What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on both Circle (CRCL) and CoreWeave (CRWV), citing existential regulatory risks, reliance on a few hyperscalers, and unsustainable growth assumptions.
Risk: Regulatory risk around stablecoins and power grid constraints for CoreWeave's GPU deployment.
Opportunity: None identified.
Plenty of tech companies went public over the past year, but some of those tech IPOs have already fizzled out amid intensifying macro headwinds. Two of the better IPOs that resisted that sell-off were Circle (NYSE: CRCL) and CoreWeave(NASDAQ: CRWV).
Circle's stock has more than quadrupled from its IPO price of $31, while CoreWeave's stock has nearly tripled from its IPO price of $40. Let's see why these two tech IPOs impressed the market, and why they're still worth buying in this frothy market this month.
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on a little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly," providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need.
Circle, which went public last June, is the issuer of USD Coin(CRYPTO: USDC), a stablecoin pegged to the U.S. dollar and backed by its own cash and U.S. Treasuries.
Stablecoins can be used to settle cross-border transactions faster and more cheaply than conventional SWIFT interbank transfers. They're also an appealing way for people to preserve their savings in countries with currency devaluation issues without buying actual U.S. dollars. Stablecoins can also be staked (locked up) on centralized exchanges and decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols to earn yields that are often higher than those at traditional banks.
Circle earns interest from the bank deposits and short-term Treasuries, which it holds to back USD Coin. That reserve interest income accounts for most of its profits.
If the market's demand for USD Coin rises, it will mint more coins and accumulate more cash and Treasuries to back them, thereby boosting its reserve interest income. However, the latest Senate draft of the U.S. Clarity Act -- the proposed regulatory framework for all cryptocurrencies -- could limit the ways stablecoins can earn yields.
The latest proposed limitations will permit activity-based rewards but ban yields on passive stablecoin balances, which could make stablecoins less appealing than conventional savings accounts. But even if the Clarity Act curbs market demand for stablecoins, Circle can continue to generate interest income from its current reserves while growing transaction and subscription fees from its APIs, digital wallets, and other applications.
From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect its revenue and adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) to grow at CAGRs of 26% and 32%, respectively. With an enterprise value of $25 billion, it still looks reasonably valued at 27 times this year's adjusted EBITDA -- making it a great play on the nascent stablecoin market.
CoreWeave
CoreWeave, which went public last March, was once an Ethereum mining company. But after the 2018 cryptocurrency crash, it abandoned that business model and repurposed its GPUs for AI tasks. It only operated three data centers at the end of 2022, but that network expanded to 43 data centers with over 250,000 GPUs at the end of 2025.
By installing Nvidia's (NASDAQ: NVDA) top-tier data centers at scale across those data centers, CoreWeave can process certain AI tasks 35 times faster and 80% cheaper than larger and more diversified cloud infrastructure platforms.
CoreWeave generates most of its revenue from Microsoft, but its new contracts with OpenAI and Meta Platforms should gradually reduce its dependence on the tech giant. It had a massive backlog of $99.4 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2026, up from $66.8 billion at the end of 2025 and quadrupling from a year earlier.
From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect CoreWeave's revenue and adjusted EBITDA to grow at CAGRs of 97% and 101%, respectively, as the AI market expands. With an enterprise value of $104 billion, it still looks surprisingly cheap at 14 times this year's adjusted EBITDA. It's taking on a lot of debt to buy more GPUs and build more data centers, but its ambitious strategy should pay off over the long run as economies of scale kick in.
Should you buy stock in Circle Internet Group right now?
Before you buy stock in Circle Internet Group, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Circle Internet Group wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $471,827!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,319,291!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 986% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 207% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
Leo Sun has positions in Meta Platforms. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Ethereum, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Both companies face significant terminal value risks due to extreme client concentration and dependence on favorable macro-monetary conditions that are unlikely to persist through 2028."
The article presents a classic 'growth at any price' narrative, but investors should be wary of the underlying structural risks. For Circle (CRCL), the reliance on interest income from Treasuries makes it a proxy for interest rate policy rather than a pure fintech play; if the Fed cuts rates aggressively, their margins compress instantly. CoreWeave (CRWV) is even more precarious. While a $99.4 billion backlog is impressive, it is highly concentrated in a few hyperscalers. If Microsoft or Meta pivot to custom silicon or optimize their own internal infrastructure, CoreWeave’s debt-fueled capital expenditure cycle becomes a massive liability. Both stocks are priced for perfection in a cooling macro environment.
If CoreWeave successfully captures the 'middle-market' AI compute demand that hyperscalers ignore, their economies of scale could create a defensive moat that justifies the current EBITDA multiple.
"Regulatory threats to stablecoin yields and customer/debt risks in AI infrastructure severely undermine the article's buy thesis despite headline growth."
