SpaceX IPO at $135: $75B Raise, One Trillion-Dollar Question

Photo by Brecht Corbeel on Unsplash

As of June 21, 2026, this analysis draws on reporting from Reuters and Google News, combined with SpaceX S-1 filing data reviewed by Fortune, and independent research published by Morningstar and CFRA ahead of the listing.

The Trading Picture — June 12–21, 2026

$75 billion. The number rewrote every record in the history of public markets when SpaceX shares opened on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX on June 12, 2026, raising nearly three times what Saudi Aramco pulled in during its 2019 offering — the previous benchmark at $25.6 billion. Demand was seismic: retail interest alone exceeded $100 billion (revised upward from initial estimates of $70 billion), and total institutional and retail orders oversubscribed the offering approximately four times. Shares opened at $150 and closed the first session at $161.11, a 19.3% gain over the $135 IPO price, pushing market capitalization above $2 trillion.

Thesis: SPCX represents a genuine, profitable technology franchise anchored by Starlink — which generated $1.2 billion in Q1 2026 operating profit — but the $135 IPO price encodes simultaneous execution requirements across orbital rocketry, AI infrastructure, and satellite expansion so ambitious that public-market buyers are essentially paying today for a company that must still be built.

Reuters initially reported SpaceX was targeting the $135 price point days before the offering, a number subsequently confirmed when the deal priced. Elon Musk set it as a fixed figure ahead of the traditional marketing roadshow — a deliberate departure from conventional Wall Street price discovery — which amplified early oversubscription but also drew scrutiny from valuation-focused analysts. Goldman Sachs led the book, followed by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase. Musk retains 82% voting control post-IPO, meaning public shareholders own economics but not meaningful governance.

Starlink Is the Business — Evidence Anchoring the Bull Case

Peel away the Starship ambitions and the xAI story, and the core of SpaceX is a satellite internet company that is genuinely growing and generating real profit. As of full-year 2025, SpaceX reported $18.674 billion in consolidated revenue — a 33% year-over-year increase from $14.1 billion in 2024, per the S-1 prospectus. Starlink drives more than two-thirds of total revenue and is the company's primary profit center, with $1.2 billion in Q1 2026 operating profit from that segment specifically.

Chart: SpaceX's $75B IPO raise dwarfs Saudi Aramco's 2019 record of $25.6B — nearly a 3x increase in the largest single public-market fundraise in history. Source: Reuters, company filings, as of June 21, 2026.

The AI revenue layer adds a second growth narrative. Per the S-1, two contracts anchor near-term projections: Anthropic paying approximately $1.25 billion per month for access to xAI's Colossus 1 datacenter through May 2029, and Google contracted at roughly $920 million per month through June 2029. Together those agreements represent approximately $26 billion in annualized AI revenue — a figure investors are watching closely, though it is worth noting that the regulatory environment governing AI compute and cross-border model access remains in active flux. As AI Trends has analyzed regarding export policy shifts, regulatory changes could reshape the terms under which hyperscalers commit to large multi-year infrastructure contracts. The company claims participation in a total addressable market it describes as $28.5 trillion — a figure worth treating as aspirational framing rather than near-term guidance.

ARK Invest quantified its conviction on day one: the firm purchased more than $500 million worth of SPCX shares at the IPO price, making SpaceX the largest holding in ARK's $1 billion internal venture fund, which first backed the company when it was valued under $200 billion in late 2023. That entry-to-IPO return illustrates why the bull case is not without substance — the question is whether that thesis holds at a $2 trillion public-market valuation.

Photo by Anne Nygård on Unsplash

One Accounting Wrinkle That Changes Everything

Here is what separates this S-1 from a typical technology filing: SpaceX uses common-control accounting to consolidate SpaceX, xAI, and X (formerly Twitter) as a single reporting entity, on the basis that Elon Musk controls all three. The consequence is that there is no clean mechanism to isolate SpaceX's standalone financial performance from two companies — a social media platform and an AI lab — that carry their own distinct cost structures, growth trajectories, and risk profiles.

The Q1 2026 blended figures show $4.694 billion in revenue, a $1.943 billion operating loss, a $4.27 billion net loss, and $1.127 billion in adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization — a measure of underlying operating cash generation before accounting adjustments). Full-year 2025 includes a $4.9 billion net loss alongside that 33% revenue growth, with an accumulated deficit of $41.3 billion as of March 31, 2026. None of that is unprecedented for a capital-intensive infrastructure company — but it creates a genuine challenge for standard sector analysis, because any multiple you apply to SpaceX revenue or EBITDA is applied to a three-entity blend, not a pure-play space business.

