Is SpaceX Stock Still a Buy at $140?

Pubblicato 2026-08-19Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-08-19

Introduzione

SpaceX (SPCX) has been on a rollercoaster ride since its IPO: it debuted at $135, surged to a high of $225.64, then dropped to $104.83 before rebounding to $140 as of August 14th. While it's down 38% from its peak, this doesn't necessarily mean the stock is cheap.

SpaceX (SPCX) has taken a roller-coaster ride since its IPO: priced at $135, it surged to a high of $225.64, then fell to $104.83, before rebounding to around $140 as of August 14. While this represents a 38% decline from the peak, it doesn't necessarily mean the stock is cheap.

SpaceX currently operates three main businesses. Starlink is the primary profit driver, generating $4.29 billion in revenue and $1.66 billion in operating income in Q2 2026, with its user base growing to 12 million. The rocket business forms the core competitive moat but remains unprofitable. The AI business is the fastest-growing segment, with quarterly revenue up 247% year-over-year to $2.56 billion; however, capital expenditures soared to $15.83 billion, representing both the greatest growth opportunity and the largest financial risk.

The company's total revenue for Q2 was $7.81 billion, up 92% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA reached $3.54 billion, a 191% increase. However, capital expenditures for the first half of the year totaled $28.48 billion, resulting in free cash flow of approximately negative $25 billion. In other words, while growth is rapid, the company is still burning significant amounts of cash.

Valuation is the primary concern at current levels. Based on diluted shares after the Cursor acquisition, the $140 share price implies a market capitalization of approximately $1.91 trillion, resulting in an enterprise value roughly 80 times the past twelve months' revenue. The article presents pessimistic, neutral, and optimistic valuation scenarios of $32, $130, and $265 per share, respectively, with a risk-weighted value of approximately $116.

On the technical front, the $118-$125 range is the primary support zone, with stronger support between $105 and $110. Significant resistance lies near the $146-$151 area. Buying at $140 is akin to chasing near resistance levels, with insufficient downside protection.

A more prudent strategy would be: initiate a small position after stabilization in the $120-$125 range; consider adding to the position at $110-$115; the risk-reward ratio becomes more attractive closer to $105. Investors favoring trend trading could wait for a confirmed breakout above $151 on strong volume, followed by a successful hold above that level.

Key risks include underperformance of AI investments relative to expectations, customer concentration, persistent negative free cash flow, dilution from share issuances, the unlocking of a large amount of restricted stock, delays in the Starship program, and governance risks stemming from Elon Musk's controlling stake of over 80% of the voting power.

The conclusion is straightforward: SpaceX is an outstanding company, but $140 may not be an outstanding entry point. One can maintain a long-term bullish outlook without the need to chase the price higher immediately. The $115-$125 range represents a more balanced zone in terms of valuation, technical support, and market sentiment.

Letture associate

When Real Estate Ownership Goes Digital: What Happens to Your Rights, Risks, and Liquidity?

"Tokenizing Real Estate: Rights, Risks, and the Path to Liquidity" While tokenizing real-world assets (RWA) gains traction, real estate presents unique complexities. Beyond technical token issuance, critical challenges remain: enforcing legal rights, managing the underlying physical asset, and creating genuine secondary market liquidity. This article explores these issues through OneAsset, a Dubai-based commercial real estate (CRE) tokenization platform. OneAsset moves away from simply offering asset fragmentation. Instead, it focuses on institutional-grade infrastructure, prioritizing asset quality, legal enforceability, and operational fundamentals. Each property is held in an independent, single-asset vault, backed by a legally separate Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for bankruptcy remoteness. Investors acquire tokens representing the economic rights to a specific property, with precise legal claims defined by the underlying SPV structure. OneAsset emphasizes that tokenization cannot transform a poor-quality asset. Its initial focus is on institutional investors and quality Dubai-based CRE, selected for stable tenant cash flows and a clear regulatory environment. The platform integrates compliance by design, aiming to embed investor qualification and transfer rules directly into the token architecture. A core insight is that asset fragmentation does not automatically create liquidity. True liquidity depends on the asset's inherent quality—its location, cash flow, and valuation—as well as sufficient buyer demand. The goal is not just tradability, but making real estate rights more easily priced, verified, and reallocated. Looking ahead, the article discusses the potential for "AiFi" (AI-powered finance). For AI agents to autonomously allocate capital, investment assets like real estate tokens must become truly "machine-readable." This requires a high degree of standardization in legal rights, valuations, cash flows, and compliance data—a direction OneAsset is pursuing through its structured data reporting. In conclusion, real estate tokenization is shifting from a technology narrative to a focus on asset fundamentals. Blockchain can enhance efficiency and programmability, but it cannot replace sound underwriting, property management, or legal execution. The real work begins after the asset is on-chain.

marsbit3 min fa

When Real Estate Ownership Goes Digital: What Happens to Your Rights, Risks, and Liquidity?

marsbit3 min fa

After Affecting Two Generations, Meta Ordered to Pay $18 Billion in Damages

After more than two decades, a legal parallel has emerged. In 1998, major U.S. tobacco companies settled for $206 billion, leading to strict advertising bans and warning labels that significantly reduced smoking rates. On August 26, 2026, Meta reached a landmark settlement with U.S. attorneys general, agreeing to pay up to approximately $18 billion and implement mandatory changes to Facebook and Instagram. This historic settlement, one of the largest against a tech company, stems from allegations that Meta deliberately designed addictive features like infinite scroll and push notifications, harming youth mental health and violating child privacy laws. Facing a potential $1.4 trillion lawsuit and a series of unfavorable jury verdicts, Meta chose to settle on the eighth day of trial to avoid a catastrophic ruling. The core of the agreement is not just the financial penalty, which Meta will pay over 10 years, but a series of strict, 10-year product mandates for young users. These include a hard two-hour daily time limit (combined across apps), a default "nighttime block" from midnight to 6 AM, restricted notifications during school hours, hidden "like" counts, an optional non-algorithmic feed, and stronger age verification. An independent auditor will monitor compliance. Crucially, roughly 30% ($5.3 billion) of Meta's payment is contingent on YouTube and TikTok adopting similar measures and paying around $5 billion each. This move aims to create an industry-wide standard and prevent Meta from being competitively disadvantaged. The settlement is being likened to Big Tobacco's "tobacco moment." By legally framing addictive algorithm design as a "public nuisance," it sets a powerful precedent. Nearly 3,000 similar cases are pending against other social media giants, signaling a fundamental shift in regulatory pressure. The era where platforms could deny the addictive impact of their designs on children is effectively over.

marsbit8 min fa

After Affecting Two Generations, Meta Ordered to Pay $18 Billion in Damages

marsbit8 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片