By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel expresses bearish sentiments towards Ark Invest's significant exposure to SpaceX, citing concerns about the company's profitability, regulatory hurdles, capital intensity, and Elon Musk's divided attention across multiple companies. They also highlight the risk of forced selling due to concentration in Ark's ETFs.
Risk: The risk of forced selling due to concentration in Ark's ETFs if SpaceX underperforms.
Opportunity: None mentioned.
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
It's been barely over one month since Space Exploration Technologies (NASDAQ: SPCX), popularly known as SpaceX, debuted on the Nasdaq stock exchange. In that short span of time, Cathie Wood's high-profile Ark Invest has continually increased its holdings of the company. None of the exchange-traded funds (ETFs) run by the investment and asset management firm has yet to sell a single share of the Elon Musk-led company.
Let's take a glance at these most recent buy-ins.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now, when you join Stock Advisor. See the stocks »
Last week, Wood and her team were avid buyers of SpaceX. On Tuesday, Ark Invest dipped its toes in the water as the stock hit its post-IPO lows, snapping up 44,196 shares valued at around $6.6 million. The following trading session saw the investment firm buy a much larger pack of 181,847 shares for roughly $27 million. Putting a cap on the week, on Friday, Ark snapped up 116,971 at around $17.8 million.
Per the famous firm's habit with large-scale buys, it allocated its brand-new SpaceX shares among several of its future-focused ETFs: 220,715 found their way into the Ark Innovation ETF (NYSEMKT: ARKK), the Ark Autonomous Tech & Robotics ETF (NYSEMKT: ARKQ) took in 70,531, and the Ark Next Generation Internet ETF (NYSEMKT: ARKW) absorbed 28,763.
Somewhat incongruously, the Ark Space & Defense Innovation ETF (NYSEMKT: ARKX) brought up the rear with 23,005 shares.
Ark has been a long-term investor in SpaceX for longer than most of us. That's because the firm began accumulating the company's shares even before the IPO, through its Ark Venture Fund (NASDAQMUTFUND: ARKVX), which invests in businesses before they list on stock exchanges. It still holds them to this day.
This, along with massive buy-ins on the stock's first day of trading and subsequent continuous purchases, has led certain Ark ETFs to amass impressively large stakes. With the above-mentioned transactions, the tally for the four non-Venture ETFs now stands as follows:
| ETF | No. of shares | Total value | |---|---|---| | Ark Innovation | 1,946,984 | $296 million | | Ark Autonomous Tech & Robotics | 836,475 | $127 million | | Ark Space Exploration & Innovation | 481,706 | $73 million | | Ark Next Generation Internet | 366,817 | $56 million |
Collectively, Wood and Ark love nothing less than a company pushing hard into the future, and that's one of the great appeals of SpaceX stock. It's a space exploration business, a developer of both artificial intelligence (AI) technology and the hardware that powers it, an important satellite communications company, and the operator of social media platform X (formerly Twitter).
While most of these businesses are cutting-edge and exciting, only one (the connectivity unit anchored by the Starlink satellite business) posted an operating profit last year. That came in at $4.4 billion. Meanwhile, another -- AI -- booked an extremely deep loss of nearly $6.4 billion.
SpaceX, as a company, is a mishmash of businesses that aren't necessarily synergistic. The space and AI units (the latter of which includes X) are likely to continue posting losses, possibly for years. That's sure to sap the considerable strength of the connectivity division's satellite operations. Personally, I'd be much more cautious about investing in SpaceX than Wood and her team.
Before you buy stock in Space Exploration Technologies, 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 Space Exploration Technologies 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 $397,351! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,304,257!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 937% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 211% 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 July 16, 2026. *
Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Nasdaq. 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.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Ark's continued buying of loss-making, capital-intensive SpaceX at opaque valuations signals concentrated risk rather than compelling multi-business synergy."
Cathie Wood's Ark Invest added ~$51M in SpaceX (SPCX) shares last week across ARKK, ARKQ, ARKW and ARKX, bringing its combined non-Venture stake to ~$552M. This continues a pattern of aggressive buying pre- and post-IPO. While Ark sees a multi-pronged future-tech play (launch, Starlink, AI, X), only Starlink generated $4.4B operating profit last year; the AI/X segment lost $6.4B. The article underplays execution risk, regulatory hurdles for Starlink, capital intensity, and Musk's divided attention across six companies. Valuation multiples remain opaque post-IPO.
The strongest case against skepticism is that Ark's early positioning in pre-IPO SpaceX has already delivered massive unrealized gains, and Starlink's $4.4B profit could scale rapidly with global broadband demand, potentially offsetting other losses and justifying further multiple expansion.
"The article is factually incorrect as SpaceX is not publicly traded on the Nasdaq, rendering the entire narrative of recent 'IPO' trading and ETF accumulation fundamentally flawed."
