APLD vs WULF: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

Reading it: WULF is the cheaper of the two on forward earnings, but cheaper is not the same as better. Pair the valuation with growth (how far the forward P/E sits below the trailing P/E) and risk (beta) before you decide.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. APLD and WULF share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined APLD and WULF exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

Applied Digital designs, builds, and operates data centers for artificial intelligence, high-performance computing, and related workloads. It makes money primarily by leasing critical IT capacity (measured in megawatts of power) to compute customers under long-term contracts, plus a legacy data-center hosting segment. The economics resemble those of a specialized real-estate or infrastructure landlord: the company spends heavily up front to secure power, land, and buildings, then earns recurring rent over multi-year lease terms. Its flagship Polaris Forge 1 campus in Ellendale, North Dakota is engineered to scale up to roughly a gigawatt over time, with a second campus broken ground more recently.

Full APLD guide

TeraWulf Inc. (NASDAQ: WULF) operates data center infrastructure powered largely by low-cost, predominantly zero-carbon energy at its Lake Mariner campus in western New York. Historically it made money by mining bitcoin: running specialized computers to earn block rewards, with revenue tied directly to bitcoin's price and network difficulty. Increasingly it makes money a different way, by leasing turn-key, power-backed data center space to high-performance-computing and AI customers under long-term colocation agreements, where the customer brings the chips and TeraWulf provides the building, power, and operations in exchange for contracted rent.

Full WULF guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• APLD drivers: Anchor CoreWeave leases create long-dated contracted revenue; Power and site pipeline in a supportive jurisdiction.
• WULF drivers: Contracted, hyperscaler-backed AI leases; Scarce energized power as the moat.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: The model is extraordinarily capital-intensive: building gigawatt-scale capacity requires continuous debt and equity financing, and Applied Digital has carried billions in debt while pricing large senior secured note offerings to fund expansion, which raises interest costs and dilution or leverage risk. For WULF, teraWulf still carries meaningful bitcoin price exposure through its remaining mining operations, so crypto weakness pressures part of the business.

Pick APLD if you believe its drivers more; WULF if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the APLD and WULF guides.

APLD. Applied Digital is still reporting net losses while it builds capacity, so traditional earnings multiples do not apply cleanly and much of the story sits in the contracted backlog rather than current profit. Figures are approximate and tied to the asOf date; revenue, losses, debt, and market cap move with each financing, lease, and earnings update. Investors generally weigh the long-dated lease backlog against the heavy ongoing capex and financing needed to deliver it.

WULF. TeraWulf is valued on contracted future AI hosting capacity far more than on current earnings, which remain negative as it spends heavily to build. The market capitalization reflects the long-dated Fluidstack and Core42 leases and the Google backstop, so the figures swing with bitcoin sentiment, AI infrastructure enthusiasm, and construction milestones. All figures are approximate and drawn from Q1 2026 disclosures.

Headline figures (approximate, 2026-06-27): APLD shows revenue (trailing 12 months) ~$319 million, most recent quarter revenue ~$127 million (up ~139% year over year), net loss (most recent quarter, to common) ~$101 million (~$0.36 per share), contracted lease backlog Reported in the tens of billions; CoreWeave expanded to full 400MW at Polaris Forge 1; WULF shows revenue (q1 2026) ~$34 million total, including ~$21 million HPC lease revenue, energized hpc capacity ~60 MW critical IT at Lake Mariner; ~594 MW contracted, cash and restricted cash ~$3.1 billion as of March 31, 2026, total debt ~$5.8 billion (incl. ~$2.5B convertibles, ~$3.2B senior secured notes).

APLD and WULF are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined APLD and WULF exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.