Ctrl K
Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -90.8x · EV/EBITDA 279.0x · ROE -14.7%. (2024–2025 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $1.15T | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $1.15T | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -90.81 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 61.54 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 10.87 | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 169.37 | — | — |
P/E links to full P/E history page with 30-year chart
Enterprise-value multiples — capital-structure-neutral measures of total business value
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 279.02 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 49.4% | 49.4% | 42.9% |
| Operating Margin | -13.9% | -13.9% | 3.3% |
| Net Profit Margin | -26.4% | -26.4% | 5.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -14.7% | -14.7% | 3.1% |
| ROA | -6.6% | -6.6% | 1.4% |
| ROIC | -5.7% | -5.7% | 1.2% |
| ROCE | -4.5% | -4.5% | 1.0% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.53 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 5.57 | 5.57 | 3.22 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.04 | 0.09 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | -0.45 | -0.45 | 0.56 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | -1.24 | -1.24 | -0.33 |
Net cash position: cash ($24.7B) exceeds total debt ($22.9B)
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.45 | 1.45 | 1.37 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.33 | 1.33 | 1.20 |
| Cash Ratio | 1.16 | 1.16 | 1.03 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.20 | 0.25 |
| Inventory Turnover | 3.91 | 3.91 | 3.99 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 30.86 | 27.40 |
Earnings, FCF, buyback, and dividend yields — total returns to shareholders
Full dividend history and growth charts are on the Dividend History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.1% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.1% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $2.9B | $10.0B |
Includes 30+ ratios · 2 years · Updated daily
Live VCP patterns, Cup & Handle overlays, support/resistance, and AI trade plans.
High-probability breakout stocks crossing their pivot across 5 pattern engines.
Bull/bear thesis, analyst target revisions, and earnings execution.
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying SPCX stock.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.'s current P/E ratio is -90.8x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.'s current EV/EBITDA is 279.0x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.'s return on equity (ROE) is -14.7%. The historical average is -5.8%.
Based on historical data, Space Exploration Technologies Corp. is trading at a P/E of -90.8x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. has 49.4% gross margin and -13.9% operating margin.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 5.6x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Massive cash burn outpaces equity raise
Valuation Ignores Deep Losses
The company trades at a P/S of 55.32x and an EV/EBITDA of 250.76x, multiples that suggest investors are pricing in a future earnings transformation that is not yet supported by its current negative profitability, as reported in recent financial statements.
The extreme valuation multiples, including a P/E of -81.63x reflecting current losses, appear entirely disconnected from present fundamentals and instead capitalize on the speculative value of SpaceX's technological leadership and future launch cadence. This pricing strategy acknowledges the company is in an investment phase, but the implied growth rate is astronomical and leaves no margin for execution missteps or delays in reaching profitability.
R&D Dominance Distorts Margins
Gross margin expanded to 55.3% in 2026Q2 from 49.1% in Q1, yet the operating margin remained negative at -1.8% due to R&D spending consuming 44.9% of revenue, a structure that fundamentally obscures underlying operational profitability.
The significant gross margin improvement suggests better mission execution or pricing power, but this is entirely overshadowed by the massive, non-discretionary R&D burden required to develop next-generation systems. The company's core earning power cannot be accurately gauged using traditional margin analysis while such transformative investment is ongoing, as the costs are being capitalized rather than expensed in a way that reflects immediate operational cash generation.
Negative Returns Amid Capital Surge
ROIC stood at -0.2% in 2026Q2, a marginal improvement from -2.6% in Q1, but the negative return on a capital base that ballooned to $192.8B in assets indicates the business is still destroying value as it deploys massive equity raises into long-term projects.
The slight improvement in returns is not a sign of operational efficiency but rather a mathematical result of the equity infusion inflating the capital base. True capital efficiency is impossible to assess while the company is in a peak investment cycle, as the assets being built are not yet generating returns. Investors must differentiate between a temporary, strategic period of negative returns and a structural inability to earn a cost of capital.
Debt Modest, Equity-Funded Growth
The debt-to-equity ratio of 0.31 in 2026Q2 is conservative, but the interest coverage ratio of 0.18x indicates earnings are insufficient to service even this modest debt load, a situation that may necessitate further equity dilution if losses persist.
While the company has prioritized equity financing, maintaining a low leverage profile, the negative interest coverage ratio highlights that debt is currently serviced through cash reserves, not operating profits. This structure is sustainable only as long as the capital markets remain open for equity raises; any tightening in funding conditions could expose the company to refinancing risk despite its seemingly conservative balance sheet.
Liquidity Fortress Faces Burn Rate
Current and quick ratios of 5.12 and 4.99 in 2026Q2 signal a fortress liquidity position, yet this is built on a $93.5B cash balance that, based on a quarterly free cash burn of $15.9B, would be depleted in approximately six quarters without additional financing.
The strong liquidity ratios are a direct result of the recent massive equity infusion, not operational cash generation. The true liquidity story is the tension between the enormous cash cushion and the equally enormous and ongoing cash burn for capital expenditures and R&D. This creates a binary scenario where liquidity is ample today but its adequacy is entirely dependent on the company's ability to reach cash flow breakeven before the reserves are consumed.
Profitability Ratios in Investment Phase
The single most misapplied ratio to this business model is the P/E ratio, which at -81.63x is meaningless given the company's investment-phase accounting and provides no insight into the future earnings power its valuation requires.
For a company like SpaceX, which is aggressively capitalizing R&D and spending heavily on long-term assets, traditional profitability metrics like net margin, ROE, and P/E are largely academic and potentially misleading. They reflect the timing of massive strategic investments, not the fundamental economics of its space launch and satellite services. A more appropriate lens would focus on gross margin trends, revenue backlog growth, and the timeline to free cash flow generation, as these better align with the company's stated objective of funding future growth through current operational excellence.