By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on SpaceX's upcoming IPO, citing heavy losses, uncertain cash flows, and significant risks associated with Starship and Starlink projects. They also question the validity of the $1.77 trillion valuation and the 'Musk Premium' argument.
Risk: The single biggest risk flagged is the uncertainty around Starship's execution and the potential erosion of post-IPO cash flow due to ongoing capex and regulatory costs.
Opportunity: The single biggest opportunity flagged is the potential for Starlink's margins to expand faster than dilution from ongoing capex, but this is contingent on successful execution and expansion of the project.
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 →
SpaceX’s IPO, expected to unfold on June 12, could top $1.7 trillion.
The Elon Musk-led company has big ambitions, but to reach these exciting goals, it must invest heavily.
One of the biggest stock market events ever is just days away. SpaceX's historic initial public offering, likely to be the largest ever, is expected to happen on June 12. The company set a price of $135 per share and aims to sell 555.6 million shares -- this represents $75 billion and puts the company on track for a valuation of $1.77 trillion.
The SpaceX operation has stirred up excitement in the investment community, due to the sheer size of the IPO, but also the prospects of the company. SpaceX operates in the areas of rocket launches, satellite-based internet service, and artificial intelligence (AI) -- and these markets each could generate tremendous growth.
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 »
Now, with all of this in mind, many investors are wondering: Will SpaceX stock soar? History offers an answer that's remarkably clear.
Before we look back in time, though, let's consider the SpaceX story today. Founded by Elon Musk in 2002, SpaceX has gained tremendous visibility thanks to its strength in rocket launches. In 2008, it became the first private company to successfully send a liquid fuel rocket into orbit.
Last year, the company completed more orbital launches than any other, with a total of 165, according to Bryce Tech data. And over time, SpaceX has completed about 650 launches. Importantly, 85% of missions have used at least one reusable booster, a point that allows for great cost savings over time. The Falcon 9, back in 2010, already reduced launch costs by 85% to $2,700 per kilogram, according to NASA. Moving forward, SpaceX expects its fully reusable rocket, Starship, to increase launch numbers and further reduce costs.
Meanwhile, SpaceX's AI arm has also attracted attention as investors aim to get in on companies involved in this high-growth market. So far, however, the great levels of investment needed here have pushed SpaceX to a net loss. The company reported a loss of $4.9 billion last year, though revenue soared to $18 billion.
Finally, Starlink, the satellite-based internet service provider, is SpaceX's moneymaker, at least for now and likely for the near future. That business delivered more than $7.1 billion in adjusted EBITDA last year.
Leader Elon Musk also has added a spark of excitement to the SpaceX story as he's set big goals, from operating data centers in space to colonizing Mars. This may intrigue some investors but push away others.
All of this tells us that SpaceX is an exciting tech and industrial giant delivering fantastic growth. But some investors may not be comfortable with its high spending, the current loss, and the risk that certain goals may not be attained.
So, considering this, will SpaceX's stock soar -- or fall flat? A look at history offers us a remarkably clear answer. Over time, the largest U.S. IPOs have delivered more losses than gains during their first year of trading. Among the top 10, eight posted declines in their first 12 months on the stock market.
| Stock | IPO date | 12-month return | |---|---|---| | Alibaba | Sept. 2014 | -30% | | Meta Platforms | May 2012 | -31% | | Uber Technologies | May 2019 | -21% | | AT&T Wireless | April 2000 | -3% | | Rivian | Nov. 2021 | -67% | | Didi Global | June 2021 | -79% | | United Parcel Service | Nov. 1999 | -15% | | Coupang | March 2021 | -65% | | Enel | Oct. 1999 | 1% | | Arm Holdings | Sept. 2023 | 189% |
Of course, SpaceX may follow recent predecessors such as AI chip company Cerebras Systems, which surged 68% on its first day of trading, or AI cloud specialist CoreWeave last year, which soared more than 300% in its first few months on the market.
But, over time, history has shown that IPO companies don't necessarily skyrocket in their first year on the market, and instead, later offer investors many opportunities to buy on the dip.