This article pitches CRCL and CRWV as resilient IPOs in a frothy market, citing explosive growth and 'cheap' valuations at 27x and 14x 2026 adj. EBITDA. But it downplays Circle's (CRCL) existential regulatory risk from the Clarity Act, which could ban passive yields and erode USDC demand amid Tether's dominance (unmentioned). Profits are rate-sensitive; Fed cuts would crush reserve income. CoreWeave (CRWV) boasts a $99B backlog and 97% rev CAGR, but Microsoft reliance ('most' revenue), hyperscaler competition, and debt-heavy capex for 250k+ GPUs risk a capex cliff if AI ROI disappoints. CAGRs assume perfect execution in overcrowded AI infra.
If Clarity Act clarity boosts compliant USDC adoption and AI demand sustains hyperscale capex outsourcing to specialists like CRWV, projected CAGRs could deliver multi-baggers from current multiples.
"Both stocks are priced for flawless execution of aggressive growth assumptions that have already been partially reflected in their 3-4x IPO returns, leaving little margin for regulatory setbacks (Circle) or competitive/margin pressure (CoreWeave)."
The article conflates valuation cheapness with investment quality. CoreWeave (CRWV) at 14x EBITDA looks 'cheap' only if: (1) 97% revenue CAGR sustains through 2028—historically rare for capex-heavy infrastructure plays; (2) gross margins don't compress as competition enters GPU cloud; (3) the $99.4B backlog converts at stated economics, not at discounted rates as customers gain leverage. Circle (CRCL) faces existential regulatory risk: if the Clarity Act bans passive yield, USDC's primary value prop evaporates. The article acknowledges this but dismisses it too quickly. Both stocks have tripled/quadrupled—momentum, not fundamentals, is pricing them now.
CoreWeave's backlog growth (4x YoY) and exclusive Nvidia partnership access are genuine moats; if AI capex spending accelerates as expected, 97% growth is achievable and 14x EBITDA could be a steal in 2028.
"Valuations rest on robust stablecoin yields and booming AI demand; regulatory limits and higher financing costs could sharply compress returns and turn backlogs into uncertain revenue."
The piece paints Circle (CRCL) as a yield-generating stablecoin player and CoreWeave (CRWV) as a rapidly expanding AI compute specialist, but it relies on optimistic assumptions. Regulatory risk around stablecoins (e.g., Clarity Act yield caps) could throttle reserve income and fee growth. CoreWeave’s impressive backlog and 250k GPUs depend on sustained AI demand and favorable GPU pricing, yet debt-financed expansion raises interest-rate sensitivity and execution risk in data-center builds. Competition from hyperscalers and potential cooling of AI compute demand could pressure margins. In a slowdown, crypto/regulatory shocks or capex shocks could turn those backlogs into uncertain revenue rather than scalable profits.
Backlog may overstate booked revenue and regulatory shifts could cap yields; rising financing costs and slower AI growth could quickly undermine the thesis.
"CoreWeave’s true value lies in its strategic role as Nvidia’s preferred supply-chain partner, potentially setting the stage for an acquisition rather than long-term independent growth."
Claude, you’re right about the momentum-driven pricing, but you’re ignoring the 'Nvidia-as-a-bank' factor. CoreWeave isn't just a cloud provider; it’s a vehicle for Nvidia to bypass hyperscalers and maintain pricing power. If Nvidia continues to prioritize GPU allocation to CRWV, their moat isn't just 'compute'—it's supply chain supremacy. The real risk isn't just margin compression; it's the potential for Nvidia to eventually acquire them, turning this into a forced exit play.
"Nvidia-CoreWeave ties are partnership, not acquisition risk; power constraints threaten GPU utilization more acutely."
Gemini, Nvidia acquiring CoreWeave at a $20B+ valuation would dilute its shareholders massively amid its own $3T market cap and GPU margins scrutiny—it's symbiotic financing, not takeover bait. The unmentioned elephant: escalating power costs and grid delays could cap CRWV's 250k GPU deployment at 50-70% utilization, turning backlog into stranded assets faster than hyperscaler shifts.
"CoreWeave's backlog is hostage to grid infrastructure, not just GPU supply or AI demand."
Grok's power-grid constraint is the hardest constraint nobody modeled. CoreWeave's $99B backlog assumes 250k GPUs deployed, but data-center power density (10-15MW per facility) hits grid limits faster than capex. If utilization caps at 50-70% due to power infrastructure lag—not hyperscaler competition—the CAGR collapses silently. This isn't regulatory or demand risk; it's physics. The article never mentions power costs or grid interconnection timelines.
"Grid/interconnection delays and permitting risk could derail CRWV's backlog-driven growth even with Nvidia alignment."
Claude, your grid constraint framing is essential, but the unmodeled risk is permitting and interconnection delays that push timelines out and elevate carrying costs. Even with Nvidia alignment, backlog depends on synchronized grid upgrades, cooling, and local approvals; any delay crushes utilization and cash conversion, not just margins. If backlog is contingent on perfect infra rollout, the 97% growth assumption looks like a house of cards.
Panel Verdict
Consensus ReachedThe panel consensus is bearish on both Circle (CRCL) and CoreWeave (CRWV), citing existential regulatory risks, reliance on a few hyperscalers, and unsustainable growth assumptions.
None identified.
Regulatory risk around stablecoins and power grid constraints for CoreWeave's GPU deployment.