IPv4 Monetisation in 2026: Models, Risks and Strategies for Surplus IP Addresses

Organisations holding surplus or underutilised IPv4 address space face an increasingly practical question:

Should the addresses remain unused, be leased for recurring income, be transferred for immediate liquidity, or be managed through a combination of strategies?

This is the core question behind IPv4 monetisation.

IPv4 monetisation means creating economic value from address capacity that an organisation does not currently need for its own infrastructure.

The most common approaches include:

• selling surplus IPv4 address space;
• leasing IPv4 addresses;
• using a broker or marketplace;
• working directly with an IPv4 service provider;
• reserving part of a block for future internal growth; and
• combining sale and leasing strategies.

But monetisation is not simply a pricing exercise.

A successful strategy also needs to consider:

• registry state;
• commercial and contractual rights;
• transfer eligibility;
• IP reputation;
• routing configuration;
• RPKI and IRR;
• reverse DNS;
• abuse management;
• counterparty risk;
• future internal demand; and
• operational continuity.

IPv4 monetisation works best when financial value, registry state and operational reality remain aligned.

What Is IPv4 Monetisation?

IPv4 monetisation is the process of generating economic value from unused or underutilised IPv4 address capacity.

For some organisations, monetisation means transferring surplus IPv4 resources in exchange for an immediate payment.

For others, it means allowing another network to use the addresses under a leasing arrangement while maintaining the underlying resource relationship subject to the applicable registry framework and commercial agreement.

A third group may use a hybrid approach: retain some addresses for future growth, lease some for recurring income, and transfer blocks that are unlikely to be required again.

There is no universally correct model.

The right strategy depends on:

• the organisation's current and forecast IPv4 requirements;
• desired liquidity;
• cash-flow preferences;
• risk tolerance;
• block size;
• registry status;
• address reputation;
• internal network capabilities; and
• the expected holding period.

Why IPv4 Monetisation Still Exists in 2026

The economic case for IPv4 monetisation begins with scarcity.

IPv4 uses a 32-bit address space, providing approximately 4.3 billion possible addresses before reservations and other non-publicly usable ranges are considered.

The large-scale supply of newly available IPv4 space has been exhausted.

Regional Internet Registries now operate under different post-exhaustion policies and limited-supply conditions.

APNIC, for example, notes that all RIRs have either limited supplies or have exhausted their available IPv4 pools, while organisations requiring larger quantities may need to consider transfers.

See: APNIC – IPv4 Exhaustion .

At the same time, IPv6 adoption has not eliminated demand for IPv4.

Enterprises, hosting companies, cloud services, broadband networks, SaaS providers and other infrastructure operators continue to operate environments where IPv4 compatibility matters.

This combination creates an active secondary environment for existing IPv4 resources.

Public RIR transfer data also demonstrates that IPv4 resources continue to move between organisations.

For example, the RIPE NCC publishes records of valid transfers processed under its transfer policies.

See: RIPE NCC – Transfer Statistics .

IPv4 Has Commercial Value, but Legal Classification Is a Separate Question

IPv4 resources clearly have economic value.

Organisations pay to acquire access to scarce address capacity, transfers involve substantial commercial consideration, and leased address space can generate recurring revenue.

But commercial value and legal classification are different questions.

Different registry frameworks may describe allocation, assignment, registration or rights to use Internet number resources differently.

Legacy resources, contractual arrangements and applicable law can introduce additional complexity.

It is therefore better to distinguish:

legal and commercial rights → registry state → routing authorisation → operational use

These layers should remain aligned, but they should not be treated as identical.

For more on this distinction, read Who Owns IP Addresses? Understanding Rights, Registry Records and Network Control .

The Four Main IPv4 Monetisation Models

Most organisations considering IPv4 monetisation will evaluate one or more of four broad models.

1. Sell Surplus IPv4 Addresses

Selling surplus IPv4 address space can convert an underutilised resource into immediate liquidity.

This may be suitable when:

• the addresses are unlikely to be needed again;
• the organisation prefers immediate capital;
• management wants to reduce long-term administrative obligations;
• the organisation does not want to operate a leasing programme;
• future IPv4 requirements can be met through other infrastructure; or
• the transaction value is more attractive than retaining the capacity.

