By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on ASTS, RKLB, and LUNR, with the key risk being their stretched multiples and execution hurdles, and the key opportunity being retail investor momentum.
Risk: Stretched multiples and execution hurdles
Opportunity: Retail investor momentum
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 →
Many space stocks soared before SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) went public on June 12. But after SpaceX's IPO, many of those stocks gave up their gains. Some investors likely took profits in those smaller space stocks and chased SpaceX's post-IPO rally instead.
SpaceX listed its IPO shares at $135, and its stock started trading at $150 before setting a record high of $225.64 on June 16. At its peak, its market cap hit $2.66 trillion -- or 142 times its 2025 revenue of $18.7 billion -- and sucked the oxygen out of the rest of the space sector.
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 »
But as of this writing, SpaceX trades at about $160 with a market cap of $2.13 trillion. It still looks expensive at 114 times last year's sales, but its pullback could finally give some of its industry peers a chance to catch their breath. Let's take a closer look at three other space stocks that might benefit from the market's waning interest in SpaceX: AST SpaceMobile (NASDAQ: ASTS), Rocket Lab (NASDAQ: RKLB), and Intuitive Machines (NASDAQ: LUNR).
AST SpaceMobile, like SpaceX's Starlink, produces low-Earth-orbit (LEO) satellites for cellular and internet connectivity. However, AST's satellites are much larger than Starlink's, and it doesn't offer its own first-party satellite internet service. Instead, AST helps telecom giants like AT&T and Verizon serve more customers in remote and rural areas. It's also building satellites for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's "Golden Dome" project.
AST has only launched seven satellites so far, but it plans to have 45 to 60 satellites in orbit by the end of 2026, and up to 248 satellites in its constellation within the next few years.
From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect AST's revenue to soar from $71 million to $1.88 billion as its constellation expands. They also expect it to turn profitable in 2027 and 2028. AST's stock might not seem cheap at 12 times its 2028 sales, but it has a lot more upside.
Rocket Lab, like SpaceX, develops reusable orbital rockets. However, Rocket Lab's Electron rockets carry much smaller payloads than SpaceX's Falcon rockets.
Its customers include NASA, the U.S. Space Force, the Swedish National Space Agency, Kinéis, and BlackSky Technology. It's already launched 89 Electron rockets into orbit, and it plans to launch its higher-capacity Neutron rocket by the end of this year.
Over the next few years, Rocket Lab plans to expand into an "end-to-end" space services company by producing more spacecraft, satellites, and subsystems for companies and government agencies. As those catalysts kick in, analysts expect its revenue to soar from $602 million in 2025 to $1.63 billion in 2028, and for it to achieve profitability in the final year.
Its stock looks expensive at 36 times its 2028 sales, but it could have plenty of room to grow as it launches more rockets and expands its space services business. It should also remain a compelling alternative for investors who like SpaceX but don't like its money-losing AI division.
Inituitive Machines develops lunar landers and exploration vehicles for NASA. It's already sent two Nova-C landers to the moon (IM-1 in 2024 and IM-2 in 2025). IM-1 marked America's first successful moon landing since 1972, and it helped the company win additional lunar logistics and near-space network services (NSNS) contracts from NASA.
Like Rocket Lab, Intuitive Machines is gradually expanding into a more diversified space services provider. It recently acquired Lanteris Space Systems, a developer of satellite and space defense systems, to accelerate that strategy.
From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect Intuitive's revenue to jump from $210 million to $1.39 billion, with profitability in the final year, as it scales its business. However, it trades at less than three times its 2028 revenue -- making it one of the cheapest high-growth space stocks. That lower valuation could attract much more attention as SpaceX's high-flying shares pull back.
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 $393,037! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,280,627!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 913% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 208% 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 June 23, 2026. *
Leo Sun has positions in Verizon Communications. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends AST SpaceMobile, BlackSky Technology, Intuitive Machines, and Rocket Lab. The Motley Fool recommends Verizon Communications. 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
"Valuations for ASTS, RKLB, and LUNR rely on optimistic 2025–2028 growth assumptions and are highly sensitive to SpaceX's ongoing dominance and government funding, making durable upside uncertain."
While the idea that SpaceX’s retreat frees wind for peers is plausible, the thesis rests on fragile assumptions. AST SpaceMobile, Rocket Lab, and Intuitive Machines would need sustained multi-year growth from an expensive base, or a blue-sky defense/space services cycle, to justify current multiples. The article relies on 2025–2028 revenue projections and pushes into 2028 sales multiples (ASTS ~12x, RKLB ~36x, LUNR <3x) that already imply peak-growth is priced in. Yet SpaceX remains a dominant, capital-allocating force, and government contracts or NASA missions can shift quickly. Financing risk, delays, and dilution could erode returns even if revenues materialize. A pullback may not guarantee durable upside.
SpaceX could re-accelerate and pull the entire sector higher again, so these names may never realize durable upside; or if SpaceX remains dominant, the market may re-rate them downward on execution/dilution risk.
"The space sector is not a monolith, and these smaller firms face distinct, high-stakes execution hurdles that remain largely independent of SpaceX's equity performance."
