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

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-06-11Востаннє оновлено о 2026-06-11

Анотація

"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.

Пов'язані питання

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.

Пов'язані матеріали

Podcast Notes | Conversation with GSR Asset Management Head: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Watch the Lending Rates on Aave

Podcast Summary: Dialogue with GSR's Head of Asset Management: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Check Lending Rates on Aave Andy Baehr, Managing Director of Asset Management at GSR, discusses the current crypto market, characterizing it as stuck in a state of "ambivalence" with short-lived, unsustainable rallies. He outlines a simple framework: the market moves between "ambivalence" and "conviction" (sustained upward momentum). Currently, every rally resembles a single-stage rocket booster that quickly fizzles out. Baehr identifies three key signals to watch: 1) DeFi lending rates, 2) the potential passage of the CLARITY Act, and 3) the market forming a consensus on the "Fed hawkish peak." He emphasizes that the most immediate indicator for the sustainability of the recent CPI-triggered rally is the USDC borrowing rate on Aave, currently around 3.75%—close to U.S. Treasury yields. The absence of a credit spread indicates low leverage demand and a lack of market energy. He explains that a healthy, sustained rally requires layered buying pressure. Last year's rally progressed from an ETH short squeeze to crypto-native trader influx and finally to ETF inflows. Currently, this structure is missing. Other potential structural buyers like Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) companies are absent, and ETF flows have proven transient. Baehr notes that while small-cap crypto tokens outperformed large caps in Q2—a potential sign of capitation in major assets—capital is also flowing to more exciting opportunities like AI stocks and tech IPOs, leaving crypto sidelined. Regarding DeFi, he highlights that platforms like Aave provide a clear, real-time signal of leverage demand through their supply/demand-driven interest rates. A significant, sustained rate increase would signal genuine market conviction. He also observes the quiet emergence of fixed-income-like products and vaults in DeFi. On regulation, the probability of the CLARITY Act passing before the August 7th deadline has dropped linearly from 75% to below 40% on Polymarket. Baehr suggests its passage would be treated as a bullish surprise, a potent driver for price movement. However, political hurdles, including ethical clause debates and disclosures about the First Family's crypto profits, remain significant obstacles. Ultimately, the market awaits clarity on the Fed's terminal rate under Chair Warsh. Until the "Fed Solstice"—the point where the market collectively understands the peak of hawkish policy—sustained conviction will be difficult to achieve.

marsbit27 хв тому

Podcast Notes | Conversation with GSR Asset Management Head: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Watch the Lending Rates on Aave

marsbit27 хв тому

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Following the collapse of Huione Pay—dubbed the "Alipay of Southeast Asia"—seven months ago, the region's underground financial guarantee platform sector is undergoing a significant reshuffle. This power vacuum has been swiftly filled by emerging platforms such as XinBi, Tiger/Navigator, JinBei (renamed JinBo), Dali/Tiancheng, and FullyLight. These platforms, operating largely via Telegram and offering services like escrow for illicit transactions, have absorbed the vast user base and markets left behind by Huione. While positioning themselves as "trust intermediaries," their primary clientele consists of networks involved in online scams, money laundering, illegal gambling, and even human trafficking. For instance, the Tiger/Navigator platform explicitly provides "escrow" services for kidnapping-for-ransom operations ("强押车交易"). Data underscores the immense scale: Huione alone processed over $103 billion in cryptocurrency payments and facilitated over $31 billion through its escrow market before its downfall, linking it to Cambodia's notorious Prince Group. Since its collapse, competitors have seen explosive growth. For example, the XinBi platform has accumulated over $1.6 billion in total USDT revenue, while platforms like NewPay, OkPay (under Dali), and FullyLight Wallet collectively processed over $4.8 billion in USDT in a single year. This ecosystem thrives in regions like Cambodia and Myanmar, where regulatory gaps allow these platforms to act as critical financial infrastructure for sprawling cybercrime industries, from scam compounds to online casinos. The article concludes that the moniker "Southeast Asian Alipay" is a misnomer, obscuring the platforms' fundamental role in enabling serious criminal enterprises rather than representing legitimate financial innovation.

Odaily星球日报1 год тому

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Odaily星球日报1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片