Exhibit · Form 10-K · Item 1A Risk Factors · scanned 2026-09-24
What the crypto exchange and custody filings say about the halving
5 US-listed crypto exchange, custody and wallet companies are in this scan — a stated roster, not every one listed in the US. 5 have filed an annual report. All 5 disclose this one: if block rewards and transaction fees do not pay miners enough, the network is put at risk. Four of them say it in the same sentence. Three add the view from their own seat: they pay the network's fees when they move coins, and those fees may rise. Their own words, each linked to EDGAR.
The ETFs disclose it about an asset. Three of these five exchanges and custodians also file the network fees they pay as a cost of their own. What it costs ↓
Form 10-KItem 1A What the crypto exchange and custody filings say about the halving verified 2026-10-01 Download the full report Every quote with its EDGAR address and hash, the full roster, the arithmetic and the method.
Risk factors: declining mining rewards
verbatim · four of these five file the same bullet, near word for word
Form 10-K · filed 2026-03-11
Item 1A Risk Factors
In approximately 2140, new Bitcoin tokens will no longer be awarded for adding a new block and miners will only have transaction fees to incentivize them. As a result, it is expected that miners will need to be better compensated with higher transaction fees to ensure that there is adequate incentive for them to continue mining. If transaction confirmation fees become too high, the marketplace may be reluctant to use Bitcoin. This may result in decreased usage and limit expansion
In approximately 2140, new Bitcoin tokens will no longer be awarded for adding a new block and miners will only have transaction fees to incentivize them
Translation of the highlighted sentence. The excerpt above is the filing's own English.
Wallet, not order book. Exodus makes a self-custody crypto wallet with in-app swaps. Its filing is the only one in this set with a risk factor of its own on the mechanism — Bitcoin-specific, from the miner's costs to the 2140 endpoint.
The same Exodus risk factor, continued — the archive splits it at page breaks:
of the Bitcoin network in the retail. Conversely, if the reward for miners or the value of the transaction fees is insufficient to motivate miners, they may cease expending processing power for any blockchain to solve blocks and confirm transactions. Ultimately, if the awards of new Bitcoin for solving blocks declines and transaction fees for recording transactions are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners, or if the costs of validating transactions grow
The same Exodus risk factor, continued — the archive splits it at page breaks:
disproportionately, miners may operate at a loss, transition to other networks or cease operations altogether. Each of these outcomes could, in turn, slow transaction validation and usage, which could have a negative impact on the Bitcoin network, which is the primary network used for Exodus’ operations.
Form 10-K · filed 2026-02-12
Item 1A Risk Factors
if rewards and transaction fees for miners or validators on any particular crypto network are not sufficiently high to attract and retain miners or validators, a crypto network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack;
a crypto network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack
Translation of the highlighted sentence. The excerpt above is the filing's own English.
Shared language. GEMI, FIGR and BTGO file this same bullet, near word for word — only the network's name changes. It is one line in a list of network risks, about any network, not Bitcoin by name. Counted here as one sentence in four filings, not four independent warnings.
Same 10-K, Item 1A — the fee side. Coinbase pays network fees when it moves crypto assets. The archived paragraph ends at a page break, mid-sentence; nothing past its last word is quoted.
In addition, we also pay blockchain transaction fees when we move crypto assets for various operational purposes, such as when we transfer crypto assets between our hot and cold wallets, for which we do not charge our customers. However, blockchain transaction fees have been and may continue to be unpredictable. If the block rewards for miners on any blockchain network are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners, miners may demand higher transaction fees, or collude to reject low transaction fees
Form 10-K · filed 2026-03-31
Item 1A Risk Factors
if rewards and transaction fees for miners or validators on any particular blockchain network are not sufficiently high to attract and retain miners or validators, a digital asset’s network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack;
a digital asset’s network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack
Translation of the highlighted sentence. The excerpt above is the filing's own English.
Shared language. COIN, FIGR and BTGO file this same bullet, near word for word — only the network's name changes. It is one line in a list of network risks, about any network, not Bitcoin by name. Counted here as one sentence in four filings, not four independent warnings.
Same 10-K, Item 1A — the fee side: the network fees this company pays when it moves digital assets, and what it says happens if miners demand more.
