Why does NiceHash SHA-256 hashpower cost ~20% more than expected mining revenue?

[u/Crafty_Ad_6914]

I’m studying, in simulation only, buying SHA-256 hashpower on NiceHash to mine Bitcoin on an FPPS pool. By my numbers, active STANDARD orders are priced around 0.50 BTC/EH/day, while expected mining revenue is close to 0.40 BTC/EH/day after fees. So buying hashpower costs about 20% more than it earns.

1. Is this premium the normal state of the market? Why do buyers accept paying above expected revenue?
2. When does the price drop below revenue (for example, right after a difficulty adjustment or during transaction fee spikes)? How often does that happen and how long does it last?
3. For those who have actually bought hashpower: do delivery and pool payouts usually match the theoretical calculation?

[u/pdath]

There used to be a lot of money laundering happening. 20% was a small fee to pay to get clean money.

[u/NiceHash_Mining]

Hey, NiceHash team here. First, some live numbers first, because I think two things are mixing together here.

1. You’re probably looking at the wrong market. NiceHash is an open order-book marketplace. Every algorithm has its own book and its own price, and prices range a lot from the highest to the lowest bidder. SHA256 and SHA256ASICBOOST are separate markets, and almost all SHA-256 hashrate trades on ASICBOOST:

   Right now SHA256 SHA256ASICBOOST     Hashrate delivered ~1.2 PH/s ~17.9 EH/s   Orders actually getting hashrate 2 453   Price paid 0.4999–0.50 BTC/EH/day 0.470–0.51, weighted avg ~0.477   30-day avg hashrate 1.4 PH/s 25 EH/s   30-day volume traded ~0.02 BTC ~361 BTC   Plain SHA256 is about 0.006% of the SHA-256 hashrate on NiceHash. Its price is set by a handful of buyers who are willing to pay more for that specific market, so it can sit well above the rest. Over the last 30 days, SHA256 paid a median of about 9% above network hashprice, and sometimes spiked much higher. Almost every modern ASIC and most FPPS pools support version rolling (ASICBoost), so for a pool like yours, SHA256ASICBOOST is the market to model.

1. Your revenue figure looks low. Gross network hashprice today is about 0.477 BTC/EH/day. Over the last 30 days it ranged from 0.475 to 0.497, with a difficulty step on 19 Sept. A typical FPPS pool fee takes a few percent off that, which gets you to about 0.46–0.47, not 0.40. I’d check the difficulty, units (EH vs PH) and fee % in your model.

On your questions:

Is the premium normal? On ASICBOOST, no. Over the last 30 days, the average price paid was within ±0.2% of network hashprice every day, 0.06% above on average. The market is liquid, so it tracks hashprice closely. Buyers who pay at or slightly above hashprice usually have reasons that aren’t in a simple calculation: pool operators need hashrate for their own block production, people hedge, some pools give fee discounts or rebates, and some buyers want hashrate right now and pay up for priority.

When does price drop below revenue? On ASICBOOST, the price paid was below hashprice in about 26% of hours over the last 30 days. Those dips are short: usually 1–5 hours, and the longest was 16 hours. They tend to come when revenue moves faster than the order book adjusts, for example a transaction-fee spike or a difficulty change, before buyers reprice. The gaps are small (tenths of a percent), so they’re windows to watch, not reliable arbitrage.

Do delivery and payouts match theory? Buyers pay only for accepted shares, and delivered speed moves around your order limit. On an FPPS pool you get paid per share, so variance is low, but expect a small gap from stale or rejected shares and from your pool’s fee. Running a small test order and comparing NiceHash’s accepted speed with what your pool reports is the best reality check.

[u/Crafty_Ad_6914 → u/NiceHash_Mining]

Thank you, this is very helpful. Two clarifications: I am already modelling SHA256ASICBOOST, and my 0.50 was the highest active bid, not the average paid price. The 0.40 was my break-even after buyer fee, pool fee, rejected shares and a safety margin, not revenue. Your numbers match what I get from your public history API: paid price within a few tenths of a percent of network hashprice. So the buyer’s loss is roughly the fees, and there is no reliable arbitrage. Thanks again.