBIT based on the underlying value and future price expectations of Bitcoin, rather than traditional cash flow metrics. Given its negative operating cash flow and a franchise/durability score of 0/5, investors are primarily focused on the speculative growth potential of Bitcoin itself and the ETF's ability to track its price effectively.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
As an ETF, IBIT does not engage in dividends or buybacks; its capital allocation is primarily focused on holding Bitcoin and managing its fund structure.
Residual Income
Balance-sheet financial (Investment Banking): residual income model - book value is meaningful anchor.
Show advanced inputs
| Sector Default | 8.0% |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project net interest income and fee-income lines independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Moat Signals
Net income was negative latest, though profitable in 1 of 2 years, reflecting its recent launch and market dynamics.
Geography & Markets
IBIT is offered by BlackRock, a global asset manager headquartered in the United States. Its trading is primarily accessible to investors in regions where spot Bitcoin ETFs are approved, such as the US.
Geographic Risks
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)38.8NeutralMomentum is balanced — neither overbought nor oversold.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (5 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (5)
- Financial sector: using residual income model. IV = Book Value + PV(excess earnings).
- INVARIANT: weighted IV is non-positive. Model may not be appropriate.
- Model implies no positive equity value under these assumptions. Valuation is speculative/low-confidence.
- Model mismatch: residual income inappropriate for asset-light financial (BVPS $0.00 not meaningful vs price $42). Consider FCF model.
- DATA UNAVAILABLE: per-share values suppressed due to missing/unreliable shares data.
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF's SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | — | -9.0B | $-7.46 |
| 2024 | — | 14.2B | $26.93 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
Capital expenditure isn't tagged in this filer's machine-readable data (the CapEx column shows "—"). The free-cash-flow column is therefore operating cash flow less stock-based compensation only — an upper bound on true owner earnings, not the real figure. Companies that report capex under a custom label (some large IFRS filers do) look better here than they are.
| Year | Operating CF | CapEx | − SBC & adj. | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | -19.9B | — | — | -19.9B |
| 2024 | -37.3B | — | — | -37.3B |
How we define FCF: operating cash flow − capital expenditure − stock-based compensation (owner-earnings basis — SBC is a real cost to shareholders even though it's non-cash). This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses, though the DCF's starting value is a EPS basis (residual-income model), not this single year.
Recent video coverage
Top recent YouTube videos by date. We don't endorse the channels — these are surfaced for context.
Similar companies worth a look
Same sector and industry, similar fundamentals shape. Verify everything yourself — this list is computed mechanically and does not reflect our judgment about whether any of these are a good investment.