Bitcoin Miners Face Shareholder Backlash Over Executive Compensation

By: Isha Das

In a dramatic shift within the Bitcoin mining sector, shareholders are voicing their dissatisfaction with the substantial pay packages granted to mining executives. Recent findings by asset manager VanEck reveal that shareholder support for executive pay at major U.S. Bitcoin mining companies has dropped significantly, averaging only 64% approval during the current proxy season. This contrasts sharply with the more than 90% approval typically observed in S&P 500 companies.

VanEck’s research, which analyzed filings from eight publicly listed Bitcoin mining companies, indicates a marked increase in executive compensation. Named-executive-officers (NEOs) are seeing their average pay jump from $6.6 million in 2023 to a projected $14.4 million in 2024. Equity and other long-term compensation mechanisms accounted for a massive 79% of the total pay in 2023, rising to 89% in 2024, surpassing the 63% typical in the Russell 3000 and the energy sector.

This discontent is fueled partly by reports that equity grants have skyrocketed. For instance, the CEO of Riot Platforms secured a 2024 stock award valued at $79.3 million, far exceeding awards given to peers such as Marathon Digital Holdings. Moreover, Core Scientific, which is emerging from bankruptcy, has issued a $39.5 million stock grant to its CEO as part of the remuneration package.

The reaction to these developments has been evident in advisory votes on compensation across the industry, with many failing to achieve adequate shareholder backing. Notably, Core Scientific, Riot Platforms, and Marathon Digital Holdings garnered only 38%, 32%, and 22% approval, respectively, for their 2025 executive compensation packages.

Despite these setbacks, executives are attempting to align pay structures more closely with company performance. Six of the eight companies have started using Performance Stock Units (PSUs) that align vesting with multi-year share price goals. However, developments in executive compensation practices reveal inconsistencies in shareholder alignment. VanEck suggests that companies could mitigate shareholder pushback by linking bonuses to cost-per-coin-mined metrics and tying long-term equity incentives to return-on-capital rather than mere share-price targets.