A sale generally involves both a commercial transaction and the applicable registry transfer process.

commercial agreement → registry transfer → routing and security updates → buyer deployment

Completing one step does not automatically complete the others.

Organisations considering an outright transfer can review Sell IPv4 Addresses to LARUS .

2. Lease IPv4 Addresses for Recurring Revenue

Leasing provides another monetisation path.

Instead of transferring the resource permanently, an organisation can permit another party to use address capacity under a contractual arrangement.

This may provide recurring income while preserving the underlying resource relationship, subject to the relevant contracts, registry framework and operational structure.

Leasing may be attractive when:

• the organisation may need the IPv4 space again in the future;
• recurring revenue is preferred to a one-time transaction;
• the addresses can be operationally delegated without disrupting internal systems;
• the organisation has appropriate controls for reputation and abuse;
• routing and registry-facing responsibilities are clear; and
• the expected return justifies the ongoing management burden.

Leasing is not automatically superior to selling.

The lease return must be considered against:

• future market uncertainty;
• administrative cost;
• abuse risk;
• reputation management;
• counterparty exposure;
• operational support; and
• the opportunity cost of not selling.

For a detailed explanation of different leasing structures, read IP Leasing: How IPv4 Leasing Works, Models, Costs & Benefits .

3. Brokered or Marketplace-Based Monetisation

An organisation may also work through a broker, marketplace or transaction platform.

These intermediaries can provide useful functions including:

• buyer or lessee discovery;
• market access;
• pricing information;
• transaction coordination;
• documentation support; and
• commercial negotiation.

Intermediation is not inherently risky.

The important question is whether each dependency is:

• necessary;
• visible;
• contractually defined;
• operationally supported; and
• accountable when something goes wrong.

The number of parties alone does not determine risk. Unclear responsibility is the more important problem.

4. Hybrid IPv4 Monetisation

A hybrid approach combines multiple strategies.

For example, an organisation may:

• retain a reserve for expected internal growth;
• lease a portion of unused capacity;
• sell blocks that are unlikely to be needed again; and
• review the allocation periodically as business needs change.

There is no universal percentage that every organisation should lease, sell or reserve.

The allocation should be based on actual demand forecasts, block structure, revenue expectations and operational risk.

Sale vs Leasing vs Hybrid: Which Model Fits?

How Much Is IPv4 Address Space Worth?

There is no single universal IPv4 price.

Market value can vary according to:

• block size;
• registry relationship;
• transfer eligibility;
• address reputation;
• transaction structure;
• market liquidity;
• timing;
• buyer demand;
• routing readiness; and
• commercial terms.

Lease rates can also vary according to:

• prefix size;
• contract duration;
• intended use;
• reputation requirements;
• RPKI and routing support;
• reverse DNS requirements;
• abuse profile;
• support requirements; and
• service continuity expectations.

Because market conditions change, fixed price claims in a long-lived article can become misleading.

Organisations should use current market data when evaluating a transaction.

See: LARUS Global IPv4 Pricing & Market Statistics .

Block Size Can Affect IPv4 Liquidity

Block size can affect both pricing and the number of potential counterparties.

Smaller blocks may fit the requirements of a wider range of buyers or lessees, while larger blocks can appeal to organisations seeking substantial capacity.

But deal count, address volume and total transaction value are different measures.

A block size appearing frequently in transactions does not necessarily mean it moves fastest in terms of days-to-close, and a category representing the largest number of transferred addresses may not represent the largest number of individual deals.

For current analysis of this distinction, read IPv4 Liquidity in 2026: Which Block Sizes Are Moving Fastest in the Market? .

Regional Transfer Data Should Be Interpreted Carefully

IPv4 transfer data is also published through different Regional Internet Registries.

However, comparisons should be made carefully.

Different datasets may count:

• transactions;
• individual transferred prefixes;
• total addresses;
• mergers and acquisitions;
• intra-RIR transfers;
• inter-RIR transfers; or
• different categories of resource change.

RIR service region should also not be confused with geographic ownership or the physical location where a prefix will ultimately be routed.

For a deeper analysis, read IPv4 Market by Region in 2026: What Transfer Data Shows .

Risk 1: Future Internal IPv4 Demand

The first monetisation risk is often overlooked: the organisation may later need the addresses itself.

