What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on NuScale (SMR) due to significant risks including the 50MWe vs 77MWe certification gap, high cash burn rate, and lack of commercial plants built. Despite tailwinds like NRC approval and government contracts, the company's high valuation and speculative nature make it a risky investment.
Risk: The 50MWe vs 77MWe certification gap, which could lead to multi-year regulatory delays and liquidity crisis.
Opportunity: None explicitly stated by the panel.
Key Points
Nuclear start-up NuScale Power is a first mover in the small modular reactor (SMR) space.
The company's stock is down more than 75% in the last six months and looks compelling for risk-tolerant investors.
- 10 stocks we like better than NuScale Power ›
Nuclear power is renewable, carbon-neutral, and cheap to produce. However, the high up-front costs of building a new nuclear power plant have impeded nuclear deployment in the U.S.
But a new crop of nuclear start-ups hopes to change that by building small modular reactors (SMRs), which would have a much smaller footprint and lower construction costs than a traditional power plant. One of the first movers in this potentially revolutionary industry is NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR), the first SMR company with designs approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
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 »
The company is speculative and its stock is volatile, but it could be the ticket to millionaire status for risk-tolerant investors. Here's why.
From design to reality
Excitement around SMR technology surged in 2025, and so did the stock prices of NuScale and SMR-focused rivals like Oklo (NYSE: OKLO). At its peak, NuScale had a market cap of nearly $9 billion and a stock price of over $50/share.
But just as the industry began to see concrete progress toward deployment of their long-awaited technology, investors soured on nuclear stocks. NuScale's shares have been hit particularly hard over the last six months, tumbling more than 75% to less than $10/share. The company's market cap now sits just below $3 billion.
While the stock is still risky and speculative, NuScale has inked deals with the government of Romania and the Tennessee Valley Authority to deploy its technology, and is moving forward with both projects, although final approvals are still pending.
There are still big risks ahead for NuScale, but with a nuclear-friendly administration in the White House, this start-up's shares could suddenly soar. Investors who are bullish on SMRs should give NuScale's stock a fresh look at this newly discounted price.
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 $532,929! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,091,848!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 928% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 186% 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 April 9, 2026. *
John Bromels has positions in 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
"A 75% stock decline doesn't equal a 75% reduction in execution risk; NuScale remains pre-revenue with unproven unit economics and binary regulatory/commercial approval events ahead."
NuScale (SMR) has legitimate tailwinds—NRC approval, Romania/TVA contracts, pro-nuclear administration—but the article conflates a 75% drawdown with 'compelling valuation' without addressing why. A $3B market cap for a pre-revenue company with no operating reactors and pending final approvals is still speculative, not cheap. The 'millionaire' framing is clickbait masking real execution risk: SMRs remain unproven at scale, cost overruns are endemic in nuclear, and government contracts can evaporate. The article omits that Oklo (OKLO) trades similarly—suggesting sector-wide skepticism, not NuScale-specific opportunity.
If SMRs actually achieve cost parity with renewables and AI data centers drive massive baseload demand, NuScale's first-mover regulatory advantage could justify a $9B+ valuation again—and the 75% drop could be a genuine entry point for 5-10 year holders.
"NuScale's 75% stock price decline reflects the fundamental failure of its primary commercial project rather than a simple market correction or 'discount'."
The article frames the 75% drawdown as a 'discount,' but fails to mention the fundamental collapse of NuScale’s flagship Carbon Free Power Project (CFPP) in Idaho, which was canceled due to rising costs and lack of subscriber interest. While NuScale (SMR) holds the only NRC-certified design, that certification is for a 50MWe module, not the 77MWe version they are actually trying to sell. With a cash burn rate exceeding $40M per quarter and limited revenue, the $3B valuation remains detached from the reality of a company that has yet to successfully commercialize a single reactor. The 'first mover' advantage is rapidly becoming a 'first failure' warning.
If the U.S. government provides massive backstop funding or direct subsidies via the Department of Energy to ensure domestic SMR viability against Chinese competition, NuScale’s certified design becomes an invaluable strategic asset regardless of current balance sheet woes.
"NuScale's current valuation largely reflects credible execution and regulatory risk — successful completion of initial SMR projects is the only realistic trigger for a sustained, large upside."
