What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on NuScale and Oklo, with key risks including execution challenges, capital intensity, fuel supply chain issues, and competition from state-subsidized Chinese SMRs. The main opportunity lies in potential customer acquisition and favorable financing terms.
Risk: Fuel supply chain issues and competition from state-subsidized Chinese SMRs
Opportunity: Potential customer acquisition and favorable financing terms
Key Points
NuScale Power is the only U.S. company with an NRC-approved SMR design.
Oklo is the more exciting stock with a broader mix of potential customers.
NuScale's valuation looks more attractive today.
- 10 stocks we like better than NuScale Power ›
If 2025 was the year of nuclear power's resurgence, then 2026 is shaping up to be the year when the market stops and asks which of the most exciting nuclear stocks actually have a real business behind the hype.
Indeed, two of nuclear energy's most promising companies, Oklo (NYSE: OKLO) and NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR), are both falling in 2026, with Oklo trading about 11% lower on the year and NuScale down nearly 27%.
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 »
Both companies could deliver serious long-term upside, since both are tied to one of artificial intelligence's (AI's) biggest bottlenecks: access to reliable, 24/7 power.
However, between the two, NuScale looks like the better value -- that is, right now.
Not only does NuScale carry a market cap that is about two-thirds lower than Oklo's ($3.6 billion versus $11.3 billion) but it's also more mature in respect to its regulatory position, with an NRC-certified design for a small modular reactor (SMR) in hand.
Oklo, for its part, likely won't have an NRC-certified, deployable reactor until 2027 or 2028. As such, NuScale's revenue over the next two years will likely dwarf Oklo's, as the chart below suggests.
The case for investing in NuScale, however, isn't unquestionably strong. Even though it is currently the only nuclear company in the U.S. with a small reactor design approved by the NRC, it has not made a firm sale. Its near-term business path is also more tied to large power providers and utilities companies, while Oklo is chasing a broader mix that includes data centers, industrial sites, remote communities, and governments.
If everything works in Oklo's favor, the company could deliver huge gains for investors. However, with zero revenue, no regulatory blessing, and a large-cap valuation, investors are being asked to pay for a lot of success that simply hasn't happened yet.
For most investors, I would still keep positions in either nuclear stock small. But if I had to choose one right now for 2026, NuScale jumps out as the safer speculative play.
Should you buy stock in NuScale Power right now?
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 $504,832! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,223,471!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 971% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 202% 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 2, 2026. *
Steven Porrello has positions in NuScale Power and Oklo. 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.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Both companies are fundamentally overvalued relative to their current ability to convert regulatory milestones into positive free cash flow."
The article frames this as a choice between regulatory maturity (NuScale) and growth potential (Oklo), but it misses the capital intensity trap. NuScale (SMR) is struggling with commercialization despite NRC approval, suggesting that regulatory hurdles aren't the only bottleneck—it’s the unit economics. Oklo’s $11.3 billion valuation for a pre-revenue company is pure speculative froth, likely driven by Sam Altman’s backing rather than fundamental parity. Both companies face massive execution risk in a sector where project delays are the norm, not the exception. I am bearish on both because they are essentially 'venture capital' plays masquerading as public equities, lacking the cash flow to survive a prolonged interest rate environment.
If these firms secure even one major hyperscaler contract for dedicated data center power, the valuation could re-rate instantly as the market prices in a 'first-mover' monopoly on carbon-free, baseload AI energy.
"Oklo's microreactor focus on data centers positions it for outsized AI power demand capture, outweighing NuScale's stalled utility-centric path despite the latter's approval."
The article favors NuScale (SMR) for its NRC-approved 77 MWe VOYGR SMR and lower $3.6B market cap versus Oklo's (OKLO) $11.3B, expecting SMR revenue to outpace OKLO's zero through 2027-28. But it glosses over NuScale's execution flops—no firm sales despite approval, highlighted by the 2023 UAMPS project cancellation amid cost overruns (from $5B+ for 462 MW). OKLO's 15-50 MWe Aurora microreactors target nimble data centers and industrials—ideal for AI hyperscalers needing quick, dedicated power—offering superior TAM. SMR's utility focus risks bureaucratic delays. OKLO's premium reflects this edge, with backing from Sam Altman and DoD interest.
NuScale's regulatory head start delivers near-term revenue while Oklo battles approvals and remains pre-commercial; overpaying 3x for unproven potential ignores dilution risks from OKLO's cash burn.
