Want to Follow SpaceX? Data Shows 30 Star U.S. IPO Stocks Mostly Halve in First Year

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-06-11Обновлено 2026-06-11

Введение

"SpaceX is set for a historic IPO on June 12 under ticker SPCX, pricing at $135 per share to raise $75 billion at a valuation of about $1.75 trillion. However, data from Motley Fool on 30 high-profile tech IPOs since 2012 reveals a challenging pattern for new investors. Median returns were -9% after six and twelve months, with a median maximum drawdown of 54% in the first year. No company avoided a significant decline, including later successes like Meta and Palantir. Morningstar estimates SpaceX's fair value at only around $780 billion, less than half its IPO valuation. Despite SpaceX's dominant market share in U.S. rocket launches and a profitable Starlink subscriber base, its financials show a $4.9 billion net loss in 2025 and a trailing twelve-month revenue of $18.7 billion, resulting in a price-to-sales ratio exceeding 90. Analysts caution that while the IPO may see initial gains, historical trends suggest a high probability of substantial price declines and volatility in the following year."

Author: Curry, Chaoxiang Research

Synopsis: SpaceX is set to price after market close on June 11 and list on Nasdaq on the 12th under ticker SPCX, with an offering price of $135 per share, a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion, raising $75 billion, making it the largest IPO in history.

However, historical data from 30 star tech IPOs compiled by Motley Fool shows: the median returns 6 months and 12 months post-listing were both -9%, with a median maximum drawdown of 54% in the first year, and none escaped unscathed. Morningstar's fair value estimate is only about $780 billion, less than half the offering valuation.

This Friday (June 12), SpaceX will list on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX. According to a Reuters report on June 3, the offering price was set at $135 per share, issuing about 5.56 billion shares to raise $75 billion, corresponding to a valuation of about $1.75 trillion (some sources calculate it as $1.77 trillion based on post-offering shares). By either measure, this is the largest IPO in stock market history, with Goldman Sachs leading a syndicate of 21 underwriters. The final pricing will be determined after the U.S. market close on June 11.

The hype is undeniable. SpaceX stated in its S-1 filing that the company has "identified the largest executable total addressable market in human history," quantified at $28.5 trillion. The retail allocation was set at about 30% of the float, roughly three times the usual level for large IPOs.

The problem is, for ordinary investors rushing in on the first day, the answer provided by historical data is quite grim.

The Median Ledger: Small Gains in the First Three Months, Collective Losses After Six

In an article published on June 9, Motley Fool analyst Ryan Vanzo analyzed the post-listing performance of 30 star technology companies since 2012, with a sample ranging from Facebook and Twitter to Coinbase, Robinhood, Rivian, Arm, and CoreWeave.

The shape of the median curve is telling: median returns were +3% after 1 week, +1% after 1 month, and +4% after 3 months—all passable up to this point. But extending to 6 months, the median becomes -9%; at 12 months, it remains -9%. The proportion of companies with positive returns also collapses in sync, dropping from 57% maintained in the first three months to 43% at both the 6-month and 12-month marks. In other words, holding for a full year results in losses for most momentum buyers.

Individual stock divergence is extreme. CoreWeave soared 300% three months after listing, Palantir gained 164% in three months, and Zoom rose 142% in twelve months. But negative cases are equally dense: Lyft fell 65% in twelve months, Robinhood dropped 74%, Rivian fell 67%, and Coupang declined 65%. There is no stable relationship between star power and post-IPO returns.

Median Maximum First-Year Drawdown 54%, Robinhood and Coinbase Both Halved

More striking than returns are the drawdown figures. The median maximum drawdown within the first year of listing for the 30 companies was 54%, with an average of 55%. Okta had the smallest drawdown at 20%, and none avoided it.

Two platforms familiar to crypto users are in the hardest-hit areas. Robinhood's maximum drawdown in its first year was 90%, the highest among the 30; Coinbase saw a 57% drawdown. Even companies later proven to be big winners were not exempt: CoreWeave had a 65% first-year drawdown, Palantir 53%, and Meta (then Facebook) 54%. This data points to a simple conclusion: even if you pick the right company, buying at the opening price will likely subject you to floating losses at the halving level first.