In addition, we also pay blockchain network fees when we move digital assets for various operational purposes, such as when we transfer digital assets between our hot and cold wallets, for which we do not charge our users. However, fees can be unpredictable and, if miners or validators demand higher transaction fees for recording transactions in the underlying blockchain network, the cost of using the applicable digital asset may increase and the marketplace may be reluctant to accept such digital asset as a means of payment. Alternatively, miners or validators could collude in an anti-competitive manner to reject low transaction fees and force users to pay higher fees. While we do not expect such behavior, higher transaction confirmation fees may adversely affect our business.
Form 10-K · filed 2026-03-16
Item 1A Risk Factors
if rewards and transaction fees for miners or validators on any particular digital asset network are not sufficiently high to attract and retain miners or validators, a digital asset network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack;
a digital asset network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack
Translation of the highlighted sentence. The excerpt above is the filing's own English.
Shared language. COIN, GEMI and BTGO file this same bullet, near word for word — only the network's name changes. It is one line in a list of network risks, about any network, not Bitcoin by name. Counted here as one sentence in four filings, not four independent warnings.
Same 10-K, Item 1A — the fee side: the network fees this company pays when it moves digital assets, and what it says happens if miners demand more.
In addition, we pay transaction fees when we move digital assets for various operational purposes, for which we do not charge our customers. Such fees have been and may continue to be unpredictable, and may vary depending on a range of factors including activity levels on the relevant blockchain network and parameters specified by the governance processes of the relevant blockchain network. In addition, for PoW and PoS networks, if the block rewards for miners or validators on any blockchain network are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners or validators, miners or validators may demand higher transaction fees, or reject low transaction fees and force users to pay higher fees, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Form 10-K · filed 2026-03-27
Item 1A Risk Factors
if rewards and transaction fees for miners or validators on any particular digital asset network are not sufficiently high to attract and retain miners or validators, a digital asset network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack;
a digital asset network’s security and speed may be adversely affected, increasing the likelihood of a malicious attack
Translation of the highlighted sentence. The excerpt above is the filing's own English.
Shared language. COIN, GEMI and FIGR file this same bullet, near word for word — only the network's name changes. It is one line in a list of network risks, about any network, not Bitcoin by name. Counted here as one sentence in four filings, not four independent warnings.
The halving itself. All five list it in Item 1A, most as one bullet in a list of price risks. As this company files it:
the reduction in mining rewards of Bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time and reduces the block reward earned by miners
The halving itself. All five list it in Item 1A, most as one bullet in a list of price risks. As this company files it:
the reduction in blockchain transaction fees of Bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time and reduce the block reward earned by miners
The halving itself. All five list it in Item 1A, most as one bullet in a list of price risks. As this company files it:
the reduction in mining rewards of Bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time and reduces the block reward earned by miners
The halving itself. All five list it in Item 1A, most as one bullet in a list of price risks. As this company files it:
the reduction in mining rewards of Bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time and reduces the block reward earned by miners
The halving itself. All five list it in Item 1A, most as one bullet in a list of price risks. As this company files it:
further reductions in mining rewards of Bitcoin, including due to block reward halving events, which are regularly occurring events that occur after a specific period of time that reduce the block reward earned by “miners” who validate Bitcoin transactions, or increases in the costs associated with Bitcoin mining, including increases in electricity costs and hardware and software used in mining, or new or enhanced regulation or taxation of Bitcoin mining, which could further increase the costs associated with Bitcoin mining, any of which may cause a decline in support for the Bitcoin network
fees ÷ (fees + subsidy), BTC terms · monthly average of daily values since 2012 · ▲ halving · the shaded band is the shortfall: to hold miner revenue where it is today when the subsidy halves at block 1,050,000, fees must reach 50% of revenue — 79× today — at a constant BTC price. Fees are drawn flat because nothing in the series implies a climb. · data through 2026-09-27 · verified 2026-10-01
The halving is the schedule. The security budget is the consequence.
The security-budget index today, against five published benchmarks for what it should be.
OPEN →What Bitcoin pays miners, live, per second — and what it stops paying at block 1,050,000.
OPEN →What has to replace the block reward as it goes to zero, and one way it could.
Quotes are excerpts from public SEC filings, reproduced verbatim for commentary. Issuer names and marks identify the documents quoted and imply no affiliation or endorsement. Nothing here is investment advice. Filings scanned 2026-09-24 · figures verified 2026-10-01.
Logo files via the issuers' own sites and Wikimedia Commons. Full attribution in logos/_sources.json.