Aggregator
California-born fast food chain dominates national french fry rankings: ‘They don’t skimp’
Seth Meyers bashes Trump’s World Cup appearance in back-to-back late-night rants
Chaos as hundreds of flights delayed and canceled as massive storm rolls in — with major California airports in the crosshairs
Can SpaceX Fire On All Cylinders?
Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,
SpaceX’s June IPO raised $75 billion, resulting in an initial valuation of $1.77 trillion, making it the largest IPO in history. SpaceX, encompassing its launch business, Starlink, and the recently merged xAI, peaked at a $2.5 trillion market cap in its first week of trading, briefly tying it with Amazon as the fifth-largest publicly traded company. After only a month, the enthusiasm is rapidly fading.
Perhaps most amazing of all, the fanfare is occurring despite SpaceX producing a net loss of nearly $5 billion in 2025. Based on its $1.84 trillion market cap, investors are clearly not worried about the present. They are excitedly pricing in astronomical growth for SpaceX.
To evaluate SpaceX from a fundamental perspective, investors need to quantify the implied growth in its valuation and compare it with their own and market forecasts. In this article, we attempt to help them by providing context for their growth expectations, using Amazon’s history as a proxy.
Amazon, like SpaceX, was priced at expensive valuations and ultimately delivered on those expectations. Initial Amazon investors who held through the dot-com crash and years of zero earnings have been rewarded roughly 3,300-fold, amounting to about 32% annualized for nearly three decades.
So, the question we pose: what does the Amazon playbook require of SpaceX?
AmazonAmazon went public in May 1997 at $18 per share, valuing the online bookseller at $438 million. Revenue that year was $148 million. The market was pricing its shares at a price-to-sales (P/S) multiple of roughly 3x. At the time, the ratio was generous for a money-losing start-up, but defensible given that Amazon was doubling revenue every year. Importantly, those who envisioned that Amazon was much more than an online bookstore and appreciated its growth potential must have thought its price-to-sales ratio was dirt cheap.
What followed was one of the greatest periods of sustained revenue expansion in corporate history. Amazon crossed $19 billion in annual revenue in 2008, only eleven years after going public with $148 million in revenue. In 2025, Amazon generated $716 billion in revenue, putting it on par with Walmart as the highest-revenue company in the US. From its IPO to today, revenue has grown nearly 5,000-fold.
That trajectory is nearly unprecedented. Can SpaceX also fire on all cylinders?
SpaceX Today vs. Amazon ThenAs the graph above shows, Amazon generated approximately $19.2 billion in revenue in 2008, nearly identical to SpaceX’s $18.7 billion in 2025. In 2008, Amazon’s market cap was slightly under $40 billion, implying a P/S multiple slightly above 2x. SpaceX, with a $1.84 trillion market cap and $18.7 billion in sales, trades at a P/S nearing 100x. The market is pricing SpaceX at approximately 50 times the multiple it gave Amazon at the same revenue level.
While the ratio difference sounds extreme, there are reasons to argue SpaceX deserves a premium:
-
Its rapidly growing Starlink business generates $4.4 billion in operating income, with revenue compounding at a 50% growth rate. However, as we share in the first graphic below, its revenue growth is slowing, and average revenue per customer is declining.
-
The reusable launch business accounts for over 50% of orbital rocket launches, as we share in the second graphic. That said, competition is increasing rapidly, especially from the well-funded Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’ rocket venture.
-
There is promise in its AI infrastructure business through the xAI merger, but Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini, and new open-source models like Kimi-K3 appear to hold a meaningful advantage.
The way to rationalize a near triple-digit P/S multiple is through extraordinary, historically unprecedented growth. So, let’s quantify “extraordinary.”
SpaceX’s Implied Growth RateLet’s work backward from SpaceX’s $1.84 trillion market cap to gauge the growth needed to satisfy the market’s implied forecast. To do so, we assume that investors demand a 20% annual return. While lofty, it is roughly a third below the 32% Amazon has delivered since its IPO.
If SpaceX shares compound at 20% per year for the next ten years, its market cap will reach $11.4 trillion by mid-2036, implying a share price near $860, assuming no new equity issuance.
With that proxy $11.4 trillion market cap in hand, the only remaining variable is the P/S multiple investors will pay for a mature SpaceX. That multiple determines the revenue it must produce. Consider two scenarios:
-
Scenario one: SpaceX matures like Amazon. Amazon today, after 29 years of dominance across e-commerce and cloud computing, trades at roughly 3.7 times trailing sales. If SpaceX has the same multiple in 2036, it will generate about $3.1 trillion in annual revenue. For context, that approximates the entire GDP of France and roughly a tenth of US GDP. The implied revenue growth rate that clears this hurdle is 67% per year, compounded over ten consecutive years.
