Scrutica
Power
H100 Equiv
Supply Chain
Not yet available
Power capacity, hardware inventory, upstream suppliers, and downstream customers for the row owned by Microsoft Corporation; any BIS Entity List exposure is walked through the canonical org graph rather than asserted at the facility row.
Capacity, ownership chain, and supply-chain position for Microsoft Fairwater Wisconsin, including any export-control exposure that surfaces when the BIS Entity List touches a node above the facility in the chain.
As of 2026-06-12
Operator (or owner of record) per the Scrutica facility row.
Microsoft Corporation, the documented owner of Microsoft Fairwater Wisconsin, sits as a seed node in 1 pre-built cascade scenario. Severity is the scenario's seed-impact value (per-node override where one is defined); decay reflects the curator's substitutability assessment for the disrupted role. Run any scenario to walk the propagation through the full supply-chain graph.
Restricted-jurisdiction customers retain some domestic cloud alternatives (Alibaba Cloud, Tencent Cloud, Yandex, regional sovereign clouds) but the GPU-density and frontier-model-availability gap with US hyperscalers is structural — partial substitution dampens propagation without closing it.
Description
Microsoft Fairwater Wisconsin is set to be the tech giant’s most powerful data center yet. The buildings have a two-story structure, with GPU racks networked vertically as well as horizontally. Each of these GPU buildings is paired with a one-story building dedicated to data storage and processing using CPUs. We estimated compute capacity based on disclosures from Microsoft, and permit applications showing the layout of server racks. Data on Building 3 and 4 is more uncertain, as it is based on
Notes
Total capital cost (2025 USD): $17.71B
Other Microsoft Corporation Facilities
Parent / controlling entity, documented through a public filing or LEI registry.
Source: SEC EDGAR · Confidence HIGH · As of 2026-02-13
Chain terminates at a publicly-listed entity (EXPEDIA GROUP INC). Subsequent ownership is observable via SEC filings or the equivalent national registry.
United States (US)
Operates the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the BIS Entity List under 15 CFR 730–774; deemed-export rules extend reach to foreign nationals on US soil.
Regimes: Wassenaar Arrangement; US EAR (BIS Entity List authority)
Established via: Microsoft Corporation
No flags found across the chain (BIS Entity List, designation-cascade closures, or compute-threshold reporting obligations) as of 2026-06-12. Cascade closures evaluated: 0.
No ownership-change events documented in the available data for any entity in this chain over the last 5 years. Events draw from a licensed corporate-ownership database’s deal records (M&A, buyout, divestiture, asset sale, JV formation); coverage is strongest for private US/EU transactions and partial for state-owned-enterprise restructurings or non-Western private deals. Subsequent ingestion runs may add events here.
No documented sovereign or state-linked LP investment touches any entity in this chain. The licensed fund/LP database’s LP-disclosure rate is partial; absence of evidence here is not evidence of absence.
The walk for Microsoft Fairwater Wisconsinstarts at the operator org id (or owner org id when no operator is recorded) and climbs upward through the unified affiliate graph, normalized to trace child-to-parent relationships. At each hop, the highest-authority parent edge wins (priority ordering: SEC EDGAR / 10-K / LEI registry > licensed corporate-ownership database > licensed supply-chain database > BIS / Federal Register > licensed affiliate graph). Confidence and recency break ties.
The walk terminates on (a) a node with a public-filing-grade ancestor edge — a SEC filer, an LEI-registered listed entity, or a 10-K-disclosed parent — (b) a government entity, (c) a 10-hop limit, or (d) a detected cycle. When termination is not at a public filer or government, the panel labels the chain's end-state as opaque beyond that point. Opacity is reported, never implied.
Per-source confidence (licensed corporate-ownership database): HIGH for Parent / Subsidiary edges; MEDIUM for JV and AFFILIATE edges. Known limitations: (1) shell companies with undisclosed principals terminate the public-record walk; (2) recent transactions reach the panel after the database's weekly refresh; (3) cross-jurisdiction private holding structures may carry intermediate hops that are not in any ingested source. Each row carries an edge-level as of date so freshness is auditable per hop.
Two further caveats are inherent to how the walker and the underlying data compose. The walker selects a single highest-authority parent per hop, so JV or multi-parent ownership structures collapse to one displayed path; alternate parents exist in the ingested sources but are not surfaced on this card. And some licensed-database edges encode parent-of relations against entity-resolved stub IDs whose display name reflects a sub-entity (a business unit, an acquired-then-renamed line) rather than the canonical parent — when a chain reads structurally surprising, the per-row source citation is the authoritative reference, not the chain's narrative shape.
Computed at: 2026-06-12. Walk depth observed: 2 hops. Sources combined: Scrutica facility record + licensed corporate-ownership database + SEC CIK cross-reference + LEI registry + (where applicable) licensed supply-chain database + Federal Register designation closures. The licensed databases are held under subscription and not redistributed; per-hop labels name no vendor.
AMS08
NL