By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
Panelists agree NuScale's regulatory approval is valuable but question its commercial viability due to high execution risks, financing hurdles, and competition from other SMRs and renewables. They also debate the competitiveness of NuScale's Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) against other energy sources.
Risk: High execution risk regarding supply chain costs and project timelines, financing risk for projects with delayed revenue, and competition from other SMRs and renewables.
Opportunity: Potential demand from AI-driven data centers requiring 24/7 dispatchable baseload power.
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 →
NuScale enjoys the first-mover advantage of having the only NRC-approved SMR design.
The company could see its first nuclear reactor deployed in the next five years.
Revenue is expected to climb over 900% over the next eight quarters.
NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR) is an ambitious nuclear company at the forefront of a potential nuclear renaissance. In a world hungry for clean power, this first-mover in the development of small modular reactors (SMRs) has a tremendous opportunity to 10x from today's price (from about $12 to $120), ushering in a new era where reactors get smaller and more widely used.
Turning that promise into a profitable future will be a daunting challenge, not the least because NuScale has yet to notch a firm sale. Yet with fears of an artificial intelligence (AI) bust seemingly behind us (for now), this microreactor pioneer might be one of the best energy stocks to hold for the next 10 years. Here's why.
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 »
It's no secret that the U.S. needs to overhaul its aging power grid, much of which was built in the decades after the Second World War, before the AI era can really take off. Indeed, Gartner predicts that about 40% of AI data centers could be operationally constrained by power shortages by next year.
To that potential energy constraint, NuScale says, "Bring it on." The company's factory-built SMR can produce 77 megawatts electric (MWe) of carbon-free power and up to 924 MWe when clustered in a 12-module plant. Their small size means they can be built on retired coal plants or near industrial sites that would not normally accommodate a larger reactor. They can also, in theory, be built faster and more cheaply than a larger, more traditional nuclear power plant.
The best part? While several U.S. companies are still working toward regulatory approval for their advanced reactor designs, NuScale already has the NRC's blessing for not just one design but two. That gives it a firm head start in a burgeoning nuclear energy renaissance that could represent a $10 trillion market opportunity, according to Bank of America.
In the most bullish case, NuScale's next decade will involve winning clients over to its technology and proving to investors that its reactors can be profitable over the long haul. This would also mean becoming the face of SMR technology, which would itself grow into its promise of supplying clean energy to AI data centers.
Could this realistically happen? Yes, it could. NuScale's first project, a 426 MWe SMR plant in Romania, could become operationally in the early 2030s, while its first project in the U.S. could involve up to 6 gigawatts of SMRs deployed with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). If those projects succeed, they would not only give NuScale its first commercial SMR deployment but could also ease the hesitation that has kept other customers from committing to its new technology.
Meanwhile, revenue is projected to grow by over 900% over the next two years.
At today's price, the nuclear energy stock carries a $4 billion market capitalization on about $31.5 million in trailing 12-month revenue. The company faces plenty of execution risks -- including the need to prove it can build SMRs at an economical scale -- yet for long-term investors, this might be the time to buy before it gains more commercial momentum.
Before you buy stock in NuScale Power, 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 NuScale Power 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 $471,827! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,319,291!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 986% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 207% 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 May 9, 2026. *
Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Steven Porrello has positions in NuScale Power. The Motley Fool recommends NuScale Power. 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
"NuScale is currently priced for perfect execution in an industry where cost overruns and multi-year delays are the historical standard, not the exception."
NuScale (SMR) is currently a speculative play on the 'nuclear renaissance' narrative rather than a fundamental value proposition. With a $4 billion market cap on roughly $31 million in trailing revenue, the valuation is entirely predicated on the successful commercialization of its SMR technology. While NRC approval is a barrier to entry, it is not a guarantee of profitability. The 900% revenue growth forecast is likely based on milestone payments rather than recurring operational cash flow. Investors are essentially buying an option on the energy demands of AI data centers, but the execution risk regarding supply chain costs and project timelines—historically the bane of the nuclear industry—remains extreme.
The 'first-mover' advantage may be a trap if the initial deployment costs are so high that they force the company into perpetual dilution or bankruptcy before economies of scale can be achieved.
"SMR's premium valuation assumes flawless execution unproven in nuclear's history of overruns, cancellations, and decade-long timelines."
NuScale (SMR) holds NRC approval for its 77 MWe SMR modules—the only U.S. design certified—but commercial reality lags hype. TTM revenue is just $31.5M against a $4B market cap (127x sales), with quarterly cash burn exceeding $40M and no firm orders post-2023 UAMPS cancellation (costs tripled to $9.3B). Romania's 462 MWe project targets 2030s operation; TVA talks are exploratory. 900% revenue growth over eight quarters likely stems from services, not deployments. AI-driven demand is real (Gartner: 40% data centers power-constrained by 2025), but SMRs face supply chain hurdles, dilution risks, and rivals like GE-Hitachi closing the regulatory gap.