Before transferring or leasing surplus space, estimate future demand from:

• network expansion;
• new customers;
• cloud migration;
• acquisitions;
• new regions;
• security infrastructure;
• legacy applications;
• IPv4-only integrations; and
• business-continuity requirements.

Selling too aggressively can create a future reacquisition problem.

Leasing space without appropriate termination planning can create a timing mismatch if internal demand suddenly returns.

Monetise genuinely surplus capacity, not address space that merely appears unused today.

Risk 2: IP Reputation and Abuse

Reputation is one of the most important operational risks in an IPv4 leasing strategy.

Third-party use can expose addresses to:

• spam complaints;
• malware reports;
• phishing activity;
• fraud;
• proxy or VPN classifications;
• hosting-abuse reports;
• security blocklists; and
• other reputation changes.

However, reputation damage should not automatically be described as permanent.

Reputation is dynamic.

Different third-party systems observe different behaviour and update their datasets at different speeds.

A strong leasing programme should therefore include:

• acceptable-use requirements;
• customer verification appropriate to the risk;
• abuse reporting;
• rapid incident response;
• reputation monitoring;
• termination mechanisms for serious misuse; and
• post-lease remediation procedures.

For more information, read Understanding IP Address Reputation .

Risk 3: Registry and Transfer Readiness

Monetisation should begin with an audit of the current resource state.

Relevant questions include:

• Which registry maintains the relevant resource record?
• Is the organisation information current?
• Who has authority to act for the organisation?
• Is the block eligible for the intended transfer?
• Are historical corporate changes properly documented?
• Are there contractual restrictions?
• Are there pending disputes?
• Are current contacts accurate?
• Are the relevant registry credentials controlled appropriately?

A registry record is an important coordination record.

It should not be treated as the complete legal analysis of every right, but inconsistencies can materially delay a transaction.

Risk 4: Counterparty and Contractual Risk

Both selling and leasing involve counterparty risk.

For a sale, this can include:

• payment risk;
• transaction delays;
• failed registry approval;
• documentation problems;
• disputes about closing conditions; and
• unclear responsibility for post-transfer changes.

For leasing, risks may include:

• non-payment;
• unauthorised use;
• abuse;
• routing outside agreed parameters;
• customer termination;
• renewal uncertainty;
• reputation remediation; and
• delayed return of operational control.

The appropriate contract depends on the jurisdiction, transaction and commercial structure.

Important provisions may include:

• scope of use;
• term;
• payment;
• acceptable use;
• abuse response;
• routing rights;
• RPKI responsibility;
• IRR responsibility;
• reverse DNS;
• termination;
• migration periods;
• liability; and
• dispute procedures.

Risk 5: Routing and RPKI Misalignment

Monetising an IPv4 prefix can create routing changes.

A new operational user may originate the prefix from a different ASN.

That can require updates to:

• RPKI Route Origin Authorisations;
• IRR route objects;
• LOAs or upstream documentation;
• routing filters;
• BGP monitoring;
• reverse DNS; and
• other network configuration.

RPKI should be understood as route-origin authorisation, not proof of conventional legal ownership.

A strong operational process should ensure that the intended:

prefix + origin ASN + ROA + IRR + BGP state

remain aligned.

Risk 6: Reverse DNS and Operational Dependencies

Reverse DNS is another part of IPv4 operational readiness.

A lessee may require PTR records for:

• email infrastructure;
• network services;
• security systems;
• customer requirements; and
• operational identification.

The parties should know:

• who controls reverse DNS;
• how updates are requested;
• what happens at termination;
• how stale PTR records are removed; and
• how quickly new records can be created.

Risk 7: Treating Every Intermediary as a Risk

A simplistic monetisation strategy may assume that fewer parties always means lower risk.

That is not necessarily true.

Brokers, marketplaces, service providers, network operators and technical vendors can each perform useful functions.

Risk increases when:

• responsibilities are unclear;
• the underlying resource relationship cannot be identified;
• the parties cannot make required routing changes;
• contracts do not align;
• renewal depends on an unknown party;
• payment responsibility is unclear; or
• no party owns incident resolution.

Dependency should be visible, necessary and accountable.

Risk 8: Believing First-Party Means Centralised Control

A first-party IPv4 service model can simplify accountability, but it should not be described as centralising every form of control.