The piece is promotional and over-simplifies a complex, capital-intensive thesis. NuScale (ticker: SMR) does have an NRC-approved design — that’s an important milestone — but the stock’s 75% decline to under $10 and market cap < $3B suggests investors are pricing in long regulatory timelines, financing needs, construction/scale-up risk, and possible cost overruns on its Romania and TVA projects (final approvals still pending). The article also mislabels nuclear as "renewable" (it’s low‑carbon but not renewable) and leans on Motley Fool marketing. For patient, risk-tolerant investors the upside exists, but the path requires flawless execution, steady government support, and multiple successful builds.
If NuScale delivers on its Romania and TVA pilots on budget and schedule, the company could become the dominant SMR supplier and re-rate dramatically as utility customers sign offtake and governments subsidize deployment. Early technical validation would remove the principal valuation overhang quickly.
"NuScale's 2023 flagship project cancellation due to massive cost overruns highlights execution risks that the article downplays, keeping commercialization distant."
NuScale Power (SMR) boasts NRC approval as the first SMR designer, with deals for Romania and TVA deployments pending final nods—tailwinds from a pro-nuclear administration add appeal amid AI-driven power demand. But the stock's 75% plunge reflects reality: no commercial plants built, the 2023 Utah project cancellation after costs tripled to $9.1B from $5.3B, and persistent high capex risks even for modular designs. At ~$3B market cap and sub-$10/share, it's speculative; revenue is years away, cash burn continues, and rivals like Oklo (OKLO) erode first-mover edge. Risk-tolerant only, but history screams caution.
NuScale's NRC certification and government partnerships position it uniquely for SMR scale-up, especially with policy support accelerating timelines versus traditional nuclear delays.
"The 77MWe design still lacks full NRC certification—a regulatory bottleneck the article and panel have understated."
Gemini nails the CFPP cancellation—that's the real story the article buries. But everyone's treating the 50MWe vs 77MWe certification gap as minor. It's not. NRC approval for 50 doesn't automatically clear 77; that's a separate review. TVA and Romania both need the 77. If either hits delays on re-certification, the 'first-mover advantage' evaporates fast. Nobody flagged this timeline risk explicitly.
"The mismatch between NuScale's certified 50MWe design and its commercial 77MWe target creates a binary regulatory risk that could lead to a liquidity crisis."
Claude’s focus on the 50MWe versus 77MWe certification gap is the critical pivot. If the NRC review for the 77MWe design stalls, NuScale’s entire order book—specifically the TVA and RoPower projects—is effectively frozen. This creates a binary risk: either a multi-year regulatory delay that triggers a liquidity crisis, or a swift approval that validates the modular thesis. The market isn't pricing a 'discount'; it's pricing the probability of a total redesign or bankruptcy.
"NuScale lacks runway for a multi-year 77MWe recertification delay without severe dilution or asset sales."
Claude and Gemini correctly flagged the 50MWe vs 77MWe certification risk, but no one quantified the immediate cash/runway implication: at ~>$40M quarterly burn (per Gemini) plus development capex, a multi‑year recertification delay would force 2–3 dilutive financings or asset sales. Investors should model share count expansion scenarios and contract termination penalties; valuation collapses quickly if NuScale issues equity at sub-$10 or sells IP stakes.
"NuScale's Q2 $121M cash provides 2.5+ year runway, mitigating near-term dilution and bankruptcy risks."
Panel's cash crunch panic overlooks Q2 2024 balance sheet: $121M cash equivalents support ~$40M+ quarterly burn for 2.5+ years pre-revenue, per filings. This defers ChatGPT's dilutive financing urgency and Gemini's bankruptcy specter, buying time for 77MWe NRC review (underway, eyed for 2025). Consensus overemphasizes liquidity; real test is first-build costs vs. AI demand ramp.
Panel Verdict
Consensus ReachedThe panel consensus is bearish on NuScale (SMR) due to significant risks including the 50MWe vs 77MWe certification gap, high cash burn rate, and lack of commercial plants built. Despite tailwinds like NRC approval and government contracts, the company's high valuation and speculative nature make it a risky investment.
None explicitly stated by the panel.
The 50MWe vs 77MWe certification gap, which could lead to multi-year regulatory delays and liquidity crisis.