"Regulatory approval without customer commitments or revenue is a necessary condition for value, not a sufficient one—NuScale's lower valuation may reflect justified skepticism about near-term deal closure, not a bargain."
The article's framing—NuScale as 'safer' due to NRC approval and lower valuation—misses a critical operational risk: NuScale has zero revenue and no firm customer commitments despite regulatory clearance. The $3.6B market cap assumes flawless execution on utility contracts that don't yet exist. Oklo's 11% YTD decline versus NuScale's 27% suggests the market is already pricing in NuScale's near-term revenue disappointment. The real question isn't which stock is cheaper, but whether either can achieve the unit economics required to justify current valuations. Neither has demonstrated a profitable path to scale.
NuScale's NRC approval is a genuine moat that de-risks the regulatory pathway; if it lands even one major utility contract in 2026, the stock could re-rate sharply upward, making today's 27% decline a buying opportunity rather than a warning signal.
"NuScale offers the best risk-adjusted near-term revenue path among SMR peers, but the outcome still depends on policy and project execution."
NuScale's NRC-certified SMR design provides regulatory incumbency and likely utility interest, but the near-term revenue cadence is uncertain since no firm sales yet. Oklo's broader mix could unlock outsized upside if certification and pilot deployments come earlier than 2027–28, but that path is fragile to siting, financing, and policy risks. The article glosses over EPC complexity, grid interconnections, and long project lead times, which are the real bottlenecks. The market seems pricing Oklo with optionality; NuScale's lower valuation suggests a mispricing of near-term revenue potential, not a guaranteed win. Additionally, any shift in US nuclear policy toward faster approvals or subsidies could re-rate both names.
Oklo's optionality could deliver outsized upside if certification or pilot deals materialize earlier than 2027–28, challenging NuScale's 'safer' stance. Conversely, regulatory delays or EPC financing hurdles could wipe out Oklo's premium.
"The lack of a domestic HALEU fuel supply chain renders both firms' regulatory and commercial milestones functionally moot."
Grok and Claude are ignoring the supply chain reality: neither firm has a credible path to procuring high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU). Without a domestic fuel supply chain, NRC approval is a hollow victory. Even if NuScale lands a utility contract or Oklo secures a data center pilot, they remain hostage to a fuel market currently dominated by Russian imports. The 'regulatory moat' is irrelevant if the reactor cannot be fueled. This is a critical, overlooked systemic risk.
"China's operational and near-term SMRs create a global supply glut that erodes US small reactor economics."
Panel overlooks global competition: China's HTR-PM (210 MWe pebble-bed SMR equivalent) reached full power in 2023 at Shidaowan, with Linglong-1 (125 MWe) under construction for 2026 grid connection. This state-subsidized supply threatens US pricing power, capping margins for SMR and OKLO regardless of NRC wins or hyperscaler deals. Unit economics look even worse internationally.
"HALEU and China are real long-term headwinds, but the immediate kill-risk for both companies is commercial traction, not fuel supply or foreign competition."
Gemini and Grok both raise valid supply-chain and geopolitical headwinds, but conflate two separate risks. HALEU scarcity is real—but it's a 2027+ constraint, not immediate. China's cost advantage is structural and longer-term. The near-term bottleneck remains neither fuel nor competition: it's customer acquisition. NuScale has NRC approval but zero signed utility contracts. Oklo has zero certifications. Regulatory clearance without offtake agreements is a sunk cost, not a moat.
"Financing runway and dilution risk is the hidden driver of value for NuScale and Oklo, not just regulatory or fuel-supply hurdles."
Gemini, HALEU scarcity is real, but the bigger, underpriced risk is financing the pilots and early plants. NRC approval without offtake or utility credit is essentially a free option on a cash-burning business; in a sustained high-rate environment, dilution and capex risk dominates returns more than regulatory hurdles. Even if one hyperscaler contract lands, the IRR hinges on favorable financing terms and timely fuel supply. Without that, valuation compresses.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusThe panel consensus is bearish on NuScale and Oklo, with key risks including execution challenges, capital intensity, fuel supply chain issues, and competition from state-subsidized Chinese SMRs. The main opportunity lies in potential customer acquisition and favorable financing terms.
Potential customer acquisition and favorable financing terms
Fuel supply chain issues and competition from state-subsidized Chinese SMRs