A useful separation is:

Resource or service provider

→ carries defined commercial and registry-facing responsibilities

Network operator

→ controls BGP policy, network architecture and production infrastructure

Registry layer

→ provides relevant number-resource coordination functions

The benefit of a first-party model is clearer responsibility where one provider can directly support the underlying IPv4 service.

It is not that the provider should control the customer's entire network.

Clear accountability is more useful than unnecessary concentration of control.

Risk 9: Opportunity Cost

Every monetisation strategy has an opportunity cost.

Selling today may provide immediate liquidity but remove future exposure to IPv4 value or lease income.

Leasing may produce recurring revenue but delay a sale and require continued management.

Holding unused addresses preserves optionality but may generate no financial return.

A useful comparison is therefore:

expected sale proceeds vs expected net lease income vs strategic value of retaining capacity

The word net matters.

Lease revenue should be evaluated after:

• service costs;
• administration;
• support;
• abuse management;
• potential downtime between customers;
• reputation remediation;
• transaction costs; and
• other operating expenses.

Risk 10: Assuming IPv4 Prices Only Move Up

IPv4 scarcity does not guarantee that market prices will increase continuously.

Pricing can be affected by:

• buyer demand;
• economic conditions;
• block size;
• regional transaction patterns;
• market inventory;
• IPv6 adoption;
• carrier-grade NAT and other technical architectures;
• cloud networking models;
• financing conditions; and
• transaction liquidity.

IPv4 should therefore not be treated as an investment with guaranteed appreciation.

Organisations should review monetisation decisions periodically rather than assuming today's economics will remain unchanged.

Risk 11: Legal, Tax and Accounting Treatment

The commercial treatment of IPv4 resources may have legal, accounting or tax implications.

Those implications can differ by:

• jurisdiction;
• resource history;
• contract structure;
• corporate structure;
• transaction form;
• accounting standards; and
• applicable tax rules.

Registry terminology should not be used as a substitute for professional legal, accounting or tax advice.

An organisation considering a material IPv4 transaction should obtain advice appropriate to its circumstances.

How to Build an IPv4 Monetisation Strategy

Step 1: Audit Your IPv4 Inventory

Start by identifying:

• all IPv4 blocks associated with the organisation;
• which prefixes are currently routed;
• which prefixes are in active internal use;
• which prefixes are customer-facing;
• which addresses appear unused;
• which systems depend on them;
• which registry maintains each record; and
• the relevant corporate and administrative relationships.

Step 2: Separate “Unused” From “Actually Surplus”

A prefix that is not currently visible in BGP is not automatically surplus.

It may be reserved for:

• future expansion;
• business continuity;
• disaster recovery;
• network migration;
• planned infrastructure;
• customers; or
• internal addressing strategy.

Confirm with engineering and business teams before committing resources commercially.

Step 3: Verify Registry State and Authority

Check:

• RDAP or Whois information;
• organisation records;
• authorised contacts;
• corporate-name history;
• merger or acquisition history where relevant;
• transfer restrictions;
• applicable agreements; and
• the authority required to approve monetisation.

Step 4: Review Reputation

Reputation affects both saleability and lease suitability.

Examine:

• major blocklists;
• spam history;
• malware reports;
• abuse history;
• proxy or VPN classifications;
• geolocation;
• reverse DNS;
• BGP history; and
• known security incidents.

For a complete pre-transaction process, read How to Check IP Reputation Before You Buy IPv4 Addresses .

Step 5: Estimate Current Market Value

Evaluate both:

• potential transfer value; and
• potential lease income.

Use current market information rather than historical assumptions.

Consider block size, reputation, transaction costs, service requirements and expected time to monetise.

Step 6: Model Net Returns, Not Headline Revenue

A simple leasing calculation might begin with:

number of leased addresses × monthly rate × occupied months

But a meaningful comparison should deduct:

• platform or service fees;
• administrative costs;
• support;
• abuse handling;
• reputation management;
• vacancy between leases;
• technical operations; and
• other transaction expenses.

Compare this with the value of an immediate sale and the strategic value of retaining the addresses.