As of June 21, 2026, data suggests the market has chosen to treat this integration as a feature — the Starlink-xAI-X combination creates a vertically integrated connectivity and AI stack that no direct competitor can replicate. Whether that framing justifies approximately 94x trailing revenue and 170x EBITDA is the central disagreement between the bull and bear camps driving every institutional conversation about SPCX right now.

The Bear Case Deserves Better Than a Paragraph

Three credentialed research teams have gone on record with quantified skepticism, and they deserve precise treatment rather than a token mention.

Morningstar analysts placed a fair value on SpaceX of $780 billion — approximately 48% below the company's $1.5 trillion private-market valuation that preceded the IPO. Their most pointed concern: xAI poses a "material threat of value destruction" with an "economic moat indeterminate." In plain terms, Morningstar's argument is that the AI subsidiary may undermine SpaceX's competitive advantages rather than extend them, and that a buyer at IPO price carries almost no margin of safety relative to their model.

CFRA initiated coverage with a Sell rating and a $115 price target — $20 below the $135 IPO price. Their specific focus: SpaceX's dependence on "an unproven Starship for nearly every growth initiative" creates execution risk the current valuation ignores. Global broadband expansion, point-to-point travel, deep-space logistics — every major long-term revenue projection runs through a launch vehicle that has not yet demonstrated commercial-scale reliability. That is not a minor execution item; it is the load-bearing wall of the entire growth thesis for anything beyond Starlink's current footprint.

Wellington Management offered the most pointed framing: the offering functions "as much as a test of investor appetite for rocketry and artificial intelligence as it is for CEO Musk himself," with the valuation "fully priced, or in my opinion overpriced, for where it is today." The 82% voting control Musk retains post-IPO means the company's strategic direction — xAI integration depth, Starship commercialization timelines, capital allocation across three consolidated entities — flows through a single decision-maker managing multiple competing demands simultaneously.

When I review these three independent assessments together, the honest conclusion is that SPCX has become a referendum: you are not buying a satellite internet company at a premium, you are buying a conviction that one person can execute simultaneously on orbital rocketry, AI datacenter infrastructure, and global broadband within the same five-year window the current price already assumes. That is a concentrated, single-point-of-failure bet that traditional investment research frameworks were not designed to evaluate — and the bear case deserves that acknowledgment.

Watchlist — What Investors Are Tracking

• Overallotment decision (within approximately 30 days of June 12): Underwriters hold the right to purchase an additional 83.33 million shares at $135, potentially raising the total raise to $86.2 billion. Exercise of this option would signal institutional demand holding beyond day-one momentum.
• Q2 2026 earnings — first as a public company: The $1.2 billion Q1 2026 Starlink operating profit needs to prove itself as a sustainable run-rate. CFRA specifically flagged declining Starlink average revenue per user (ARPU) as the key metric to watch each quarter.
• Starship commercial milestone: A paying commercial payload on Starship would materially weaken the CFRA bear case. Absence of one by year-end 2026 strengthens it. This is the single most cited specific risk across bearish analyst notes.
• OpenAI and Anthropic IPO timelines: Both have filed confidential IPO documents. As of June 21, 2026, Anthropic has reached $44 billion in annualized revenue and its first operating profit ($559 million in Q2 2026); OpenAI has grown from $2 billion to more than $20 billion in annualized revenue, with Anthropic valued above $960 billion and OpenAI above $850 billion in private markets. Their listings will test whether the market sustains premium multiples for AI-adjacent, loss-generating companies at scale — a direct read-through for SPCX.
• Ticker to monitor: SPCX (Nasdaq). The lock-up expiration window — typically 90 to 180 days post-IPO — creates a secondary test of insider conviction when early holders gain the ability to sell.

In my read, the clearest near-term signal is not the stock price itself — it is the overallotment exercise date and the first Starlink ARPU figure SpaceX reports as a public company. Those two data points will do more to resolve the bull-bear standoff than any analyst note published this week.

Frequently Asked Questions

Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice, a recommendation, or an endorsement of any security. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial advisor before making investment decisions. Research based on publicly available sources current as of June 21, 2026.