Sazmining

⚖️ Regulatory

Checked against 4 regulator sources — no warnings found.

Reads whatever court/regulator sources are configured for this score (see the Regulatory section below) and reports back — it's a starting point for your own research, not a verdict.

• US CFTC RED List:5.0/5(Not listed)· checked Jul 9, 2026view ↗

  Not named on the CFTC RED List as of 2026-07-10 (checked by name and domain). Scored 5.0/5 under this project's pass/fail convention for regulator lists: clean = 5.0, listed = 1.0.

• US SEC PAUSE List:5.0/5(Not listed)· checked Jul 9, 2026view ↗

  Not named on the SEC PAUSE list as of 2026-07-10 (checked by name and domain). Scored 5.0/5 under this project's pass/fail convention for regulator lists: clean = 5.0, listed = 1.0.

• IOSCO Investor Alerts:5.0/5(Not listed)· checked Jul 9, 2026view ↗

  Not named on IOSCO’s Investor Alerts Portal as of 2026-07-10 (checked by name and domain). Scored 5.0/5 under this project's pass/fail convention for regulator lists: clean = 5.0, listed = 1.0.

• UK FCA Warning List:5.0/5(Not listed)· checked Jul 9, 2026view ↗

  Not named on the UK FCA Warning List as of 2026-07-10 (checked by name and domain). Scored 5.0/5 under this project's pass/fail convention for regulator lists: clean = 5.0, listed = 1.0.

🛡️ Trust SignalsA

Checked against 4 trust signals — see the per-source breakdown below.

Reads whatever site-health/trust sources are configured for this score (see the Trust Signals section below) and reports back — it's a starting point for your own research, not a verdict.

• ScamAdviser:3.7/5(Likely Safe)· checked Jul 9, 2026view ↗
• Website Exists:5.0/5(A)· checked Sep 3, 2026view ↗
• Website Freshness:4.8/5(94%)· checked Sep 3, 2026view ↗
• Site History:5.0/5(since 2019)· checked Aug 26, 2026view ↗

Trustpilot Summary4.5★

4.5 from 64 Trustpilot reviews. The consistent picture is of a hands-off hosted-mining service that customers find genuinely easy to use: reviewers describe being set up quickly, running multiple rigs across the company's Paraguay, Ethiopia and South Dakota sites, and machines performing as expected over periods measured in years. Customer service is the single most-praised element, and it is unusually personalised — a named account representative appears in a majority of the positive reviews, credited with onboarding, ongoing questions and special requests. Read that two ways: it is consistent with a real account-management model, and it also means the score reflects one relationship strongly, so it may not generalise if that arrangement changes. The dissenting review is worth weighing against the rest. A customer who bought a single machine reports not receiving what they paid for and slow replies to their concerns, and in an update puts total earnings at about $150 since signing up in December — roughly $30 a month, far below what they expected. Small-scale buyers should model returns conservatively and confirm the expected monthly yield in writing before purchase; the enthusiastic reviews come mostly from multi-rig customers, whose economics are different. Re-checked against the 2026-08-30 Trustpilot refresh: nothing has moved. The score, the review count and the eight quotes on file are unchanged, and the most recent review of any kind is still 2026-06-16 — coming up on three months of silence. No comparably detailed complaint has been added, but neither has anything that would answer the one on file, so both the strong service picture and its single unresolved counter-example stand exactly where they did.

Compiled from public forum/search discussion (via manual research, automated tools, or both), not independently verified. Reflects poster opinions, not confirmed fact.

Google Search SummaryC-

A mining-as-a-service operator running a revenue-share model — it takes a percentage of mined bitcoin rather than a flat hosting fee — with published all-in rates in 2026 ranging from about $0.047/kWh in Paraguay to about $0.085/kWh at higher-cost US sites. Around 65 Trustpilot reviewers are genuinely split. Positives describe transparency, straightforward purchasing, effective deployment and good uptime, with repeat buyers adding rigs. The negatives are specific rather than vague: a customer reports having to liquidate rigs after Sazmining shut down the facility hosting their equipment; a multi-year customer records a net loss of $26,448.66 between March 2024 and March 2026 despite mining 0.4147 BTC; and a reviewer argues the 'we only make money when you do' framing is contradicted by a revenue percentage taken whether or not the customer is in profit. Lowered from C to C-: a facility closure that forced customers to liquidate is a material operational finding, and the fee-model complaint is about disclosure rather than luck.

Compiled from public forum/search discussion (via manual research, automated tools, or both), not independently verified. Reflects poster opinions, not confirmed fact.

Reddit SummaryB-

Well regarded on the things that are hard to fake, criticised on price, and with one concrete delivery complaint on record. The strongest endorsement comes from an independent operator running three rigs across three separate hosts, who names Sazmining as one of only two that let him point his hashrate at a pool of his own choosing — the single check he treats as separating trustworthy hosts from the rest. A 2024 r/BitcoinMining thread asking whether the company is legitimate is answered plainly: they are legit and have been around a while, but their hardware prices are pretty high. The company is also visibly technically serious, appearing in r/bitcoinismoney because a customer's rig found a block through Stratum v2 signalling BIP-110, though one commenter there pushes back that describing Sazmining itself as signalling is misleading. The clearest negative is a customer waiting on the new Paraguay facility who was told their rig would be hashing by the 26th and reports it still was not. Sazmining posts its own material to Reddit and runs a near-dormant official subreddit. B- reflects a real, mostly positive record with genuine gripes about pricing and one commissioning delay.

Compiled from public forum/search discussion (via manual research, automated tools, or both), not independently verified. Reflects poster opinions, not confirmed fact.