2 Top Space Stocks I Like Better Than SpaceX

The article argues Rocket Lab and Intuitive Machines could be attractive alternatives ahead of a potential SpaceX IPO, highlighting Rocket Lab’s planned Neutron rocket and Intuitive Machines’ $180 million NASA lunar delivery contract. Rocket Lab’s market cap is cited at $46.4 billion, while Intuitive Machines reported Q4 revenue of $58.5 million, backlog of $235.9 million, and losses of $15.4 million. The piece is largely speculative and opinion-driven, with limited immediate market impact.

Analysis

The market is treating “space” as one trade, but the second-order dispersion is in business model quality, not headline TAM. RKLB’s real option is not launch revenue; it is whether Neutron converts the company from a custom-shop launcher into a higher-throughput manufacturing platform, which would compress unit economics faster than revenue growth alone suggests. If that cadence slips, the current multiple likely de-rates before any fundamental damage shows up in the income statement, because valuation is already discounting a near-flawless execution path.

LUNR is a different animal: the key is not lunar demand, but government procurement timing and concentration risk. NASA’s shift toward CLPS-style outsourcing should favor incumbent contractors with flight heritage, but that also makes revenue lumpy and headline-sensitive to mission success rates, budget cycles, and political scrutiny after any high-profile delay. In other words, the stock can rerate on a single contract win, but the downside is equally reflexive if the backlog does not convert into billings on schedule.

The underappreciated trade is that a successful Neutron launch could pressure adjacent small-launch names and broaden the gap between platform companies and point-solution contractors. Meanwhile, LUNR’s commercial asymmetry is much more tied to “trust premium” than addressable market size; if investors start to believe NASA is standardizing a repeat-buy vendor list, the multiple can expand despite low near-term revenue growth. The consensus may be overpaying for both names as if both are pure growth stories, when in reality RKLB is a binary execution story and LUNR is a procurement cycle story.

Key Decisions for Investors

• Avoid initiating a full-size long in RKLB ahead of Neutron milestone visibility; prefer a starter position only after launch cadence is confirmed, because a 1-2 quarter delay can trigger a 20-30% multiple reset even if long-term demand is intact.
• For investors wanting space exposure, pair long LUNR / short a basket of higher-beta small-cap industrial growth names over the next 3-6 months; the thesis is that government-backed backlog converts more reliably than speculative commercial launch narratives.
• Use call spreads rather than outright equity in RKLB into the next catalyst window: long-dated calls financed by short calls to cap downside from schedule slippage while retaining upside if Neutron de-risks.
• On LUNR, consider buying on post-contract pullbacks only if backlog-to-revenue conversion remains visible; risk/reward is best when sentiment cools after a win, not when the stock is already pricing in the next award.
• If Neutron launches cleanly, short-term relative-value trade favors shorting weaker launch-adjacent names on the view that RKLB will absorb incremental investor attention and customer credibility faster than peers.