Independent bitcoin mining still sometimes holds surprises against large industrial operations. Between February and November 2026, several participants managed to discover blocks despite oft
Independent bitcoin mining still sometimes holds surprises against large industrial operations. Between February and November 2026, several participants managed to discover blocks despite often limited computing power. According to data from Soloblocks.io, these operations represent 36 discoveries and approximately 113,149 BTC in cumulative rewards. These results, valued at nearly 8.5 million dollars, illustrate the possibilities of solo mining but also the tiny probabilities surrounding this activity.
Solo mining of bitcoin is based on a simple principle: a participant tries to discover a block without relying on a large industrial operation. They connect their hardware to the network and perform calculations to find a valid solution. When successful, the rules of the service used determine how they receive the reward. In a true solo setup, the finder typically receives the block reward after deducting any applicable fees.
This method attracts bitcoin enthusiasts who want to contribute to the network with their devices. Some use compact machines; others have small, more powerful setups. In both cases, they face competition that includes specialized farms and operators with much greater resources. The power difference greatly reduces their chances but does not eliminate them completely.
Each calculation is an attempt for the Bitcoin network in a probability-based competition. A modest machine can therefore theoretically discover a block, even if its chances remain low. This possibility explains the interest generated by discoveries made by individuals. However, it does not mean these devices have a technical advantage over industrial installations.
The year 2026 provided several examples of independent participation in bitcoin mining. Compact devices have contributed to discoveries recorded by different platforms and pools. Some events involve genuine individual miners, while others include small farms. This distinction is important to understand what exactly “solo mining” means in the published statistics.
Your 1st cryptos with CoinbaseThis link uses an affiliate program.On November 5, 2026, Solo Satoshi, a retailer specializing in small-scale mining hardware, reported a discovery. The company indicated that one of its clients had helped solve block number 974238. The hardware mentioned in their announcement was a NerdQAxe++ Rev 6. This communication linked a compact device with the discovery of a block on the network.
Three days later, the CKPool Solo operator announced another event. The developer indicated that an independent miner had solved block number 974893. Their computing power reached about 581 TH/s, with a worker reported at 564 TH/s. According to the operator, a miner with this computing power has about a one-in-35 chance of finding a block in one year.
On November 7, another CKPool Solo participant also discovered a bitcoin block. The mempool.space developer reported that two solo miners achieved this feat only seven hours apart. This succession of events illustrates the irregular nature of discoveries. Results can cluster over a short period even when each participant has limited probability.
The data from Soloblocks.io records 36 Bitcoin blocks associated with solo-type operations between February 11 and November 7, 2026. The corresponding rewards total about 113,149 BTC, including transaction fees. Their cumulative value was estimated at nearly 8.5 million dollars. This report provides a concrete measure of the activity recorded during this period, without establishing the net profit of each participant.
The monthly distribution of bitcoin blocks shows a particularly irregular pace. February counts four discoveries, April totals six, and May records three. Miners then found two blocks in June and four in July. August and September each count only one, highlighting the gaps between observed periods.
October recorded eight discoveries, while November already counted seven by November 7. This last sequence includes four blocks on Sunday, November 1, then one discovery on November 5. The two blocks reported on CKPool Solo on November 6 and 7 complete this report. These figures show a concentration of events but do not allow predicting their future frequency.
Statistics also require that we consider the nature of the participants. Soloblocks.io archives identify some operations as small farms, with powers estimated at 153.7 PH/s and 540 PH/s. These capacities far exceed those of home devices presented as desktop miners. However, they remain very far from the power of large industrial pools.
Equipment associated with independent bitcoin mining covers a very broad range. Bitaxe Gamma 601 and 602 produce about 1.2 TH/s and consume between 17 and 20 watts. Their compact format allows use in a home environment. They illustrate the existence of devices designed for enthusiasts who want to participate with limited consumption.
The NerdQAxe++ Rev 7 reaches about 4.8 TH/s thanks to four BM1370 chips. The Bitaxe Naja Duo 1201 develops about 4.4 TH/s for 42 watts of consumption. The NerdOctaxe Gamma is higher in this range, with an announced power of about 8 TH/s. These differences offer several levels of capacity and consumption.
The gap between these machines and the total power of the Bitcoin network remains considerable. In the simplified hypothesis presented by the data, the network reaches about 1,000 EH/s. A 10 TH/s machine then represents only a tiny fraction of this global power. This comparison explains why home devices can participate in the process without truly competing with large installations.
According to the same hypothesis, a 10 TH/s machine could wait about 1,900 years before discovering a block. A 1.2 TH/s device could theoretically exceed a 15,000-year wait. These durations are statistical averages, not guaranteed deadlines. Each attempt remains independent: a discovery may happen quickly or never occur during the device’s entire use.
People who do not want to manage their entire Bitcoin infrastructure can go through a specialized pool. These services facilitate device connection and organize participation conditions. However, their models are not identical. Some apply a solo operation where the finder receives the reward, while others share payments among multiple miners.
CKPool Solo is among the services most present in the year’s data. It charges about 2% fees and totals nine recorded discoveries in 2026. Public Pool offers a hosted option without fees and counts five discoveries. Braiins Solo also appears in statistics with five blocks, and some sources indicate fees around 0.5%.
The Parasite Pool category shows why reading the numbers requires precision. The service totals five discoveries in the data consulted. Historically, it attributes a fixed amount of 1 BTC to the finder, then distributes the remainder among participating miners. This hybrid model does not exactly correspond to a formula where a single person keeps the whole reward.
The prospect of a high reward in bitcoin mining is not enough to make it profitable. Devices consume electricity during their entire operation period, while revenues depend on an uncertain discovery. To assess costs, the data take the example of a rate of 0.15 dollars per kilowatt-hour. Under these conditions, a 6 TH/s Avalon Nano 3S used continuously costs about 184 dollars in electricity per year.
Large bitcoin operations often have much lower rates. Some pay about 0.07 dollars per kilowatt-hour, or even less, according to communicated elements. Individuals can therefore bear a significantly higher bill for lower computing power. This gap places small miners in an economically unfavorable situation compared to industrial operators.
Probability-weighted reward estimates confirm this difficulty. For the Avalon Nano 3S, the theoretical annual amount reaches about 75 dollars, excluding pool fees and hardware purchases. This estimate remains below the 184 dollars in annual electricity expenses. Even before accounting for the initial device cost, the calculation reveals a deficit.
The recorded events show that modest-sized bitcoin mining machines can discover blocks despite the dominance of large installations. Computing power remains decisive for probabilities. However, it does not allow predicting in advance which participant will discover the next block. Individual successes result from this combination of technical capacity and statistical chance. They do not challenge the structural advantage of the best-equipped operators.
Block number 974930, reported on November 7, illustrates this mechanism. Each hash is a new attempt without guaranteeing the next will succeed. A machine can therefore succeed earlier than its theoretical average suggests. Conversely, it can operate for years without discovering a block, even if it remains properly connected to the network.
The rest of the year will show whether the pace observed in October and early November is maintained. The number of additional blocks, their distribution among pools, and associated rewards will provide new elements. However, a series of close discoveries is not enough to establish that the chances of small devices have increased. Odds always depend on each participant’s power and that of the overall network.
Ultimately, 2026 results indicate that independent BTC mining retains a possibility of discovery but not assured profitability. Rewards can be significant when a block is found, while costs keep accumulating during the wait. For individuals, the difference between participating in the network and making money remains essential. Future statistics will now allow measuring the evolution of this activity without erasing the gap that separates small devices from large farms.
