What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is that ASTS and LUNR are overvalued and face significant risks, including execution challenges, regulatory hurdles, and potential dilution. Despite their recent rallies, these stocks are priced for perfection and may not live up to expectations.
Risk: Dilution due to expensive launches and operations before firm milestones or FCC rulings
Opportunity: LUNR's potential for private payloads if it executes lunar logistics at scale
Key Points
By one estimate, the space industry may nearly triple into a $1.8 trillion addressable market by 2035.
Although retail investors' favorite satellite-based cellular broadband services provider has well-defined competitive edges, it's likely priced for perfection.
Meanwhile, another high-flying space stock may be weighed down by competitive pressures and ongoing cash burn.
- 10 stocks we like better than AST SpaceMobile ›
Although artificial intelligence has been capturing the attention and capital of investors for years, space may mark the next game-changing opportunity. According to an April 2024 report from McKinsey, the space economy is expected to nearly triple in value from $630 billion in 2023 to an estimated $1.8 trillion by 2035 -- and investors are taking notice.
Two of Wall Street's most popular stocks among retail investors are space stocks. Shares of AST SpaceMobile (NASDAQ: ASTS) and Intuitive Machines (NASDAQ: LUNR) have soared by 3,070% and 256%, respectively, over the trailing two years.
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »
But where there's a big-dollar opportunity, there are bound to be skeptics. Based on the low-water price targets of select Wall Street analysts, shares of these retail-favorite space stocks can plummet by up to 56% in 2026.
AST SpaceMobile: Implied downside of 56%
While some analysts see satellite-based cellular broadband services provider AST SpaceMobile surging beyond $130 per share, analyst Andres Coello of Scotiabank recently lowered his firm's price target on the company to just $41.20. If accurate, Coello's price target would imply a 56% decline from where shares ended on March 19.
On the one hand, AST brings a competitive edge to the table. The company's BlueBird satellites can work with existing smartphone technology, which means no need for specialized phones. Furthermore, AST has partnered with over 50 mobile network operators globally, meaning it'll work with, not compete against, them.
Nevertheless, cellular broadband is a highly competitive industry. For instance, SpaceX-owned Starlink announced a $17 billion acquisition of spectrum from EchoStar in September.
AST SpaceMobile's premium valuation also depends on the company launching new satellites in a timely and cost-effective manner. Inflationary pressures have previously pushed up cost estimates for its satellites, and launch dates have already been pushed back. In many ways, AST SpaceMobile appears priced for perfection, which is the basis of Coello's low-water price target on the stock.
Intuitive Machines: Implied downside of 50%
The other highly popular space stock whose shares may come crashing back to Earth is lunar space infrastructure and technology company Intuitive Machines. Bank of America Securities analyst Ronald Epstein expects shares to fall to $9.50, representing a 50% decline.
Investor interest in the manufacturer of the Nova-C lunar lander really began to manifest in September 2024. On Sept. 17, 2024, it was awarded a Near Space Network contract for communication and navigation services for NASA missions. It's a base five-year deal with an option for an additional five years, potentially worth up to $4.82 billion.
Despite government contract revenue padding Intuitive Machines' pocketbooks, there are reasons to be skeptical.
For one, it's still an early stage company that lost money and burned through some of its cash on hand last year. Its full-year net loss totaled $83.3 million, with $14.3 million in net cash used in operating activities. Early stage companies often issue stock and dilute their shareholders to raise cash, which is what Intuitive Machines has done.
The other concern is that its government contract-focused operating model lacks pricing power. It's competing against brand-name defense companies with deep pockets, and the federal government isn't known for overbidding on space contracts. Like AST SpaceMobile, Intuitive Machines may be priced without room for error.
Should you buy stock in AST SpaceMobile right now?
Before you buy stock in AST SpaceMobile, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and AST SpaceMobile wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $495,179!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,058,743!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 898% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
*Stock Advisor returns as of March 24, 2026.
Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Sean Williams has positions in Bank of America. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends AST SpaceMobile and Intuitive Machines. The Motley Fool recommends Bank Of Nova Scotia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The article presents worst-case analyst targets as likely outcomes when they're actually tail risks that don't invalidate the underlying thesis—execution risk is real, but so are genuine competitive advantages the article downplays."
The article conflates 'select Wall Street analysts' with consensus, presenting two outlier price targets as predictive rather than cautionary. Coello's $41.20 ASTS target and Epstein's $9.50 LUNR target are floor cases, not forecasts. The real issue: both companies face binary execution risk (satellite launches, cost control, contract wins) that justifies wide analyst ranges. But the article ignores that ASTS has 50+ carrier partnerships and working hardware—genuine moats absent in most pre-revenue space plays. LUNR's $4.82B NASA contract is real revenue, not vaporware. The 3,070% and 256% rallies reflect genuine scarcity value in proven space infrastructure. Downside exists, but it's priced into volatility, not ignored.
