The SpaceX IPO: Is It a Space or an AI Company? (Part 4: Underwriting A Split Personality)

This is Part 4 of a four-part series on the SpaceX IPO. Part 1 valued SpaceX’s operating businesses at approximately $1T against an IPO target of $1.75T to $2.0T. Part 2 examined what the additional $1T premium buys. Part 3 took a close look at what the S-1 said and didn’t say.

At this point, a reasonable question to ask is: what’s the purpose of our analysis?

What’s the point?

SPCX will trade in the near-term largely on the conviction that Musk’s track record of operational improbabilities will continue. So you might wonder why do this analysis at all if fundamentals won’t matter.

We can learn something about how and when fundamentals will matter by looking at Tesla. For well over a decade, TSLA traded at valuations untethered to automotive peers, on a Musk-led narrative about vehicle electrification, autonomy, and energy. Analysts who anchored on automotive multiples were correct on the math, but wrong on the price for years at a stretch. What’s instructive is that TSLA moved through three distinct stages: narrative won decisively for years, followed by a period in which narrative and fundamentals coexisted in tension with each other. Finally, fundamentals became the dominant pricing force, with a permanent Musk premium baked in, which is where TSLA is today.

SPCX will likely follow the same path, but it’s a bit more complicated than TSLA. Tesla was always a car company and the market always knew what business it was valuing. SpaceX hasn’t quite figured out what it is yet: Starlink earns cash today and the Space segment is the brand, but AI is what will drive near-term growth. So, is it a space company or is it an AI company? Or, somehow both?

Our analysis helps by putting a spin on the usual IPO investor questions of (a) whether to enter; and (b) when to exit. Both questions now have to be answered relative to a declared company persona. Anyone who buys SPCX at IPO is implicitly underwriting one persona over the other, or paying for the optionality of holding both. What should then drive an exit decision follows from knowing which one attaches. So, if you believe in the AI thesis, you should watch how the AI-segment disclosure gaps evolve: Anthropic ramp schedule, compute capacity and utilization, customer concentration, RPO growth, and the realized economics of orbital compute, if those satellites are ever launched. On the other hand, if you believe in the space thesis, you’d be watching the evolution of a different set of data points, primarily: Starship launch and production costs and third-party commercial demand. Either way, SpaceX is asking investors to take a narrative bet and a persona bet at the same time, with a disclosure that makes both hard to price.

---

We put together this four-part analysis in just a day using Revelata’s deepKPI. You can do this kind of work yourself by signing up for our free tier. No credit card required.