v3.26.1
Fair Value Measurements
 6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]  
Fair Value Measurements Fair Value Measurements
Financial assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis are classified as Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 as follows (in thousands):
As of June 30, 2026
TotalLevel 1Level 2Level 3
Assets:
Digital assets$1,215 $— $1,215 $— 
Transchem Warrants107,906 — — 107,906 
Total Assets$109,121 $— $1,215 $107,906 
Liabilities:
DTR top-up consideration$4,919 $— $— $4,919 
Warrant liability - Class 1 and Class 2 warrants$10,187 $— $— $10,187 
Warrant liability - public warrants428 428 — — 
Total Liabilities$15,534 $428 $— $10,192 

As of December 31, 2025
TotalLevel 1Level 2Level 3
Assets:
Digital assets$1,238 $— $1,238 $— 
Derivative assets3,352 — — 3,352 
Total Assets$4,590 $— $1,238 $3,352 
Liabilities:
Warrant liability - Class 1 and Class 2 warrants$15,589 $— $— $15,589 
Warrant liability - public warrants1,143 1,143 — — 
Total Liabilities$16,732 $1,143 $— $15,589 
The carrying amounts of certain financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivables, unbilled accounts receivables, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, and operating lease obligations approximate their fair values due to their short-term nature. The balance of deposits with clearinghouse not invested in U.S. government securities are in the form of cash, and therefore approximate fair value.
The fair value of the Company's digital assets was determined using Level 2 inputs which included using the value of the digital asset determined as the mid-point of a bid-ask spread in the market management determined to be the principal market for the related digital assets as of June 30, 2026 and December 31, 2025.
The Transchem Warrants are not traded on an active market and are classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Fair value is estimated using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model, with inputs including the quoted closing price of Transchem's underlying shares, the remaining contractual term, the ₹56.25 per remaining warrant exercise price, expected volatility based on Transchem's historical share-price returns over a period commensurate with the Warrants' term, and a risk-free rate derived from Indian government securities of matching maturity. Because the underlying shares are subject to a post-exercise regulatory lock-in and limited trading liquidity, the model incorporates a discount for lack of marketability (DLOM), which is also considered a significant unobservable input for purposes of this disclosure.
The following table presents the change in the fair value of the Transchem Warrants (a recurring Level 3 measurement) for the period from allotment through June 30, 2026 (in thousands):
Investment in Transchem Warrants (ASC 321 – Fair Value Option)Fair Value
Balance as of January 1, 2026$— 
Purchases (allotment date cash consideration)9,410 
Unrealized gains included in the statement of operations98,496 
Balance as of June 30, 2026$107,906 

The following table presents quantitative information about the significant unobservable inputs used in the Level 3 fair value measurement as of June 30, 2026:
Unobservable InputJune 30, 2026Valuation TechniqueDirectional Sensitivity*
Underlying share price (Transchem, BSE-listed)
₹342.10 ($3.62)
Option-pricing (Black-Scholes)Increase in price → increase in FV
Expected volatility58%Historical (18-month lookback)Increase in volatility → increase in FV
Risk-free interest rate6%India 1yr/2yr G-Sec averageIncrease in rate → increase in FV
Discount for lack of marketability (DLOM)22%Calibrated / put-option modelsIncrease in discount → decrease in FV
Remaining contractual term1.39 yearsContractualIncrease in term → increase in FV
* Directional sensitivity reflects the isolated impact of an increase in the indicated input, holding all other inputs constant; inputs are not independent, and a change in one unobservable input is not necessarily accompanied by a change in another.

The fair value of the Transchem Warrants is sensitive to changes in the unobservable inputs described above. Significant increases (decreases) in the underlying share price, expected volatility, or remaining contractual term, in isolation, would result in a significantly higher (lower) fair value measurement. A significant increase (decrease) in the discount for lack of marketability, in isolation, would result in a significantly lower (higher) fair value measurement. Given the regulatory lock-in restrictions applicable to the underlying shares and the limited trading liquidity of Transchem's listed equity, the DLOM applied represents a significant component of, and source of estimation uncertainty in, the fair value measurement.
Since the second quarter 2024, the Company's Class 1 Warrants and Class 2 Warrants were valued using the Black-Scholes-Merton model and a binomial lattice model, respectively, both of which utilize certain Level 3 inputs. Prior to the second quarter of 2024, the Class 1 Warrants and Class 2 Warrants were valued using the Black-Scholes-Merton model and a Monte Carlo simulation, respectively. A significant input to the Monte Carlo simulation included the volatility of movement in the price of the stock underlying the warrants, which was estimated using the historical volatility of the Company's Class A Common Stock over the contractual period of the warrant.
The significant unobservable inputs used for the fair value measurement of the Class 1 Warrants and Class 2 Warrants liabilities as of June 30, 2026 are summarized as follows:
Expected term (years)3.18
Continuous risk-free rate4.1%
Expected volatility128.0%
The Public Warrant liability is valued based on quoted prices in active markets and is classified within Level 1.
The preceding methods described may produce fair value calculations that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. Furthermore, although management believes the Company's valuation techniques are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different fair value measurement at the reporting date.