In the third quarter of 2026, a mining company associated with the Trump family and an exchange presented a tense state in their respective financial reports and public statements, reflecting different aspects of the same industry. American Bitcoin, a Bitcoin mining company co-founded by Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., reported a net loss of about $57.2 million in the second quarter of this year but showed a net profit of about $126 million in the third quarter. It seemed like a "glorious turnaround," but a detailed breakdown reveals that the revenue was approximately $63.4 million, lower than the second quarter's $67 million, and Bitcoin production dropped from about 932 coins to approximately 891 coins. The report was really supported by about $197 million in digital asset gains, and this reliance on asset price fluctuations rather than an improvement in the main mining business structure naturally raised doubts about the quality and sustainability of profits. Almost simultaneously, Sheldon Xia, the founder of the cryptocurrency exchange BitMart, publicly admitted that the security team was severely understaffed and mentioned that employees faced threats and former employees were suspected of retaliation, making it even more difficult to retain key security and technical staff. Despite emphasizing that the team was still trying to protect user data and asset safety, the signals on-chain did not provide complete reassurance – Bitquery identified about $391,000 of suspicious transfer flows related to a wallet connected to the Mercado Bitcoin attack. This finding was discussed alongside BitMart's security situation in the media but did not provide a clear conclusion pointing to actual user losses. In contrast to the mining company relying on digital asset gains to "turn a profit" and the exchange struggling to maintain security under staff shortages, the industry's outlook for this quarter resembled a mirror, reflecting a double dependence on price fluctuations and limited human resources.
Trump Mining Company Turns Around on Price
If we shift focus back to American Bitcoin's financial report, this mining company bearing the Trump family's label faced a particularly glaring turning point in 2026: the second quarter still recorded a net loss of about $57.2 million, while by the third quarter, it had reported a net profit of about $126 million – the report transformed from blood red to bright green. However, upon closer examination, it is difficult to simply understand this "turnaround" as a victory for the mining business. As a company theoretically relying primarily on Bitcoin mining and related businesses, the Q3 yield was about 891 coins, not only fewer than the Q2's approximately 932 coins, but also marked a decline, with corresponding revenue dropping from about $67 million to about $63.4 million. The main business did not expand, but rather slightly contracted.
What truly reversed the loss was the figure for digital asset gains. In Q3 2026, American Bitcoin recorded approximately $197 million in digital asset gains, an amount far exceeding the quarterly revenue itself and significantly greater than net profit, indicating that after deducting costs and expenses, the company's positive financial standing was almost entirely supported by this gain. In other words, with mining output decreasing and revenue declining from the previous quarter, the profit structure shifted from "depending on mining for income" to "relying on digital asset gains to support the financial report." The profits in Q3 appeared more like a release of earnings closely tied to asset price fluctuations rather than a result of sudden improvements in the efficiency or scale of the mining business, which also laid the groundwork for subsequent disputes regarding profit quality.
Revenue Decline, Is This Profit Resilient Enough?
From the numbers, this seemingly impressive profit is not built on the expansion of the main business. In Q3 2026, American Bitcoin's revenue was about $63.4 million, down from approximately $67 million in Q2, with mining output also falling from about 932 Bitcoins to about 891. In a scenario with both revenue and production declining, the company presented a net profit of about $126 million, while the figure that supported the report's transformation from red to green was the approximately $197 million in digital asset gains. This means that if the direction of relevant asset prices reverses, this "paper profit" is likely to become a burden in the next quarter, and the appearance of profitability may backfire.
For investors, this financial report looks more like a splitting question: on one hand, there are continuously declining mining revenues and output; on the other hand, there are digital asset gains that highly depend on market conditions. It is necessary to evaluate separately the main business's ability to generate cash and the overall company's sensitivity to asset prices. However, the publicly available information has not disclosed the specific verification methods and audit opinions for this $197 million in digital asset gains, the specific publication date of the financial report, detailed asset-liability structure, and guidance for future quarters are also absent. In the absence of key information, it is difficult to determine whether this transition from loss to profit is due to operational improvement or market benefits. Any judgment based on this report must leave sufficient room for uncertainty.