If AI power shortages force policy shifts with subsidies and streamlined permitting, NuScale's first-mover edge could secure multi-GW contracts, validating the 10x upside as deployments accelerate.
"NuScale has regulatory approval but zero commercial contracts, and the stock's valuation assumes perfect execution on a 10-year timeline in an industry notorious for delays and cost overruns."
NuScale's regulatory approval is real and valuable, but the article conflates regulatory blessing with commercial viability—a dangerous leap. The 900% revenue projection rests on Romania (early 2030s, unbuilt) and TVA (no signed contract, only 'up to 6 GW' exploration). At $4B market cap on $31.5M trailing revenue, the stock prices in flawless execution across a decade of construction, permitting, and cost-competitive deployment. The article ignores that traditional nuclear has faced decades of cost overruns and delays; SMRs are unproven at scale. First-mover advantage evaporates if competitors (X-energy, Commonwealth Fusion) reach commercialization with better economics. No mention of financing risk: who funds $billions in capex for projects that won't generate revenue until 2030+?
If AI power demand truly becomes acute by 2027–2028 and NuScale's first units come online on schedule, early-mover economics could be extraordinary—customers desperate for carbon-free baseload might accept premium pricing and overlook execution risk.
"NuScale's stock faces material execution and financing risk; without firm orders and a credible profitability path, the upside is highly uncertain."
NuScale has a branding edge as an SMR pioneer, but the article glosses over real headwinds. The NRC approved NuScale’s design, but there is confusion about two designs — there aren’t two fully certified designs in operation; and there are no firm commercial sales yet. Romania’s 426 MWe project and a TVA path are highly contingent on permitting, financing, and construction risk. A 900% revenue jump over eight quarters would require multiple multibillion-dollar contracts at scale, which is unproven for now. With a 4B market cap and only a sliver of trailing revenue, the stock is pricing in near-perfect execution and favorable policy — both of which are uncertain amid policy, financing, and supply-chain constraints.
Even if the above risks materialize, a big utility contract or favorable policy could unlock a multi-billion-dollar, long-term roadmap, sending SMR demand and NuScale's stock higher despite weak near-term visibility.
"NuScale's fundamental risk is not just regulatory, but the inability to achieve a competitive Levelized Cost of Energy against cheaper, proven baseload alternatives."
Claude and Grok correctly identify the financing gap, but you are all ignoring the 'LCOE' (Levelized Cost of Energy) trap. Even with subsidies, NuScale must compete with cheap solar-plus-storage and existing nuclear life extensions. If the cost per megawatt-hour remains non-competitive against natural gas or renewables, no amount of AI-driven demand will save them. They aren't just selling tech; they are selling a commodity that is currently too expensive to manufacture at scale.
"AI data centers prioritize reliable baseload over intermittent renewables, improving NuScale's competitive LCOE position."
Gemini, LCOE critique overlooks AI data centers' need for 24/7 dispatchable baseload—solar+storage's intermittency forces overbuilds and backups, inflating true costs 2-3x for hyperscalers (e.g., MSFT's nuclear PPAs). NuScale's 77 MWe modules match data center scale perfectly, unlike gigawatt reactors. Renewables compete on peaks, not AI's always-on loads; this demand asymmetry bolsters SMR viability despite capex hurdles.
"AI baseload demand is real, but NuScale's cost-per-MW and timeline disadvantage versus existing nuclear and emerging competitors makes first-mover advantage illusory without dramatic cost breakthroughs."
Grok's LCOE reframe is sharp, but conflates two markets. Yes, hyperscalers need 24/7 baseload—but they're already signing nuclear PPAs with existing plants (Constellation, Kairos). The real question: does NuScale's capex+timeline beat life-extension retrofits or next-gen competitors? If a 77 MWe module costs $2B to build and takes 8 years, a data center operator funds cheaper alternatives first. Demand asymmetry helps SMRs, but only if unit economics outpace incumbents. They don't yet.
"Long-term PPAs and carbon pricing can mitigate LCOE concerns, but financing and EPC execution remain the decisive risk to NuScale's 900% revenue thesis."
Gemini, I agree LCOE matters, but you underplay reliability premium and policy levers. If NuScale lands long-term baseload PPAs with outage penalties and carbon pricing, the effective LCOE could clear despite higher upfront costs. The bigger risk is financing and EPC execution: multi-year capex, supply-chain delays, and policy shifts that could bleed margins before any revenue materializes. Without clear scale, the 900% revenue path remains highly speculative.
Panelists agree NuScale's regulatory approval is valuable but question its commercial viability due to high execution risks, financing hurdles, and competition from other SMRs and renewables. They also debate the competitiveness of NuScale's Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) against other energy sources.
Potential demand from AI-driven data centers requiring 24/7 dispatchable baseload power.
High execution risk regarding supply chain costs and project timelines, financing risk for projects with delayed revenue, and competition from other SMRs and renewables.