KR1's FY25: sharp drop in income & NAV, but new AI and DeFi infrastructure strategy aims to drive recovery. Get the full RNS breakdown.
This article covers information on KR1 PLC.
LON:0A9XThese are weak headline numbers from KR1, and there is no point pretending otherwise. Infrastructure income fell to £4.8 million from £12.8 million, net assets dropped to £49.6 million from £139.4 million, and the company swung to a loss per share of 20.23p from earnings per share of 4.43p.
That said, this is not a simple operating collapse story. KR1 is heavily exposed to digital asset prices, so when crypto valuations fall, its reported net asset value – or NAV, the value of assets minus liabilities – can move around violently. That is exactly what happened in FY25.
| Key metric | FY25 | FY24 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure income | £4.8 million | £12.8 million | -62.3% |
| Net assets | £49.6 million | £139.4 million | -64.4% |
| NAV per share | 27.93 pence | 78.76 pence | -64.5% approximately |
| Basic EPS | (20.23p) | 4.43p | Moved into loss |
| Total income from digital assets | £4.9 million | £13.0 million | Lower |
| Cash and cash equivalents | £1.3 million | £1.2 million | Higher |
The big issue was market value. KR1 reported a £22.6 million negative movement in the fair value of intangible assets through profit and loss, a £4.1 million negative movement in the fair value of financial assets, and a further £53.8 million movement in fair value of intangible assets through other comprehensive income.
In plain English, the crypto assets it owns were worth a lot less by the end of the year. Because digital assets are treated as intangible assets under accounting rules, the accounts can look a bit odd, but the economic message is simple enough: asset prices fell hard, and KR1’s balance sheet felt it.
There were also operational pressures. Administrative expenses rose to £5.6 million from £5.3 million, and the company took £1.7 million of expenses linked to its move to the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange.
On top of that, KR1 booked an £8.5 million loss on disposal of intangible assets held at fair value and a £325,709 loss on disposal of intangible assets held at cost. So this was not just a paper valuation story – realised losses also played a part.
Related
Polar Capital Technology Trust sees 102% NAV growth in FY2026, beating its benchmark by 47 points thanks to AI and semiconductor exposure.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
Last updated
Category
InvestingViews
14 viewsLikes
No ratings yet
KR1’s core engine remains staking, which is the process of locking tokens into proof-of-stake blockchains to help secure the network and earn rewards. In FY25, staking made up 99.1% of the company’s total income from digital assets.
The main contributors were Polkadot at £2.0 million, Cosmos at £1.2 million and Celestia at £1.1 million. That tells you the business is still capable of generating real income from its infrastructure activity, even in a tough market.
The problem is scale. £4.8 million of infrastructure income was not enough to absorb costs and valuation damage elsewhere. So while the business model is alive and functioning, FY25 showed it is not defensive enough to shield shareholders when the wider market turns sour.
At 31 December 2025, KR1’s largest holding was Ethereum exposure via Lido Staked ETH, or stETH, at £11.3 million. After that came Polkadot at £7.2 million, Nexus Mutual at £5.8 million, Lido at £5.0 million and RedStone at £4.0 million.
That mix matters. It shows KR1 is not a Bitcoin proxy. It is much more of a specialist infrastructure and protocol investor, with a strong skew towards Ethereum-related activity and selected proof-of-stake networks.
| Largest holdings at 31 December 2025 | Fair value |
|---|---|
| stETH | £11.3 million |
| DOT | £7.2 million |
| NXM | £5.8 million |
| LDO | £5.0 million |
| RED | £4.0 million |
One interesting detail is that the total cost of digital assets held was £64.7 million, against a fair value of £41.9 million at year end. That tells you a fair chunk of the portfolio was underwater on a mark-to-market basis.
The clearest strategic positive here is the successful move to the Main Market in November 2025. KR1 says this broadens institutional eligibility, and I think that is fair. Plenty of larger investors simply will not touch more junior listings.
But the company is also candid that the process consumed management time and limited its ability to expand operations and investments during the year. So shareholders paid for that upgrade twice – once in the £1.7 million cost, and again in management distraction.
Long term, it could prove worthwhile if it improves visibility, credibility and liquidity in the shares. Short term, it did not help the numbers.
Post year end, KR1 launched its Financial Infrastructure Strategy. The idea is to use holdings such as Bitcoin and Ethereum in decentralised finance, or DeFi, to generate yield, with Nexus Mutual cover used as a risk-mitigation tool.
It has also committed part of its existing Nexus Mutual holding to underwrite cover through Nexus Mutual staking pools. That is a notable step because it broadens KR1 away from pure staking income and into additional onchain yield streams.
This is probably the most important strategic development in the release. Why? Because FY25 exposed the weakness of relying so heavily on one income source. Diversifying income is sensible, and arguably overdue.
The catch is that the company has not disclosed expected returns, target allocation sizes, or how quickly this new strategy could move the dial financially. So the direction is encouraging, but investors should not assume an instant earnings fix.
Management is clearly very bullish on the overlap between AI and blockchain infrastructure. The company talks up demand for programmable money, oracle networks and data availability layers, and says it is in the final stages of launching dedicated Ethereum validator operations.
There is also a potential active operator role with RedStone, plus continued interest in Celestia and decentralised AI exposure through Zee Prime II and Gensyn. Strategically, it all hangs together. KR1 wants to be more than a holder of tokens – it wants to be an operator inside the networks it backs.
That is the bullish case, and it is credible enough. But it is still mainly a forward-looking case. Investors now need to see actual revenue contribution from these activities, not just a strong theme deck.
This was a bad year on the numbers, full stop. Income fell sharply, NAV was hammered, and the reported loss was ugly.
But I would split the story in two. The negative side is obvious: KR1 is still very exposed to crypto market swings, and FY25 proved how brutal that can be. The positive side is that the company still generated £4.8 million of infrastructure income, kept liabilities low at £614,000, passed its going concern assessment, and has a clearer strategy to build more income streams in 2026.
So this RNS matters because it shows both the risk and the opportunity in KR1. If you want a steady, predictable London-listed business, this is not it. If you want listed exposure to active digital asset infrastructure with big upside and equally obvious volatility, KR1 is trying to make the case that it is the premium vehicle for that on the LSE.
For now, I would call this strategically interesting but financially bruised. The recovery case rests on execution in 2026, not on anything in these FY25 numbers themselves.
Impax Q3 AUM rises to £23.3bn despite £1.7bn net outflows, driven by market gains and strong investment performance.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
MJ Gleeson FY2026 trading update: steady profits, mixed home sales with operational restructuring improving outlook.
JoshuaJuly 10, 2026
No comments yet - start the conversation.