On July 24, 2026, Beijing time, SpaceX (SPCX) closed at $118.24, up 2.59% on the day. This seemingly modest rebound would have been unimaginable just six weeks earlier—on June 12, SpaceX debuted on Nasdaq at an offering price of $135, raising a record-breaking $86 billion including overallotments. On its third trading day, the stock soared to an all-time high of $225.64.
What followed was a sustained pullback. On July 15, SpaceX’s intraday price fell below its IPO price for the first time. Even with the 2.59% gain on July 24, the stock remains down roughly 47.6% from its peak and about 12.4% below the offering price.
SpaceX isn’t alone. The sharp declines following blockbuster IPOs are reshaping market expectations for tech unicorns preparing to go public.
IPO Market Shift: From Chasing Hype to Crunching Numbers
In recent years, the capital market’s pricing logic for tech companies has centered around one key word: narrative. The rise of AI models, the commercialization of spaceflight, the logic of new energy alternatives, and the push for domestic deep tech—all these grand narratives fueled the relentless expansion of primary market valuations. According to the Hurun Research Institute’s "2026 Global Unicorn List" released in June 2026, the number of unicorns worldwide reached 1,603, with total value rising 43% year-over-year to $8 trillion. Among them, AI unicorns numbered 215, with a net increase of 87 in a year, accounting for 36% of total value.
But in the second half of 2026, market focus is shifting. Data compiled by Zhitong Finance shows that as of July 15, the weighted average return for US IPOs in 2026 had dropped to 6%, lagging behind the S&P 500’s 11% gain in the same period. Biotech and pharmaceutical IPOs posted a weighted average return of 55%, but excluding SPACs and other financial vehicles, the overall weighted average return for US IPOs was a loss of 4.4%. The market isn’t cooling across the board; instead, there’s clear structural divergence—sectors with real earnings remain in favor, while those priced on future expectations face a reckoning.
This shift is driven by investors refocusing on three core metrics: profitability, cash flow, and debt levels.
SpaceX’s Valuation Dilemma: Starlink Pays the Bills, Starship Burns Cash
SpaceX’s stock trajectory exposes the fragility of "narrative-driven valuations."
Fundamentally, SpaceX shows classic "polarization." Starlink is the company’s only profitable segment, generating $11.387 billion in revenue and $4.423 billion in operating profit in 2025. Its monopoly in global satellite communications is unlikely to be challenged in the near term. However, Starship development and xAI’s artificial intelligence business continue to burn through cash, resulting in a net loss of $4.937 billion in 2025 and widening losses in Q1 2026.
At IPO, the market priced SpaceX’s "space vision" and "Musk premium" at extraordinary levels. At its peak, the company’s market cap topped $2 trillion. But as the bubble receded, fundamentals took over. Even after a steep correction, SpaceX’s forward price-to-sales ratio remains around 46x—significantly higher than other tech stocks.
More worrying signals are coming from the bond market. SpaceX’s 30-year bond yield has climbed from 6.7% at issuance to 7.4%, approaching high-yield junk bond territory. Credit default swap (CDS) spreads have widened to 158 basis points, up sharply from 110 at the end of June. Bond investors typically sense risk earlier than equity investors—when the bond market starts pricing a company as "junk," equity valuations face mounting pressure.
Short sellers are also ramping up. According to S3 Partners, SpaceX short interest stands at 185 to 196 million shares, accounting for 29% to 31% of the float—a dramatic increase from about 40 million shares three weeks prior. As of July 24, short sellers had unrealized gains of roughly $15.5 billion.
August’s lock-up expiration will pose another challenge. The first batch of insiders and employees eligible to sell (up to 911.5 million shares) will hit the market, more than 1.4 times the IPO float. The sudden expansion of the float, combined with persistent short pressure, suggests SpaceX’s valuation recovery will be a long process.
Ripple Effects: OpenAI Delays, AI Unicorns Under Pressure
SpaceX’s performance is triggering widespread ripple effects.
The most immediate impact is on AI giants preparing for IPOs. OpenAI originally planned to go public in the second half of 2026, but after SpaceX’s post-IPO slump, the company now favors delaying its IPO to 2027. Management insists on a $1 trillion valuation and is unwilling to lower expectations for a faster listing. Wall Street banks broadly expect that planned IPOs for large AI model companies, originally slated for late 2026, may be pushed back to the first half of 2027 due to declining risk appetite.