-
Scenario two: SpaceX retains a higher premium multiple. A more generous P/S assumption eases the required revenue growth, but the implications are still daunting. At a P/S ratio of 20x in ten years, the required 2036 revenue falls to about $570 billion, roughly three-quarters of what Amazon generates today, and a level Amazon needed 27 years to attain. The implied growth rate is substantial at 41% per year for a decade.
To appreciate what a P/S of 20 means, we share the ratio of the 20 largest US stocks below. Broadcom at 29.2 and Nvidia at 24.9 are the only two above 20, and both are growing rapidly with enormous profits.
Amazon’s single best ten-year revenue stretch, from 1997 to 2007, produced a 59% compound annual growth rate. But Amazon started with $148 million in sales and was just beginning to expand beyond books. SpaceX began at $18.7 billion, 126 times Amazon’s starting point. Growth rates achievable from a small base are significantly easier than from a large one, which is precisely why only a handful of companies have ever sustained 40%+ growth for a full decade.
Time Out: What A P/S Of 20 ImpliesIt’s worth pausing to stress what a P/S ratio of 20 implies. The best way to do so is to share the advice Scott McNealy from Sun Microsystems gave his shareholders in 2002.
‘At 10 times revenues, to give you a 10-year payback, I have to pay you 100% of revenues for 10 straight years in dividends. That assumes I can get that by my shareholders. That assumes I have zero cost of goods sold, which is very hard for a computer company. That assumes zero expenses, which is really hard with 39,000 employees. That assumes I pay no taxes, which is very hard. And that assumes you pay no taxes on your dividends, which is kind of illegal. And that assumes with zero R&D for the next 10 years, I can maintain the current revenue run rate. Now, having done that, would any of you like to buy my stock at $64? Do you realize how ridiculous those basic assumptions are? You don’t need any transparency. You don’t need any footnotes. What were you thinking?’— Scott McNealy, Business Week, 2002
Elon Musk’s Growth ForecastElon Musk’s forward guidance warrants caution, as it is very aggressive. Days after the IPO, Musk posted the comment below on X. Growing from $18.7 billion in 2025 to $1 trillion in 2030 is a 53-fold increase in five years, a compound growth rate of roughly 122% per year, more than double Amazon’s best-ever pace and from a base thousands of times larger.
Suppose Musk delivers. The shareholder outcome still hinges entirely on the multiple. If the market awards a $1 trillion revenue base Amazon’s current 3.7x P/S valuation, SpaceX’s 2030 market cap would be roughly $3.7 trillion, about a 17% annualized return from today’s price. At 20x, the same revenue produces a $20 trillion valuation and returns near 70% annually.
A 17% to 70% range on identical fundamentals illustrates the difficulty in our analysis: both variables, sales and the multiple, are unknowable, and the multiple alone can swing the outcome from ordinary to absurd.
Wall Street’s Wide ViewTo be clear, SpaceX is unique. Starlink’s subscriber economics provide a sustainable revenue base; the launch business has pricing power that thus far has not been challenged, and an xAI integration could, in the most optimistic scenario, open multiple trillion-dollar markets quickly. That said, analysts must carefully discount even the most tremendous forecasts.
To wit, the models from the SpaceX IPO underwriters sit far below those of Elon Musk. Morgan Stanley projects roughly $330 billion in 2030 revenue, and Goldman Sachs sees about $470 billion, both fractions of Musk’s $1 trillion.
New Street Research, which initiated coverage with a $165 target, acknowledged the bullish thesis could work but noted investors need a “20 to 25-year time frame” for the math to resolve favorably.
Morningstar, by contrast, set the fair value for SpaceX at $63. As we share below, the $63 to $401 range of analyst price targets reflects the uncertainty surrounding the company’s potential.
SummaryAmazon rewarded patient investors immensely, but it did so from a mere $438 million IPO valuation. Compounding from $1.84 trillion, as SpaceX tries, is harder by orders of magnitude. SpaceX can be a great company and still prove disappointing to its shareholders. To justify today’s price, its growth must be historically unprecedented, at a scale no company has ever operated, for longer than any growth cycle has ever lasted.
While that may sound bearish, this analysis doesn’t make SpaceX uninvestable. The stock will cycle through bullish and bearish periods as momentum ebbs and flows along a likely volatile path. Accordingly, traders will find plenty of opportunities on both sides. For those looking to buy and hold, however, the odds seem lofty. But, transcending financial forecasting, Musk has a proven track record of success, so it’s too early to count SpaceX out.
Can SpaceX do what only a very small handful of companies have ever done, or is the market once again pricing in a future that gravity will eventually catch up with?
