← Ante Prodan · Research

Financing-structure brief · filings to FY2025 · compiled 31 Jul 2026

Nvidia and CoreWeave: one counterparty, three positions

Nvidia supplies CoreWeave’s hardware, owns close to six per cent of its equity, and pays it as a customer for computing capacity. The circularity usually described as a loop running between separate firms sits, in this case, inside a single counterparty relationship, and it is documented in the filings rather than inferred.

Nvidia’s stake5.96%17,932,460 Class A shares at the March 2025 listing; 5.18% after the offering
Nvidia as customer$320 mpaid to CoreWeave for capacity under the April 2023 services agreement, to 31 Dec 2024
Top customer67%of CoreWeave’s FY2025 revenue came from Microsoft alone
CoreWeave debt$21.6 bnat 31 Dec 2025, of which $6.7 bn falls due within twelve months

The circuit

Three flows from vendor to neocloud, each a different kind of claim · money entering from the customers below · the dashed path is a contractual constraint, not a flow

VENDOR Nvidia Nasdaq: NVDA Capex booked as cost: 3% of income Interest cover: 501× Spread at 2030: 16 bp NEOCLOUD CoreWeave Nasdaq: CRWV Debt: US$21.6bn Bonds all 144A, coupons 9.00–9.75% Spread at 2030: 464 bp Asset life: 6 years GPU hardware every GPU in the fleet · 250,000+ deployed Equity 17,932,460 Class A shares · 5.96% at listing Cash for compute capacity US$320m paid to 31 Dec 2024 · capacity returns CUSTOMERS · THE MONEY ENTERING Microsoft 67% of FY2025 rev. Meta up to US$14.2bn OpenAI up to US$6.5bn Customer contracts specify Nvidia GPUs substitution is contractually foreclosed, not merely unattractive the buyers write the lock-in, not the vendor

Money enters from the customers and a large share of it leaves again as hardware purchases. Spreads are to a maturity-matched AAA benchmark at the 2030 point, averaged April to June 2026. Commitment figures are contractual maxima, not recognised revenue.

What is documented, and where

Each position is disclosed separately in CoreWeave’s own filings

Supplier
Every GPU in the infrastructure is an Nvidia GPU. More than 250,000 deployed across 32 data centres at 31 December 2024, a majority Nvidia Hopper. The top three suppliers were 46, 16 and 14 per cent of purchases in FY2024.
424B4 · risk factors
424B4 · business
Shareholder
17,932,460 Class A shares held directly, 5.96 per cent before the offering and 5.18 after, named repeatedly as a beneficial owner of more than five per cent of capital stock. A further US$2bn at US$87.20 a share in January 2026.
424B4 · selling
stockholder table
10-K · subsequent events
Customer
A Master Services Agreement of April 2023 under which CoreWeave supplies Nvidia with infrastructure and platform services. Nvidia had paid approximately US$320m under it and related order forms as at 31 December 2024.
424B4 · related-party
transactions

The clause that closes the loop

All GPUs in the fleet are Nvidia GPUs because the customers’ own contracts require it.

The prospectus states that all GPUs in the infrastructure are Nvidia GPUs as a result of obligations in current customer contracts, and separately that customers have contractually specified that use, warning that a forced change of supplier could impair CoreWeave’s ability to meet its obligations.

This matters beyond the single relationship. An argument that AI hardware will commoditise assumes substitution away from the incumbent becomes available once the economics favour it. At this rung of the stack substitution is contractually foreclosed rather than commercially unattractive, and the party doing the foreclosing is the buyer, not the vendor.

When it falls due

Future principal payments on total debt at 31 December 2025, from CoreWeave’s own debt note · US$ millions · the schedule sums to the stated US$21,615m total, and the 2026 line matches the balance-sheet current-debt figure exactly

cash US$3,127m + undrawn US$3,700m 2026 6,708 2027 4,298 2028 2,393 2029 1,769 2030 2,109 Thereafter 4,338 31% of total debt falls due within twelve months of the balance-sheet date · 51% within two years · 80% by end-2030 the three bond issues are only US$6,338m, 29% of the stack; the rest amortises earlier

US$6.7 billion falls due within twelve months, against cash of US$3.1 billion and US$3.7 billion of undrawn facilities. Available liquidity covers the first year only by drawing everything, and the operating result for the year was minus US$46 million.

2026
Convertible Promissory Notes (April 2026), the first OEM and software financing maturities, and quarterly amortisation on the delayed-draw facilities. US$6,708m
10-K · note 10, Debt
2028–29
DDTL 1.0 final payment March 2028, US$1,553m outstanding. Magnetar Loan January 2029. Revolving Credit Facility November 2029, capacity raised to US$2.5bn and maturity extended in November 2025, US$1,000m drawn.
10-K · note 10, Debt
2030–31
DDTL 2.0 and 3.0 August 2030, DDTL 2.1 December 2030. 2030 Senior Notes US$2,000m at 9.25 per cent, June 2030. 2031 Senior Notes US$1,750m at 9.00 per cent, February 2031. 2031 Convertible Notes US$2,588m at 1.75 per cent, December 2031.
10-K · note 10, Debt
TRACE · coupons

The bonds are the long end, not the whole picture. A view built only from traded bonds would place the first maturity in June 2030, because the three note issues run 2030 to 2031. They are 29 per cent of the debt. The delayed-draw facilities, equipment financings and revolver, which amortise from 2026, are the other 71 per cent.

What this does not establish

A structural map, not a verdict

  1. It is not a claim that revenue is counted twice. Each flow is a real transaction with its own consideration. The structure creates concentration and related-party exposure; on this evidence it does not create fictitious revenue.
  2. No pass-through share is asserted. Quantifying how much of a customer’s dollar reaches Nvidia would need a breakdown of data-centre spending by component, which is not sourced here. Land, shells, power, cooling and networking all sit in between.
  3. The equity figure is as at the March 2025 listing. Nvidia’s current holding, after the January 2026 purchase, has not been established from a filing.
  4. Commitments are maxima. Meta and OpenAI are contracted to pay up to those amounts through 2031. Neither is recognised revenue, and take-or-pay terms bind the payer rather than the outcome.
  5. The Microsoft share comes from the risk factor. The financial-statement note anonymises customers and warns that its labels may denote different firms in different years, so the attribution should not be read off that table.
  6. CoreWeave’s borrowing is not simply secured on hardware. Its delayed-draw facilities are collateralised by contractual cash flows as well as infrastructure, and one carries investment-grade tranches, so a material part of the debt is a claim on customer contracts rather than on residual GPU value.
CoreWeave, Inc. Form 10-K for FY2025, filed 2 March 2026 · CIK 0001769628 · accession 0001769628-26-000104
CoreWeave, Inc. final prospectus, Form 424B4, filed 31 March 2025 · accession 0001193125-25-067651
Both retrievable from SEC EDGAR. Registrant’s former name on EDGAR: Atlantic Crypto Corp
Spreads and the capitalisation figures are the author’s computation from FINRA TRACE via WRDS, data to 5 June 2026
All amounts in US dollars · Prepared alongside work in progress on debt-financed AI expansion · Figures subject to revision