ASIC Hosting Score: How to Rate a Bitcoin Mining Host

Two ASIC hosting offers can advertise almost the same price per kWh while delivering very different levels of quality and risk.

One may offer documented uptime, local maintenance and precise exit terms. The other may be slightly cheaper, but leave several important points unanswered.

The ASIC Hosting Score is a 100-point due diligence grid designed to compare those offers using a common method.

Short answer

The ASIC Hosting Score rates an ASIC hosting offer out of 100. It looks at five dimensions: real cost, infrastructure, maintenance, contract and transparency.

Each criterion is assessed on two things: the quality of the condition on offer, and the evidence available to verify it.

Why compare hosts with a scoring method?

Comparing several hosting offers is difficult, because their strengths are rarely in the same place.

One offer may be cheaper but subject to revision. Another may advertise better uptime with no verifiable track record. A third may have a local technical team, but no defined response time.

The ASIC Hosting Score turns these elements into a common score. Its purpose is not to pick a host for you, but to make the trade-offs visible.

To identify the criteria to check before signing, read our guide Bitcoin miner hosting: how to choose a hosting offer in 2026.

What is the ASIC Hosting Score?

The ASIC Hosting Score is a rating method developed by Startmining to compare several Bitcoin hosting offers objectively. It assigns a score out of 100 based on technical, contractual and operational criteria.

How is the ASIC Hosting Score calculated out of 100?

The ASIC Hosting Score rests on five categories.

Category	Points
Real cost and predictability	25
Infrastructure	25
Maintenance	20
Contract	20
Transparency	10
Total	100

Cost and infrastructure carry 25 points each, because they directly shape the conditions under which the ASIC operates.

Maintenance and contract carry 20 points each. A badly handled failure can keep a unit offline for several days or weeks. A vague contract can also expose the owner to unanticipated costs or constraints.

Transparency carries 10 points. It also runs through every criterion, via the level of evidence provided.

How are points awarded?

Each criterion is scored out of 5:

• up to 3 points for the quality of the condition on offer;
• up to 2 points for the quality of the available evidence.

Quality of the condition

Level	Points
Information missing or condition unfavourable	0
Weak or highly uncertain condition	1
Acceptable condition with some limits	2
Solid, clearly defined condition	3

Quality of the evidence

Level	Points
Sales claim only	0
Partial document or data	1
Directly verifiable evidence	2

Here is an example.

• One host advertises 99% uptime, without stating the period measured or providing any history.
• A second shows 98% uptime over 12 months, with a history that makes downtime windows identifiable.

The first figure is higher. The second piece of information is nonetheless far stronger for due diligence. The score exists precisely to separate a sales promise from a genuinely documented condition.

1. Real cost and predictability — 25 points

Cost has to be calculable in full.

Criterion	Score
Full cost clearly calculable	/5
Ancillary fees identified	/5
Rate stable or capped	/5
Clear billing method	/5
Entry and exit costs known	/5
Total	/25

An offer does not have to be the cheapest to score well.

A slightly more expensive offer with no surprise fees and a clearly defined pricing formula can be easier to model than a lower rate that comes with variable or poorly documented costs.

2. Infrastructure — 25 points

This category measures the site’s ability to keep ASICs running in good conditions.

Criterion	Score
Documented uptime	/5
Power continuity	/5
Network connectivity	/5
Suitable cooling	/5
Site maturity and continuity	/5
Total	/25

The analysis must not stop at uptime.

You also need to examine the quality of the power supply, the site’s protections, connectivity, the cooling system and the infrastructure’s operating history.

A recently built farm is not necessarily weaker. Its lack of history does, however, reduce the amount of data available to assess it.

3. Maintenance — 20 points

Good infrastructure reduces how often incidents happen. Good maintenance reduces how long they last.

Criterion	Score
On-site technical team	/5
Diagnosis lead time	/5
Repair lead time	/5
Parts availability and major repairs	/5
Total	/20

The key point is to separate detection, diagnosis and repair. An ASIC can be flagged as faulty quickly and still stay offline for weeks if the parts or skills required are not available locally.

Due diligence must therefore look at the whole chain: detection → diagnosis → repair → back in production.

4. Contract — 20 points

A technically strong offer can still be risky if the contractual terms are vague.

Criterion	Score
Hardware ownership clearly established	/5
Responsibilities of each party defined	/5
Precise exit terms	/5
Exceptional situations covered	/5
Total	/20

Due diligence must clearly establish ownership and identification of the ASIC, how responsibilities are split, and the financial and logistical terms for getting the hardware back.

The score must be based on the terms that actually apply, not solely on sales promises.

5. Transparency — 10 points

Transparency measures the client’s ability to monitor and verify their own operation.

Criterion	Score
Dashboard and performance history	/5
Verification of the site and operations	/5
Total	/10

A per-unit dashboard tracks the operation of an individual ASIC far more precisely than a single figure aggregated at farm level.