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 12:25Growing trend of hating men seems to backfire as anti-marriage movement leaves single women losing out
Heidi Montag has a Barbie moment in bedazzled latex bodysuit and thigh-high boots
Heidi Montag has a Barbie moment in bedazzled latex bodysuit and thigh-high boots
Tyler Herro’s NSFW warning to Heat after shocking Giannis Antetokounmpo trade
Tom Pelissero breaks silence on ESPN laying him off — months after fateful NFL Network deal
How Angelina Jolie feels about her children dropping estranged dad Brad Pitt’s last name
How Angelina Jolie feels about her children dropping estranged dad Brad Pitt’s last name
Trump tech official accuses China’s Moonshot AI of ‘large-scale’ plot to steal from Anthropic
Top Israeli Minister: 'Best For Us' If US Fights Iran While Israel Sits Out New Round of War
As four more American families grieve the deaths of soldiers killed in the war on Iran, one of the top-ranking ministers in Israel's cabinet told an Israeli audience that having America do all the fighting and dying is "the best for us." Israel had intensely lobbied President Trump to launch a joint war on Iran on Feb 22, and traded blows with Iran up until early June. Since Trump restarted intense, daily bombardment of Iran 11 days ago, however, Israel has sat out the action, sparing Israelis from lethal Iranian retaliation.
“The State of Israel has no interest in joining the contained confrontation between Iran and the United States," far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said in a session at the Katif Conference for National Responsibility, which endorses Jewish settlement in Palestinian territories. "The current situation is the best one for us.”
Bezalel Smotrich leads the Religious Zionism party and wants Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza (MENAHEM KAHANA / AFP)Smotrich is generally regarded as the second-most powerful cabinet member in Israel, and is a vital linchpin in Netanyahu's government that took power in January 2023. Lacking an outright majority, Netanyahu was forced to build a ruling coalition that gives unprecedented power to religious and ultra-nationalist extremists. Smotrich leads the Religious Zionism party. He personally aspires to make Israel a theocracy, wants Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza while barring most Palestinians from citizenship, and has said it would be "just and moral" to starve two million Palestinian men, women and children in Gaza.
In his latest remarks, Smotrich candidly acknowledged that Israel and the United States have different goals vis a vis Iran, but said America's continued military engagement furthers the Israeli agenda. “[We] must remember that the ultimate goal of Israel, and not necessarily the United States, is to undermine and weaken the regime in Iran – to the point of overthrowing it,” Smotrich said.
Army SGT Michael Swinton was killed July 19 when a controlled detonation of an Iranian drone went terribly wrong (Mia Gonzalez-Swinton via Guardian)Disregarding the widespread victimization of innocents that the strategy entails, Smotrich said destruction of Iran's economy will help precipitate the Iranian government's collapse. "Currently, inflation in Iran is at 85 percent, food inflation of over 134 percent in a total of four months, and the Iranian rial is trading at an exchange rate of 1.9 million to the dollar - and it's going up." He then reiterated that "the current situation is good for us, and there's no point in pushing ourselves inward."
Footage of the Iranian ballistic missile strike on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan last night.
At least two missiles hit the base, killing two American service members. pic.twitter.com/8tOm6yyXwe
Here's how Israeli journalist Hagai Amit recently described the benefits of Israel allowing the United States to plunge forward alone in the war that Israel urged America to start:
It reduces the risk of [Israeli] casualties and allows daily life to continue largely as normal, without midnight sirens, trips to bomb shelters or major disruptions. The Finance Ministry is also relieved not to have to burden the state budget with billions of additional shekels for air operations and the interception of ballistic missiles.
Meanwhile, as Amit warmly describes the cost savings for Israel, various analysts say America's cost of the Iran quagmire is now close to or even exceeding $100 billion, which is upwards of triple what the Pentagon has owned up to at this point.
1LT Tyler Feehan and PVT Isabella Gonzales were two of three Army soldiers killed in the Iranian strike on US forces at base in JordanOf course, the highest price is being paid by American service members who've been thrown into an unconstitutionally-initiated war launched on false premises. Four more US soldiers have been killed since Trump re-escalated the war. In addition to US Army SGT Michael Swinton being killed in Iraq when a controlled detonation of an Iranian drone went wrong, three more soldiers were killed in an Iranian strike that hit prefabricated housing units at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.
Initially, the Pentagon confirmed only two fatalities in Jordan: 19-year-old PVT Isabella Gonzales and 1LT Tyler Feehan. The third was classified as MIA, but the Pentagon is now saying SGT Angel Rampersad is "believed to be deceased." The grim implication is that Rampersad's body was devastated by an Iranian missile -- nearly five months after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared that Iran's military had been "made combat-ineffective," and almost two months after Sen. Ted Cruz said US forces had "destroy[ed] all of their missiles and drones."
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 12:05