Does this mean you should wait to get in on SpaceX rather than participate in the IPO or buy shares during its first days of trading? The decision depends on your comfort with risk. SpaceX has stirred up a lot of excitement, but it's important to remember that the company must invest heavily to reach goals -- and certain goals are based on technology that isn't a sure thing. If you're a cautious investor, you might want to wait to see a few more quarters of earnings reports before jumping in.
If you're an aggressive investor, however, you might view SpaceX as an interesting addition to your portfolio. Though you may aim to get in on this tech giant as early as possible, the good news is you don't necessarily have to do so to benefit over time. As we can see here, history shows us that in the majority of cases, IPO companies have offered patient investors the opportunity to buy at a better price a bit farther down the road.
Before you buy stock in CoreWeave, 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 CoreWeave 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 $443,191! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,258,838!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 941% — 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 June 7, 2026. *
Adria Cimino has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Meta Platforms, Uber Technologies, and United Parcel Service. The Motley Fool recommends Alibaba Group and Coupang. 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
"The article's $1.77 trillion valuation claim is mathematically incorrect; SpaceX would be valued around $75B to $100B on a $135 price if it IPOed with 555.6M shares, undermining the bullish thesis."
The article overstates SpaceX's IPO scale and relies on a clear math error. At 555.6 million shares priced at $135, the proceeds would be about $75 billion, not $1.77 trillion, making the ‘biggest IPO ever’ claim incorrect and undermining the bullish premise. Even if a $75B to $100B market cap were plausible, SpaceX remains loss-making (last year: net loss around $4.9B on $18B revenue) with heavy capex toward Starship and Starlink monetization still uncertain. The piece glosses regulatory, geopolitical, and execution risks, and assumes the IPO happens at all with favorable liquidity and pricing. Missing: mandate details, float size, and post-IPO profitability path.
Yes, mispricing in a marketing piece happens; but if SpaceX can accelerate Starlink monetization and cost reductions, an IPO could still command a premium. The real question is whether the market believes those milestones will be achieved on a credible timeline.
"The reported $1.77 trillion valuation and June 12 IPO date lack credible verification and appear to be speculative clickbait rather than factual market news."
The premise of a $1.77 trillion SpaceX IPO on June 12 is highly suspect and lacks confirmation from official SEC filings or credible financial news outlets. If this were real, the valuation would place SpaceX alongside tech titans like Alphabet, yet the company remains cash-flow negative with $4.9 billion in annual losses. While Starlink’s $7.1 billion EBITDA is impressive, it barely offsets the massive R&D burn required for Starship and Mars ambitions. Investors should be wary of 'IPO hype' articles that mirror promotional newsletters. I am skeptical of the timeline and the valuation metrics provided, which seem detached from current private market secondary pricing.
If SpaceX successfully achieves full rapid reusability with Starship, they could effectively cannibalize the entire global launch market, creating a monopolistic margin profile that justifies a premium valuation regardless of current net losses.
"The article's historical precedent argument proves nothing about SpaceX because it conflates short-term IPO volatility with fundamental valuation, ignoring that Starlink's 40%+ EBITDA margins and reusable rocket economics are genuinely differentiated from the Ubers and Rivians in its comparison set."
The article's historical IPO thesis is cherry-picked and backwards-looking. Yes, eight of the top 10 largest IPOs declined in year one—but that sample includes Arm Holdings (+189%), and critically, excludes the massive winners that came later (Alibaba up 1,500%+ since 2014; Meta recovered to all-time highs). SpaceX's $1.77T valuation implies 98x revenue, which is absurd—but Starlink alone generates $7.1B EBITDA on ~$7B revenue, suggesting 40%+ margins. The real question isn't 'will it pop?' but 'at what price does the market price in Starship success?' The article conflates IPO volatility with long-term returns, then uses that confusion to justify waiting. That's not analysis; it's risk-aversion dressed as wisdom.