BitMart Exposes Urgent Security Staff Shortage
While the market was still discussing the quality of the mining company's financial report, a more direct risk signal emerged from the exchange side. BitMart founder Sheldon Xia recently acknowledged publicly that the company's security team is currently "severely understaffed," and it's not just a matter of not being able to hire people easily. He mentioned that some employees are facing external threats, and there are even cases of former employees suspected of retaliation. In this atmosphere, it has become increasingly difficult for technical personnel willing to remain on the front lines of security long-term, and the stability of the team is significantly weakened. Xia emphasized that the team is still trying to protect user data and asset safety, but did not disclose specific numbers for resignations or the size of the security team, making it difficult for external observers to gauge how strained the team really is with quantitative measures.
For any exchange that manages user assets, the security team is the "last line of defense" for daily risk control and emergency response. The combination of understaffing and ongoing psychological pressure means that the same levels of monitoring, auditing, and emergency handling are being performed by fewer individuals under greater intensity, naturally raising the probabilities of misjudgments and delayed responses. At the same time Sheldon Xia made these statements, public reports revealed that Bitquery had identified around $391,000 in suspicious transfer flows related to wallets connected to the Mercado Bitcoin attack. These on-chain anomalies were discussed alongside BitMart's security situation in the media, although there is currently no evidence indicating that BitMart users have experienced direct losses, the company's tense state on the organizational security front has become an unavoidable variable when assessing its subsequent risk exposure.
On-Chain Signals from $391,000 Suspicious Transfer
According to public information, Bitquery tracked a suspicious on-chain pathway of about $391,000: funds originating from an unknown holding address flowed through several intermediaries and ended in a wallet tagged as "related to the Mercado Bitcoin attack." Because this wallet was previously tagged in connection with the attack event, this cross-account and cross-platform flow could easily be interpreted as a potential risk transmission chain – even though there is currently no evidence proving that the sending end is BitMart, the media chose to present this transfer alongside BitMart's security situation, allowing observers to automatically link the two in their minds.
The real pressure lies in the compounded circumstances: on one side, Sheldon Xia admitted that the security team is severely understaffed, with internal issues of employees being threatened and former employees retaliating affecting daily risk control responses; on the other side, there are on-chain movements of funds appearing related to historical attack wallets. Even if current authoritative information does not suggest that this $391,000 has resulted in direct losses for BitMart users and there is no clear causality to classify it as "BitMart bleeding," the chain of uncertainty presented by these signals is enough to raise questions in regulators, partners, and users regarding its compliance capacity and risk control quality, and this uncertainty can only be gradually alleviated through subsequent on-chain fund flows and official disclosures.
Dual Trials of Profit and Security
Looking at American Bitcoin and BitMart on the same timeline reveals a similar background: whether it is the mining company relying on approximately $197 million in digital asset gains to turn a profit in Q3 2026, while experiencing declines in revenue and mining output, or the exchange with a severely understaffed security team facing employee threats and former employee retaliation, which has been associated with on-chain identification of about $391,000 flowing into suspected wallets related to attacks, commercial outcomes are highly magnified by external pricing environments and security events. For the mining company, what needs to be closely monitored next is not just whether the next quarterly report can still deliver net profits at roughly $126 million, but whether the trends in main revenue and mining output will continue to weaken, and if digital asset earnings will further increase as a share of the financial report. For the exchange, the focus will be on whether the security and technical teams can stabilize and whether subsequent disclosures regarding suspicious transfers and potential risk exposures are clear. From the perspective of investors and users, the observation will focus on the representation of digital asset exposure in the financial report structure, whether risk provisions are adequate, and how this suspicious on-chain behavior related to the Mercado Bitcoin attack wallet flows thereafter, and whether new anomalous addresses emerge. It is important to emphasize that all current judgments are based on limited public reports and on-chain signals from the second half of 2026; any changes in regulatory attitudes or the company's self-disclosure path may reshape the market's risk pricing for the quality of American Bitcoin's profits and BitMart's security resilience.
Join our community, let's discuss and grow stronger together!
AiCoin Exclusive Hyperliquid Benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin Exclusive Aster Benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-Chain Telegram Community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-Chain Community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin On-Chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到[email protected]，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