The premise that SpaceX's IPO valuation—a staggering $2.13 trillion—'sucked the oxygen' out of the sector is a massive oversimplification. SpaceX is a vertically integrated titan; comparing LUNR, RKLB, and ASTS to it is like comparing a local hardware store to Amazon. While Rocket Lab (RKLB) has the most proven launch cadence, the 'valuation catch-up' thesis for ASTS and LUNR ignores the brutal capital intensity and execution risk inherent in space. These firms are burning cash to build infrastructure that may face significant regulatory or technical delays. I am skeptical that a SpaceX pullback creates a 'rising tide' for these speculative plays; they are more likely to trade on their own idiosyncratic milestones.
If SpaceX’s valuation remains detached from reality, retail capital may flow into smaller 'space proxies' simply because they are the only remaining liquid vehicles for thematic exposure to the sector.
"These three stocks are priced for flawless execution on 26–28% revenue CAGRs through 2028, but the article conflates SpaceX valuation compression with sector tailwinds when the real risk is that all space stocks are overvalued relative to near-term cash generation and regulatory uncertainty."
The article's core thesis—that SpaceX's pullback creates a vacuum for smaller space stocks—rests on a false premise: that capital is zero-sum within the sector. ASTS, RKLB, and LUNR trade at 12x, 36x, and <3x 2028 sales respectively, but those multiples assume execution on aggressive revenue targets (AST: 26x CAGR through 2028; RKLB: 28x CAGR). The real risk isn't SpaceX's valuation; it's that these three are priced for perfection while facing concrete execution risk—launch delays, customer concentration (NASA/DoD), and unproven unit economics. LUNR's sub-3x multiple is cheap for a reason: lunar logistics remains speculative. SpaceX's 'pullback' to $160 (still 114x sales) suggests the market hasn't actually lost faith in space—it's just repricing SpaceX's specific risk profile.
If SpaceX's momentum truly has stalled, that's bearish for the entire sector, not bullish for competitors—it signals demand destruction or geopolitical headwinds, not capital reallocation.
"Execution risks and lofty multiples make these three stocks unlikely to benefit from any SpaceX rotation."
The article assumes SpaceX's post-IPO pullback from $225 to $160 will trigger capital rotation into ASTS, RKLB, and LUNR. Yet all three carry stretched multiples relative to 2028 revenue forecasts (ASTS at 12x, RKLB at 36x, LUNR under 3x) while facing steep execution hurdles: ASTS needs 45-60 satellites by end-2026 with only seven launched, Rocket Lab's Neutron debut is unproven, and Intuitive Machines' lunar contracts remain lumpy. Broader space sentiment may simply be cooling rather than rotating.
SpaceX's valuation reset could instead validate the entire sector's growth narrative, lifting correlated small-cap space names on renewed risk appetite once the IPO hype fades.
"Rotation into RKLB/ASTS/LUNR hinges on a clean re-rating of risk, but capex, delays, and contract risk imply these stocks are more fragile than the rotation thesis suggests."
While Grok argues broader space sentiment cools and rotation may not happen, the real risk is that RKLB/ASTS/LUNR are priced for aggressive, DoD/NASA-led growth that is inherently lumpy and capex-heavy. A single launch delay, funding shift, or default on large contracts could crush 2028 sales multiple far more than SpaceX’s recalibration. Rotation assumptions may understate idiosyncratic risk; the path to durable upside remains uncertain and bifurcated.
"Retail-driven thematic rotation into smaller space stocks could decouple their valuations from fundamental execution risks regardless of SpaceX's performance."
Gemini’s 'retail flow' theory is the missing variable. If institutional capital retreats from SpaceX due to its $2T valuation, retail investors won't just exit; they will chase the 'next SpaceX' narrative. LUNR and RKLB are liquid, thematic proxies. While Claude correctly identifies execution risks, the market often ignores fundamental hurdles in favor of momentum-driven thematic rotation. The real danger isn't just valuation—it's the potential for a speculative bubble in these smaller names as retail liquidity seeks a home.
"Retail rotation into smaller space names only works if sector demand remains intact; SpaceX's pullback might signal the opposite."
Gemini's retail-flow thesis is seductive but conflates two different phenomena. Retail chasing 'next SpaceX' narratives doesn't require SpaceX's pullback—it happens regardless. The real question: does SpaceX's $160 price (still 114x sales) signal sector-wide demand destruction, or just valuation normalization? If the former, retail won't save ASTS/RKLB; they'll bleed alongside. Nobody's tested whether these names hold if SpaceX stabilizes but government space budgets contract.
"Retail flows amplify downside if SpaceX signals sector cooling rather than isolated normalization."
Claude correctly flags that retail rotation into ASTS/RKLB/LUNR does not require SpaceX's pullback, but this exposes Gemini's bubble thesis as incomplete. If government budgets contract or NASA/DoD contracts turn lumpy—as already priced into LUNR's sub-3x multiple—retail momentum will amplify downside rather than cushion it. The sector's correlation to SpaceX may simply reflect fading thematic appetite, not capital reallocation.
The panel consensus is bearish on ASTS, RKLB, and LUNR, with the key risk being their stretched multiples and execution hurdles, and the key opportunity being retail investor momentum.
Retail investor momentum
Stretched multiples and execution hurdles