SpaceX lost nearly $5 billion last year. Is a $1.77 trillion valuation actually justified?
u/sqlearner ·
Reddit — r/stocks
· June 12, 2026 at 13:30
· ⬆ 137 pts
· 💬 137 comments
| View on Reddit ↗
AI Summary
Summary
The post questions whether SpaceX’s $1.77 trillion valuation is justified after losing $5 billion last year.
The author contrasts a bullish narrative (Starlink, launch dominance, defense, future industries) with a bearish one (valuation must matter eventually).
The post is speculative noise – a thought exercise rather than data-driven DD, as SpaceX is not a publicly traded security and the scenario is hypothetical.
Score137
Comments137
Upvote %76%
▶ Full Post Text
I'm trying to separate the excitement around Elon Musk from the actual investment case for SpaceX.
The company just completed the largest IPO in history and is now valued at roughly $1.77 trillion. At the same time, it reportedly lost almost $5 billion last year and generates only a fraction of the revenue produced by most companies in a similar valuation range.
The bullish argument seems to be that investors aren't valuing SpaceX based on today's financials. They're valuing Starlink, launch dominance, defense contracts, AI ambitions, and potentially entire industries that don't fully exist yet.
The bearish argument is that at some point valuation still matters, regardless of how impressive the vision may be.
For those who are bullish, what specifically makes a $1.77 trillion valuation reasonable today rather than five or ten years from now?