Are contracts considered securities?

Created by Support Ridgeline Mining, Modified on Thu, Jan 15 at 2:18 PM by Support Ridgeline Mining

Overview

If you’ve come across terms like investment, returns, or profit sharing in the world of digital assets, it’s natural to wonder – does that make a hashrate rental contract a security?


The short answer: no – a standard hashrate rental contract is not a security. This article explains why, how it differs from traditional investment products, and what makes it a straightforward service agreement instead.


What Is a Security?

In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) uses something called the Howey Test to determine whether an arrangement qualifies as a security.


A contract is considered a security if it involves:

  • An investment of money,

  • In a common enterprise,

  • With an expectation of profits,

  • Primarily from the efforts of others (i.e., the buyer is passive).


Traditional examples include stocks and bonds, mutual funds, and investment contracts where you earn profits from someone else’s work.


How Hashrate Rental Contracts Work

A hashrate rental contract is a service agreement – not an investment vehicle. When you rent hashrate, you’re paying for computing power, not investing in a company or profit pool.


Here’s what’s actually happening:

  1. You rent a specific amount of hashrate (computing power) for a set period.

  2. That power is used to participate in Bitcoin mining.

  3. The resulting mining rewards (if any) are automatically sent to you, typically as Bitcoin.


You retain control and risk – payouts depend on network conditions, difficulty, and your rental terms, not on anyone’s managerial performance.


In other words: You’re paying for a digital service that performs a specific technical function – not purchasing an ownership stake or expecting profit from another party’s business operations.


Key Differences Between a Security and a Hashrate Rental

Category

Security

Hashrate Rental Contract

Purpose

To generate profit through another entity’s business activity

To access computing power for mining

Control

Passive – profits depend on management decisions

Active – user chooses hashrate, duration, and payout settings

Ownership

Buyer owns a share or stake in a company or fund

Buyer owns/rents hashrate for a defined term

Payout Source

Profits from a company or pooled enterprise

Mining rewards generated directly by the rented hashrate

Regulation

Overseen by securities laws and financial regulators

Treated as a service or commodity transaction



Why This Distinction Matters

Hashrate rental contracts are designed to be transparent service agreements, not speculative investments. This distinction helps protect both the company and the customer by:

  • Avoiding misleading financial terminology like investment or ROI

  • Maintaining clarity that users pay for a service, not a share in profits

  • Ensuring compliance with consumer and tax laws rather than securities laws


In Simple Terms

  • A security is an investment where someone else’s work generates your profit.

  • A hashrate rental is a service – you rent computing power to participate in Bitcoin mining yourself.

  • Your payouts come directly from network activity, not from a company’s earnings or management decisions.


The Bottom Line

While hashrate rentals can produce Bitcoin rewards, that doesn’t make them securities. They are service-based agreements that give users access to mining power, not ownership in a business or expectation of profit from others’ efforts.


By understanding this distinction, customers can confidently participate in hashrate rentals knowing they’re using a transparent, utility-based service, not entering into an investment contract.

Was this article helpful?

That’s Great!

Thank you for your feedback

Sorry! We couldn't be helpful

Thank you for your feedback

Let us know how can we improve this article!

Select at least one of the reasons
CAPTCHA verification is required.

Feedback sent

We appreciate your effort and will try to fix the article