Academic research paints a similar picture. Jay Ritter, Director of the IPO Research Program at the University of Florida, tracked 1,479 IPOs from 2012 to 2021, finding an average first-day return as high as 23.6%, but the average total return over the subsequent three years was only 10.6%. The Wall Street Journal cited Ritter's data stating that investors who bought on the first day and held for three years underperformed a market-cap-weighted index by about 21%. The excitement of the first day largely borrowed future gains.

SpaceX's Ledger: $18.7 Billion in Revenue Supporting a $1.75 Trillion Valuation

Returning to SpaceX itself, the valuation debate is more concrete than historical patterns.

According to financial data cited by The Motley Fool, SpaceX's 2025 revenue was $18.7 billion, a 33% year-over-year increase, but it reported a net loss of $4.9 billion, reversing a profit of about $790 million in 2024. S-1 data compiled by BitMEX shows a single-quarter net loss of $4.28 billion in Q1 2026, with cumulative losses reaching $41.3 billion, of which the AI business (post-merger with xAI) burns about $2.5 billion per quarter. Calculated at a $1.75 trillion valuation, the price-to-sales ratio exceeds 90 times.

Morningstar's stance is the most direct. Analysts at the firm called SpaceX "severely overvalued," suggesting long-term investors will have opportunities to buy at better margins of safety after the IPO, and set the fair value estimate at approximately $780 billion, less than half the offering valuation. A reference point: SpaceX's over-the-counter tender offer in December 2025 corresponded to a valuation of about $800 billion. In just over half a year, the pricing more than doubled.

Bullish logic also exists. The rocket launch business holds over 80% of the U.S. market share, and Starlink has over 12 million paying subscribers and is profitable, forming the foundation of this valuation. Vanzo's own judgment is that SpaceX's stock will likely perform well on its first trading day, but given the valuation level and historical data, it wouldn't be surprising to see the stock struggle over the next 12 months.

For those preparing to place orders on Friday, this data from 30 companies is at least worth a glance: history doesn't guarantee repetition, but halving in the first year has been the norm for this game over the past fourteen years.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QAccording to the article, what is the historical median performance of 30 high-profile tech IPOs after 12 months, based on Motley Fool's data?

AAccording to Motley Fool's data on 30 high-profile tech IPOs since 2012, the median return after 12 months is -9%.

QWhat is the median maximum drawdown in the first year for the 30 IPO companies studied, and which company had the worst drawdown?

AThe median maximum drawdown in the first year for the 30 companies is 54%. The company with the worst drawdown was Robinhood, with a 90% drawdown.

QWhat does the article state as Morningstar's fair value estimate for SpaceX, and how does it compare to the reported IPO valuation?

AMorningstar's fair value estimate for SpaceX is approximately $780 billion. This is less than half of the reported IPO valuation of about $1.75 trillion.

QBased on financial data cited in the article, what was SpaceX's revenue and net profit/loss for 2025?

AIn 2025, SpaceX's revenue was $18.7 billion, but it reported a net loss of $4.9 billion.

QWhat key reasons does the article mention for investors being bullish on SpaceX's valuation?

AThe article mentions that the bullish case for SpaceX's valuation is based on its rocket launch business holding over 80% of the U.S. market and its Starlink service having over 12 million profitable subscribers.