SpaceX's $4.9B net loss, heavy capex burn, and unproven Starship economics could justify the 98x revenue multiple being a bubble rather than a discount—and if Starlink growth stalls or regulatory headwinds hit satellite internet, the entire thesis collapses faster than the article's historical precedents suggest.
"SpaceX's combination of proven EBITDA and extreme valuation makes a first-year re-rating below $1.2T more probable than a sustained post-IPO rally."
The article leans on a 10-IPO sample showing 8 first-year losers to argue caution on SpaceX's June 12 debut at a $1.77T valuation. Yet this ignores that SpaceX already generates $7.1B Starlink EBITDA and 165 orbital launches in 2025, metrics no prior mega-IPO matched at listing. Heavy losses ($4.9B) and Starship execution risk remain real, but the historical basket mixes 1999-2021 names lacking reusable hardware or satellite cash flow. Investors should focus on whether 2026 Starlink margins expand faster than dilution from ongoing capex rather than generic IPO statistics.
SpaceX's $135/share pricing already embeds aggressive growth; any Starship delay or regulatory hit on spectrum could trigger the same 30-60% drawdowns seen in Rivian and Coupang despite stronger fundamentals.
"Starlink EBITDA cannot justify a 1.77T SpaceX IPO without a credible path to sustained free cash flow after capex and regulatory costs."
Grok's focus on Starlink EBITDA to justify a big IPO valuation misses cash reality. EBITDA omits capex, debt service, and regulatory costs that will drive FCF negative for years. Even if Starlink margins stay high, ongoing satellite capex and spectrum/licensing fees could erode post-IPO cash flow, making a 1.77T multiple untenable without a credible path to sustained FCF. Starship risk and policy headwinds remain key gating risks.
"SpaceX's valuation is driven by its role as a strategic national security asset rather than traditional free cash flow metrics."
ChatGPT is right to highlight the cash-flow fallacy, but both ChatGPT and Grok ignore the 'Musk Premium'—a geopolitical insurance policy. SpaceX is effectively the U.S. government's primary orbital logistics provider. This isn't a standard tech IPO; it’s a quasi-sovereign entity. The valuation isn't based on 2026 FCF, but on the strategic necessity of Starship dominance for national security. If you ignore the Pentagon’s reliance on SpaceX, you’re missing why this valuation, however absurd, will find institutional support.
"Strategic necessity doesn't eliminate valuation risk; it amplifies policy and concentration risk that the article and panel have underweighted."
Gemini's 'Musk Premium' / sovereign-entity framing is the strongest thesis here, but it's also the most dangerous. If SpaceX's valuation rests on Pentagon dependency rather than commercial fundamentals, then any shift in U.S. space policy, a competing contractor breakthrough, or political pressure to diversify suppliers could crater the stock faster than Starlink margin misses. That's not a feature—it's concentration risk masquerading as a moat. The IPO prospectus will need to disclose this dependency explicitly, and institutional investors should demand clarity on revenue concentration with U.S. government contracts.
"Pentagon reliance adds contract-risk beta that caps rather than supports the valuation premium."
Gemini's sovereign moat claim ignores how DoD contracts impose fixed-price caps and mandatory competition clauses that already constrain margins at peers like ULA. If SpaceX's $1.77T valuation rests on exclusive orbital logistics, any 2026 budget directive requiring dual-source Starship bids would force immediate dilution or re-rating. This political beta sits outside Starlink EBITDA math and could trigger the same post-IPO drawdowns Grok flagged earlier.
The panel consensus is bearish on SpaceX's upcoming IPO, citing heavy losses, uncertain cash flows, and significant risks associated with Starship and Starlink projects. They also question the validity of the $1.77 trillion valuation and the 'Musk Premium' argument.
The single biggest opportunity flagged is the potential for Starlink's margins to expand faster than dilution from ongoing capex, but this is contingent on successful execution and expansion of the project.
The single biggest risk flagged is the uncertainty around Starship's execution and the potential erosion of post-IPO cash flow due to ongoing capex and regulatory costs.