Canaan closed $72 million share sale to Brevan Howard, Galaxy and Weiss

Canaan Inc. confirmed on November 7, 2025 that it had closed a $72 million registered direct offering of American depositary shares to institutional investors including BH Digital, a division of Brevan Howard, Galaxy Digital and Weiss Asset Management. The completed financing gave the Nasdaq-listed Bitcoin-mining hardware maker additional capital for data centers, manufacturing and research while issuing equity rather than debt, warrants or other derivatives.

The closing mattered because it connected three established investment managers directly to a company that supplied application-specific integrated circuit, or ASIC, machines for Bitcoin mining. It was not an investment in bitcoin itself, and the transaction did not establish that any proceeds had already been converted into computing equipment, mining capacity or digital assets.

What Canaan sold

Canaan’s November 4 offering announcement specified 63,660,477 American depositary shares at $1.131 per ADS. Each ADS represented 15 Class A ordinary shares. Multiplying the disclosed ADS count by the offering price produces $71,999,999.49, which explains the rounded $72 million headline figure.

The ADS ratio also implies approximately 954.9 million underlying Class A ordinary shares. That calculation describes the securities represented by the offering; it should not be confused with 954.9 million separately traded Nasdaq securities. Investors traded the ADSs under the ticker CAN.

Canaan said no warrants, options or other derivative instruments accompanied the shares. That distinction limited the transaction to straightforward equity at closing, without a separately disclosed right for the buyers to acquire more shares later at a preset exercise price. Existing shareholders nevertheless faced dilution because Canaan issued new equity.

The securities were offered under Canaan’s effective Form F-3 shelf registration statement, which the company said had become effective on February 21, 2025. A registered direct offering places registered securities with selected investors under negotiated purchase agreements; it is different from selling shares incrementally into public trading through an at-the-market program.

Where Canaan intended to deploy the money

The November 4 filing said Canaan intended to use net proceeds to acquire and develop North American data-center sites and facilities, expand Bitcoin-mining-machine production capacity, support mining-site deployments and equipment sales, fund research and development, and cover general corporate purposes.

Those categories were management’s stated intentions, not completed expenditures. The November 7 closing release did not disclose offering expenses, the resulting net cash amount, individual investor allocations or a binding project-by-project budget. It also did not identify particular data-center properties or specify how much new manufacturing or mining capacity the financing would produce.

Canaan had described the investment as a change in its capital-markets strategy that could reduce reliance on future at-the-market or other potentially dilutive financing. That was a contemporaneous company claim rather than a guarantee. The completed direct offering was itself dilutive, and nothing in the November 7 record prevented Canaan from raising additional capital later.

Why the institutional participation mattered

The transaction put institutional capital behind several layers of Bitcoin infrastructure: semiconductor design, mining-machine manufacturing, data-center development and Canaan’s own mining operations. Participation by BH Digital, Galaxy Digital and Weiss Asset Management therefore represented more than a passive cryptocurrency-price exposure, although the disclosed records did not reveal each investor’s thesis, holding period or governance expectations.

The evidence supports a narrow conclusion. Canaan completed a reported $72 million gross equity offering on November 7, 2025 under the terms announced on November 4. The financing strengthened the company’s available capital, but it did not by itself verify future operating efficiency, additional hash rate, equipment demand, profitability or returns for shareholders. Those outcomes required later financial statements and operating disclosures.