Step 7: Define Operational Responsibility

If leasing, decide in advance who handles:

• BGP announcements;
• RPKI ROAs;
• IRR route objects;
• reverse DNS;
• abuse reports;
• reputation monitoring;
• geolocation corrections;
• customer onboarding;
• customer termination; and
• incident escalation.

Step 8: Plan the Exit Before the Lease Starts

Every lease eventually changes, renews or ends.

The agreement should address:

• notice period;
• renewal;
• route withdrawal;
• ROA removal or modification;
• IRR changes;
• reverse DNS cleanup;
• customer migration;
• reputation review; and
• return of operational control.

A monetisation strategy is stronger when the exit path is designed before the revenue begins.

How to Evaluate Whether Selling Makes More Sense

Selling may be more attractive when:

• the space is clearly surplus;
• future internal demand is low;
• immediate liquidity has higher business value;
• the organisation does not want ongoing operational responsibility;
• lease management would require capabilities the organisation does not have;
• market pricing meets the organisation's target; or
• management prefers a clean exit from the resource relationship.

How to Evaluate Whether Leasing Makes More Sense

Leasing may be more attractive when:

• the organisation wants recurring revenue;
• the address space may have future strategic value;
• there is a clear operational management model;
• the organisation can tolerate income variability;
• reputation can be monitored effectively;
• abuse response is available;
• routing and registry-facing responsibility is clear; and
• the expected net return justifies continued exposure.

Should You Monetise Every Unused IPv4 Address?

No.

An organisation should retain sufficient capacity for foreseeable requirements.

It may also make sense to preserve contiguous blocks rather than fragmenting an allocation excessively.

Consider:

• three- to five-year network forecasts;
• possible acquisitions;
• planned products;
• disaster-recovery capacity;
• network restructuring;
• future provider independence; and
• the cost of reacquiring comparable space later.

Monetisation should follow infrastructure planning, not replace it.

IPv4 Monetisation and Network Identity

Organisations should be especially careful with prefixes that are already embedded in production systems.

Public IPv4 addresses can become part of network identity when they appear in:

• customer allowlists;
• banking systems;
• payment integrations;
• APIs;
• firewall rules;
• VPN configurations;
• partner networks;
• security platforms; and
• compliance documentation.

An address block may therefore look technically underutilised while still carrying substantial continuity value.

Before monetising a production prefix, measure the cost of replacing its network identity, not only the number of addresses currently active.

IPv4 Monetisation and Registry Governance

Registry coordination remains relevant to monetisation, particularly for transfers, resource records, RPKI, reverse DNS and organisational changes.

But registry state should be understood as one layer of the transaction.

A registry record does not operate the network.

BGP does not determine every commercial right.

A ROA does not establish conventional property ownership.

A commercial agreement does not by itself modify registry state.

The strongest monetisation process therefore keeps:

commercial rights + registry state + routing authorisation + operational use

sufficiently aligned.

How LARUS Approaches IPv4 Monetisation

LARUS works with organisations that need to turn surplus IPv4 capacity into a practical commercial outcome.

The appropriate path may include:

• a direct IPv4 sale;
• a structured leasing arrangement;
• evaluation of block size and market conditions;
• registry and transaction preparation;
• reputation review;
• routing preparation;
• RPKI and IRR support; and
• continuity planning.

The objective is not to claim that one monetisation model is always superior.

It is to identify the commercial model that best matches the holder's:

• liquidity goals;
• future infrastructure requirements;
• risk tolerance;
• operational capabilities; and
• time horizon.

Good IPv4 monetisation is not simply about maximising today's price. It is about converting surplus capacity into value without creating unnecessary future operational risk.

IPv4 Monetisation Decision Checklist

The Future of IPv4 Monetisation

IPv6 is the long-term answer to address-space scarcity.

But IPv4 and IPv6 are likely to coexist across many networks for a meaningful period.

During that transition, IPv4 monetisation will continue to be shaped by:

• IPv6 deployment;
• cloud growth;
• hosting demand;
• network architecture;
• IPv4 transfer liquidity;
• leasing demand;
• pricing changes;
• routing-security practices;
• registry processes; and
• the cost of maintaining IPv4 compatibility.

This does not mean every organisation should monetise its IPv4 holdings.

Sometimes the most valuable use of an address block is continued internal operation.

Sometimes immediate sale is more attractive.

Sometimes recurring leasing makes sense.