If satellite launch costs keep inflating, supply chain delays persist, or competitors (Starlink, Amazon Kuiper) capture carrier relationships first, ASTS could trade below $50 regardless of technology merit. LUNR's contract revenue may disappoint if government budgets tighten or NASA pivots to cheaper vendors.
"The 'downside' targets cited are actually optimistic valuations that assume successful execution, masking the true risk of total capital loss in a high-CapEx, unproven industry."
The article frames ASTS and LUNR as high-risk due to 'low-water' price targets, yet it fails to account for the binary nature of space tech. For ASTS, a $41.20 target is actually a massive vote of confidence compared to its historical lows; the '56% plunge' narrative ignores that the stock traded under $5 just a year ago. The real risk isn't just 'pricing for perfection,' but the capital expenditure (CapEx) required to reach global scale before Starlink's Direct-to-Cell dominates. For LUNR, the $4.82B NASA contract is a ceiling, not a floor. The market is pricing in the contract's maximum value, ignoring the likely 'cost-plus' margin compression typical of government work.
If ASTS successfully launches its next block of satellites without technical failure, the massive short interest and institutional FOMO could drive the stock to $100+ regardless of current valuation metrics. LUNR's first-mover advantage in lunar logistics may lead to high-margin private payloads that offset the low-margin NASA contracts.
"N/A"
[Unavailable]
"Both stocks are priced for perfection with no margin for delays, competition, or cash burn, justifying 50-56% downside to low-end analyst targets in 2026."
Article rightly flags execution risks for ASTS and LUNR, but glosses over their frothy valuations after massive runs—ASTS up 3,070%, LUNR 256% in two years—priced for zero delays in a sector notorious for them. ASTS faces Starlink's spectrum grab and inflationary launch costs, needing perfect satellite deployments for cellular broadband revenue. LUNR's $4.82B NASA contract is multi-year with options, yet $83.3M FY loss and $14.3M op cash burn signal dilution ahead amid competition from defense behemoths. Low-water targets ($41 for ASTS, $9.50 for LUNR) imply 2026 de-rating if milestones slip, turning retail darlings into traps despite $1.8T space TAM by 2035.
ASTS's partnerships with 50+ mobile operators secure revenue share without competing directly, enabling rapid scaling post-launches, while LUNR's NASA validation could unlock backlog acceleration and profitability inflection sooner than skeptics expect.
"The downside isn't valuation—it's binary execution risk compressed into Q2-Q4 2025 milestones that the market hasn't fully discounted yet."
Gemini's 'ceiling not floor' framing on LUNR's NASA contract is sharper than I initially granted—cost-plus structures do compress margins, but Grok undersells the optionality: if LUNR executes lunar logistics at scale, private payloads (higher-margin) become viable. However, nobody's flagged the real trap: both stocks trade on *next* milestone (ASTS satellite deployment window, LUNR contract acceleration), not fundamentals. Miss either, and $41/$9.50 targets look optimistic, not cautionary.
"Regulatory and spectrum interference risks are more immediate threats to ASTS than launch failures or capital expenditure."
Claude and Grok are underestimating the 'Spectrum Trap.' Even if ASTS launches successfully, their 5G broadband speeds depend on terrestrial carriers' licensed bands. If AT&T or Verizon re-prioritize their own 5G buildouts or face regulatory hurdles with the FCC regarding interference, ASTS's hardware becomes a multi-billion dollar paperweight. The 3,070% rally assumes regulatory smooth sailing in a sector where the FCC is notoriously slow and susceptible to Starlink's aggressive lobbying efforts.
"Timing-driven dilution (cash runway vs. regulatory/operational milestones) is the biggest near-term risk for ASTS and LUNR."
Gemini's 'Spectrum Trap' is apt, but the single under-discussed near-term risk is timing: ASTS and LUNR must fund expensive launches and operations well before firm FCC rulings or contract milestones clear. That mismatch forces dilutive financings if milestones slip, which can obliterate retail froth faster than regulatory setbacks. Investors should prioritize cash runway, upcoming financing maturities, and warrant/convertible overhangs as the pivotal re-rating axis.
"LUNR's cash burn forces imminent dilution that could validate bearish PTs even if milestones hit."
ChatGPT's dilution warning is spot-on, but drill down: LUNR's $14.3M quarterly op cash burn vs. $250M mkt cap implies just 18mo runway—any NASA option delays trigger 20-30% share dilution, crushing EPS and validating $9.50 PT. Gemini's 'Spectrum Trap' overstates risk; ASTS's 50+ carrier deals grant access to *their* licensed bands, bypassing direct FCC spectrum auctions.
Panel Verdict
Consensus ReachedThe panel consensus is that ASTS and LUNR are overvalued and face significant risks, including execution challenges, regulatory hurdles, and potential dilution. Despite their recent rallies, these stocks are priced for perfection and may not live up to expectations.
LUNR's potential for private payloads if it executes lunar logistics at scale
Dilution due to expensive launches and operations before firm milestones or FCC rulings