Похожее

Trump's Crypto Empire: A $2.3 Billion Wealth Transfer Experiment

In June 2026, Reuters investigations revealed that since Donald Trump's return to the White House, his family has accumulated roughly $2.3 billion in profits from four core crypto ventures: World Liberty Financial (WLFI), the $TRUMP meme coin, American Bitcoin, and ALT5 Sigma (later renamed AI Financial). Coincidentally, overall investor losses in these projects were estimated to be a similar amount. The businesses, spanning DeFi, stablecoins, meme coins, Bitcoin mining, and digital payments, largely relied not on technological innovation but on converting the political influence and notoriety of the Trump brand into financial assets sold to the market. This marks a dramatic shift from Trump's earlier skepticism of cryptocurrencies. The ventures operated on a similar logic: leveraging the Trump name to generate market hype and trust, attracting investment through token sales or public listings, and enabling the family to capture profits upfront through equity, token allocations, and fees, while later entrants often bore the brunt of the risk as markets cooled. WLFI, the most profitable venture, generated an estimated $1.6 billion for the family, primarily through sales of its locked, illiquid governance token and its USD1 stablecoin. The $TRUMP meme coin, a direct monetization of the presidential IP, brought in over $600 million for Trump-linked entities before its price crashed nearly 97% from its peak. American Bitcoin gained a "Trump stock" premium for its mining operations, and ALT5 Sigma/AI Financial combined Trump, AI, and crypto themes for a temporary valuation surge. The episode underscores how political influence can be packaged into financial assets, creating substantial wealth for promoters while highlighting the risks for investors who base decisions on hype and brand allegiance over fundamental business models and cash flows.

marsbit15 мин. назад

Trump's Crypto Empire: A $2.3 Billion Wealth Transfer Experiment

marsbit15 мин. назад

CFTC Proposes New Rules for Prediction Markets, Redefining Which Events Can Be Listed and Who Can Participate

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has proposed new rules to establish a clearer regulatory framework for prediction markets. The proposal aims to modify how "event contracts" are reviewed, creating a structured process to determine if contracts involving terrorism, assassination, war, or illegal activities violate the public interest. This moves away from a blanket ban toward a case-by-case assessment of whether a contract's subject matter is acceptable for financial trading. A key focus is distinguishing between predicting the impact of risks and predicting the occurrence of harm. The proposal suggests that many sports-based prediction markets—such as those on game outcomes, scores, or season standings—may be permissible as they can provide price discovery and meaningful information. However, markets on easily manipulated events like specific player injuries, referee calls, or outcomes of youth sports would face stricter scrutiny. The rules directly target insider trading and manipulation risks, highlighting cases where individuals with non-public information or the ability to influence an event's outcome could unfairly profit. This underscores a shift toward ensuring market fairness. The proposal does not end the regulatory debate, particularly with state gambling regulators who argue that sports prediction markets are essentially sports betting and should fall under state jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the CFTC's action signals a move toward formalizing prediction markets, pushing the industry from a phase of rapid, often unregulated expansion into a more institutionalized, rule-based environment that more closely resembles traditional financial markets.

marsbit27 мин. назад

CFTC Proposes New Rules for Prediction Markets, Redefining Which Events Can Be Listed and Who Can Participate

marsbit27 мин. назад

CFTC Proposes New Rules for Prediction Markets, Redefining Which Events and Who Can Participate

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has proposed new rules to establish a regulatory framework for prediction markets, aiming to define which event contracts can be traded and who can participate. The 267-page proposal seeks to amend regulations to create a structured review process for "event contracts." The core goal is to determine whether contracts involving sensitive topics like terrorism, assassination, war, or illegal activities are contrary to the "public interest." The CFTC's approach is not an outright ban but a case-by-case assessment, focusing on whether a contract predicts harmful acts themselves or merely their commercial or risk-related impacts. The proposal suggests that most mainstream sports prediction markets—based on final scores, winners, or season outcomes—may be permissible as they provide price discovery and informational value. However, markets on easily manipulated granular events (e.g., player injuries, specific referee calls) or those encouraging harm/cheating would face stricter scrutiny. A primary regulatory target is insider trading and market manipulation, where individuals with non-public knowledge or influence over an event's outcome could unfairly profit. Recent alleged incidents involving military personnel, former politicians, and corporate insiders highlight this risk. The move clarifies federal oversight but does not end the debate. State regulators and gambling associations argue that many prediction markets, especially on sports, constitute gambling and should fall under state, not federal, jurisdiction. This sets up a potential conflict over regulatory authority. Overall, the CFTC's proposal signals a shift for prediction markets from rapid, less-regulated expansion toward a more institutionalized, rules-based model resembling traditional financial markets. Growth will increasingly depend on demonstrating market fairness, transparent settlement, and controlled risks.

Odaily星球日报35 мин. назад

CFTC Proposes New Rules for Prediction Markets, Redefining Which Events and Who Can Participate

Odaily星球日报35 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片