The strategy should follow the organisation's actual infrastructure and financial requirements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is IPv4 monetisation?

IPv4 monetisation is the process of generating economic value from surplus or underutilised IPv4 address capacity, typically through a sale, leasing arrangement or a combination of approaches.

Can I make money from unused IPv4 addresses?

Potentially, yes. If the organisation has appropriate rights and the resources can be transferred or operationally delegated under the relevant arrangements, surplus IPv4 capacity may have commercial value.

Is it better to sell or lease IPv4 addresses?

Neither option is universally better. Selling can provide immediate liquidity and a cleaner exit, while leasing can provide recurring revenue and preserve future optionality under the applicable arrangement. The right choice depends on financial goals, future IPv4 requirements and operational risk.

Do I keep ownership when I lease IPv4 addresses?

It is more accurate to examine the underlying resource relationship, contractual rights and applicable registry framework than to use a universal ownership statement.

In many leasing structures, the underlying resource relationship remains with the lessor while another party receives contractual operational use for a defined period.

How much are IPv4 addresses worth?

IPv4 pricing changes over time and can vary by block size, registry status, reputation, transaction structure and demand. Current market information should be used instead of relying on a fixed historical price.

See LARUS Global IPv4 Pricing & Market Statistics .

How much can I earn by leasing IPv4?

Lease income depends on the number of addresses, utilisation rate, contract duration, market pricing, service costs and operational requirements.

Net income should be calculated after administration, support, abuse management, reputation risk and periods when the space is not leased.

Is IPv4 leasing risk-free?

No. Relevant risks can include abuse, reputation changes, non-payment, routing misconfiguration, contractual disputes, renewal issues and operational dependencies.

Can IP reputation be damaged by leasing?

Yes. Misuse can negatively affect reputation. However, reputation is dynamic rather than automatically permanent, and appropriate customer controls, monitoring and remediation can reduce exposure.

Are IPv4 brokers risky?

Not inherently. Brokers and marketplaces can provide useful market-access and transaction functions. Risk depends more on whether responsibilities, counterparties and underlying dependencies are clear.

Does first-party IPv4 monetisation eliminate all risk?

No. A first-party model may simplify accountability and reduce unnecessary dependency, but no commercial structure eliminates every market, contractual, registry, reputation or operational risk.

Do I need to update RPKI when leasing IPv4?

If the operational origin ASN changes, the relevant Route Origin Authorisation may need to be created or updated so that the intended BGP announcement is consistent with the RPKI authorization state.

What should happen when an IPv4 lease ends?

The parties should coordinate route withdrawal, RPKI and IRR changes, reverse DNS cleanup, customer migration, reputation review and any other steps needed to return the prefix to its intended operational state.

Will IPv6 eliminate IPv4 monetisation?

IPv6 reduces long-term dependence on IPv4, but the transition is not uniform. As long as networks and applications continue to require IPv4 compatibility, existing IPv4 capacity can retain operational and commercial demand.

Should every organisation monetise unused IPv4?

No. An organisation should first determine whether the capacity is genuinely surplus and whether the financial return exceeds its strategic value for future infrastructure, continuity or provider independence.

Conclusion

IPv4 monetisation can convert surplus network capacity into immediate liquidity, recurring income or a combination of both.

But the decision should not begin and end with price.

A strong strategy considers:

future demand + commercial rights + registry state + market value + routing readiness + reputation + operational responsibility + exit planning

Selling may be appropriate when a block is genuinely surplus and immediate liquidity is more valuable than future optionality.

Leasing may be appropriate when recurring income, future flexibility and continued resource access matter.

A hybrid model may make sense when the organisation wants to balance internal growth, liquidity and recurring revenue.

None of these strategies is automatically superior.

The best IPv4 monetisation strategy is the one that creates value without creating a larger future infrastructure problem.

Organisations considering an outright transfer can review Sell IPv4 Addresses to LARUS .

Organisations comparing leasing structures can read IP Leasing: How IPv4 Leasing Works, Models, Costs & Benefits .

For current pricing and market indicators, visit LARUS Global IPv4 Pricing & Market Statistics .

For current analysis of transaction liquidity, read IPv4 Liquidity in 2026: Which Block Sizes Are Moving Fastest in the Market? .