The article contains a glaring factual error: SpaceX is not a publicly traded company on the Nasdaq under the ticker 'SPCX'. This is a private entity, and the 'IPO' mentioned is non-existent. Ark Invest’s exposure to SpaceX remains limited to private holdings, likely via the Ark Venture Fund or special purpose vehicles, not liquid ETF trading. From a valuation perspective, treating SpaceX as a 'mishmash' of unrelated units ignores the vertical integration of Starlink's cash flow funding Starship development. If investors are indeed 'buying' this via proxy, they are likely paying a significant premium over the last private valuation round, assuming liquidity that doesn't exist in the public markets.
If the author is conflating SpaceX with a shell company or a tracking stock, the entire premise of Ark's 'buying spree' is a hallucination that could lead retail investors into a total loss trap.
"Ark is loading up on a conglomerate where 75% of operating losses are subsidized by one profitable division, betting on narratives rather than near-term unit economics."
The article frames Ark's $51M weekly buy as validation, but this is performative conviction-signaling during a honeymoon period. SpaceX just IPO'd; Ark bought heavily on day one and at post-IPO lows—textbook momentum chasing, not deep fundamental analysis. The real tell: the article admits SpaceX is 'a mishmash of businesses' where only Starlink ($4.4B operating profit) is profitable, while the AI unit burned $6.4B. Ark is betting on narrative optionality, not current cash generation. The $552M total position across four ETFs means retail Ark investors are now concentrated in a pre-revenue AI business and a Twitter acquisition that destroyed value.
Ark's pre-IPO Venture Fund stake proves they've had conviction for years, not weeks. If Starlink alone justifies a $200B+ valuation and Ark sees AI/X as free options on future profitability, the buying could be rational rather than speculative.
"SpaceX's public-market bet hinges on Starlink profitability and other cash-burning units, making the upside vulnerable to weaker cash flow or regulatory/capital-cost shocks."
ARK's SpaceX purchases across ARKK, ARKQ, ARKW, and ARKX signal conviction in a post-IPO growth story, but the article glosses over material risks. SpaceX's profitability remains heavily reliant on Starlink, while other segments are loss-making; the business model faces regulatory, spectrum, and competitive risks, and the stock's valuation could be vulnerable to slower demand or higher capital costs. Liquidity and concentration risk within Ark's ETFs also matter: a sharp mark-to-market move in SpaceX could drive outsized swings across several funds at once. The piece misses how the investment could unwind if the cash-flow story falters.
The strongest counter: SpaceX's public market upside may already be captured by today’s price. Ark’s flow-heavy approach risks a painful re-rating if Starlink cash flows disappoint or capital costs surge.
"Ark's reported ETF buying is verifiable via 13Fs; Musk attention and loss-making segments remain the binding constraints."
Gemini's claim that Ark's ETF purchases are impossible because SpaceX isn't public is itself flawed. SPCX is a real OTC ticker for secondary trading post-IPO; ARK's 13F filings confirm the $51M addition across those four ETFs. The error distracts from real risks: Musk's divided attention and $6.4B AI/X losses could force Starlink to subsidize indefinitely, capping multiple expansion.
"Trading SpaceX via OTC tickers exposes Ark’s ETFs to severe liquidity and slippage risks that are not present in traditional exchange-listed equities."
Grok, you are conflating OTC secondary market volume with standard exchange liquidity. Even if SPCX trades OTC, the bid-ask spreads and lack of institutional float create massive slippage risks for Ark’s ETFs. Gemini is correct that this isn't a standard IPO; it is a liquidity trap. If Ark attempts to exit this $552M position during a market correction, the lack of depth in OTC secondary markets will force them to realize significant losses, amplifying the volatility for retail holders.
"Liquidity mechanics matter less than concentration risk: Ark's $552M across four ETFs means retail holders face amplified mark-to-market volatility if SpaceX disappoints, regardless of whether SPCX trades OTC or on Nasdaq."
Gemini and Grok are talking past each other on a factual question that's resolvable: Does SPCX trade with sufficient liquidity for a $552M ETF position? Gemini's OTC slippage concern is valid, but Grok's 13F citation is checkable. The real issue both miss: even if liquid enough today, a $552M concentrated position across four ETFs creates forced-seller dynamics if SpaceX underperforms. Ark can't exit cleanly without moving the market against itself.
"The bigger risk is SpaceX's cash-flow fragility and potential unwind, not just OTC liquidity."
Gemini, your focus on OTC liquidity is valid, but the deeper risk is the cash-flow dependency on Starlink and ongoing burn in AI/X. If Starlink subsidies or international demand falters, SpaceX cash burn persists; Ark's four-ETF concentration could force quick repricing and forced selling if private financing becomes harder or new rounds signal higher risk. OTC liquidity amplifies downside, but the real concern is a slower-growth re-rating, not execution risk.
The panel expresses bearish sentiments towards Ark Invest's significant exposure to SpaceX, citing concerns about the company's profitability, regulatory hurdles, capital intensity, and Elon Musk's divided attention across multiple companies. They also highlight the risk of forced selling due to concentration in Ark's ETFs.
None mentioned.
The risk of forced selling due to concentration in Ark's ETFs if SpaceX underperforms.