The goal is to be able to draw a consistent line between the commercial offer, the unit, the site and the production data.

Case study: two similar offers, two different scores

Take two fictional offers with similar rates but different terms.

Criterion	Host A	Host B
Energy price	$0.070/kWh	$0.068/kWh
Uptime	97.8% documented over 12 months	98.5% advertised
Maintenance	Local team, 6 days a week	Subcontracted technician
Diagnosis	Commitment under 24 h	48 h target
Major repairs	Local partner and parts in stock	Shipping to a regional centre
Pricing	Annual revision with a cap	Energy cost may be passed through
Exit	30 days’ notice	90 days’ notice
Dashboard	Per-unit tracking and history	Aggregated hashrate

Offer B is cheaper and advertises slightly higher uptime.

Now let’s apply the ASIC Hosting Score.

Category	Host A	Host B
Cost	20/25	21/25
Infrastructure	22/25	18/25
Maintenance	17/20	11/20
Contract	17/20	13/20
Transparency	9/10	6/10
Final score	85/100	69/100

Worked example: how is the maintenance score built?

To see how the scores are produced, let’s break down the maintenance category.

Criterion	Host A	Host B
Technical presence	5/5	2/5
Diagnosis lead time	5/5	3/5
Repair lead time	4/5	3/5
Parts and major repairs	3/5	3/5
Total	17/20	11/20

• Host A has a local team on site regularly and commits to a diagnosis in under 24 hours.
• Host B also has response capacity, but it depends more heavily on an external provider and its stated lead time is not written into the contract.

On major repairs, both offers have limits. A has a local partner and some parts, but no full repair centre directly on site. B has a regional centre, but shipping the unit potentially increases downtime.

The same logic is repeated for each of the score’s 20 criteria.

• B comes out ahead on cost.
• A takes the lead on infrastructure, maintenance, contract and transparency.

A’s higher final score does not mean B is a bad offer. It shows that B’s price advantage comes with more documentary and operational uncertainty.

The score therefore does not replace the decision. It makes the trade-offs visible.

Once the offer has been analysed, the Bitcoin mining profitability calculator lets you study its economic impact under different assumptions for Bitcoin price, uptime, network difficulty and operating costs.

How should you read your ASIC Hosting Score?

Score	Interpretation
85–100	Robust, well-documented offer
70–84	Credible offer with some points to clarify
55–69	Further due diligence required
Below 55	High level of uncertainty or risk

Three rules help avoid misreading the result.

Missing information must not default to an average score. A lack of evidence does not automatically prove that a condition is bad. It does, however, reduce its value in due diligence.

The contract outranks the sales pitch. A commitment made verbally or in a brochure does not carry the same weight as a clause in the signed contract.

A score must always be tied to a specific offer, site and date. It is not a permanent rating awarded to a company. The same host can run several sites with different rates, teams and contractual terms.

Finally, a high score guarantees neither future mining profitability, nor the absence of incidents, nor the operator’s future solvency. It measures the documented quality of the hosting conditions analysed at a given point in time.

ASIC Hosting Score summary grid

You can use this grid to run a first audit of your own offer.

Category	Criterion	Score
Cost	Full cost calculable	/5
Cost	Ancillary fees identified	/5
Cost	Rate stable or capped	/5
Cost	Clear billing	/5
Cost	Entry and exit	/5
Infrastructure	Documented uptime	/5
Infrastructure	Power continuity	/5
Infrastructure	Network connectivity	/5
Infrastructure	Cooling	/5
Infrastructure	Site maturity	/5
Maintenance	Technical presence	/5
Maintenance	Diagnosis	/5
Maintenance	Repair	/5
Maintenance	Parts and major repairs	/5
Contract	Hardware ownership	/5
Contract	Responsibilities	/5
Contract	Exit terms	/5
Contract	Exceptional situations	/5
Transparency	Dashboard and history	/5
Transparency	Verification of operations	/5
	Final score	/100

Rate your own hosting offer

Use this grid to collect the information, request the evidence you need and compare several offers on a common basis.

ASIC Hosting Score FAQ

What score should you look for when choosing an ASIC host?

A score above 70/100 indicates an offer that is broadly credible under this methodology. Above 85/100, the offer combines solid conditions with a high level of documentation.

Can a cheaper offer get a better score?

Yes. A lower rate is a real advantage if costs are predictable and operating conditions remain solid. The score does not automatically favour the more expensive offer.

How often should a hosting offer be reassessed?

The score should be recalculated after any significant change to the rate, the contract or the site. An annual review also lets you factor in the actual track record on uptime, maintenance and billing.

Take action

👉 Run your profitability simulation in the Startmining Pro calculator.

👉 Explore our ASIC and hosting bundles in the Startmining shop.

👉 Learn more about hosting and our mining farms.

👉 Go deeper with our complete 2026 Bitcoin mining guide.