Anthropic’s situation is even more nuanced. After its Series H round in May 2026, the company’s valuation reached $965 billion, and it has already secretly filed for an IPO, possibly as soon as October. Yet SpaceX’s IPO performance has set an unfavorable reference point for Anthropic’s pricing. If a company raising $86 billion and boasting a profitable Starlink segment still trades below its IPO price, how should a yet-to-be-profitable AI company be valued?
Signals from the secondary market are equally discouraging. Stanford professor Ilya Stedublaev’s database shows that as of May 2026, 332 of 1,900 unicorns raised capital at or below their peak valuations, with 212 falling below the $1 billion threshold. As many as 383 companies have not disclosed any new fundraising plans in the past three years. PitchBook estimates that as these companies reprice or go bankrupt, the net reduction in valuations will total $500 billion to $1 trillion.
"Zombie unicorns" are proliferating—companies overvalued in the primary market that can neither go public nor be acquired, and struggle to raise further capital. This is becoming the new normal in Silicon Valley.
From "Growth Stories" to "Fundamentals": A Paradigm Shift in IPO Valuation
SpaceX’s IPO trajectory reveals a deeper trend: capital markets are shifting from "growth story investing" to "fundamental investing."
Over the past decade, low interest rates and abundant liquidity made investors willing to pay premiums for "potential market size" and "future cash flows." AI, space economy, new energy, deep tech—these sectors had compelling stories that sustained primary market valuations. The Hurun list’s 1,603 unicorns and $8 trillion in total value are largely products of this loose environment.
But conditions are changing. Fed rate hike expectations, surging capital expenditures by tech giants, and uncertainty in AI commercialization are all dampening risk appetite. Investors are now asking a basic question: When will this company actually make money?
For tech unicorns still in the "burn cash for growth" phase, this question is especially pointed. SpaceX, with its profitable Starlink segment, still trades below its IPO price. Smaller, loss-making AI startups face even tougher valuation tests.
From a broader perspective, the IPO market is undergoing a deep restructuring of its valuation framework. In recent years, there’s been a notable disconnect between primary and secondary market valuations—private market values often exceeded what public markets could support. SpaceX’s post-IPO drop, SK Hynix’s retraced gains, and OpenAI’s delayed listing all point in the same direction: the secondary market is recalibrating tech company values with stricter standards.
Conclusion
SpaceX’s rollercoaster ride from $225.64 to $118.24 is more than just a single company’s stock fluctuation. It’s a microcosm of the changing logic in capital market pricing—when the era of abundant liquidity and narrative-driven valuations fades, profitability, cash flow, and debt levels become the new core metrics.
For tech unicorns preparing to go public, this means facing a much tougher valuation environment. OpenAI is opting to delay rather than lower its IPO price, Anthropic is moving forward with a $965 billion valuation—these decisions will be tested by the market in the coming months.
For investors, the paradigm shift in the IPO market means recalibrating expectations for new listing strategies. The old logic of "winning the lottery with any IPO" is being replaced by more complex fundamental analysis.
The tech IPO market in 2026 is undergoing a profound shift from "stories" to "numbers." SpaceX is just the most prominent footnote in this transformation.
FAQ
Q: Why did SpaceX’s stock drop sharply after its IPO?
The core reason is a disconnect between valuation and fundamentals. At IPO, the market priced SpaceX based on its "space vision" and the "Musk premium," but aside from Starlink, Starship and xAI continue to post massive losses, with a net loss of $4.937 billion in 2025. As hype fades, the August lock-up expiration approaches, and short interest builds, the stock price is reverting to fundamental valuation.
Q: Why did OpenAI delay its IPO plans?
OpenAI originally planned to go public in the second half of 2026, but after SpaceX’s post-IPO slump and cooling sentiment in the AI sector, the company now prefers to delay its IPO to 2027. Management insists on a $1 trillion valuation and is unwilling to lower the price for a quicker listing.
Q: What is a "zombie unicorn"?
It refers to unicorns that received high valuations in the primary market but are now stuck—they can’t go public, can’t be acquired, and struggle to raise additional funds. As of May 2026, about 212 unicorns have seen their valuations fall below the $1 billion mark.
Q: What does the IPO market’s shift from "growth story investing" to "fundamental investing" mean?
It means market pricing logic is moving from "potential future market size" to "current profitability, cash flow, and debt levels." Investors are no longer willing to pay high premiums for unproven narratives and now demand companies show a real path to profitability.
