SPCX
Space Exploration Technologies Corp - Class AEvidence as of 2026-10-23The desk's Snapshot
3 of 15 open to everyone · members see allRead the full desk report on SPCX
Seven analysts, the debate, the risk review, every claim cited. And the same for every name you hold.
Free plan, no credit card required. Silver opens the full report, $19.99 a month. AI-written · every claim cites a source · Insight, not advice.
No company profile on file for SPCX yet.
Moneyta sentiment
Where the published evidence leans after the desk debated it, not a rating or a recommendation.
+0.3 on a −2 to +2 scale.
What builds the score
Solid bars are analyst rubric scores; faded bars are computed directly from data. Claims dropped in debate count for nothing; weakened claims count at half weight.
Editor's note
Written after the debate settled. The rest of the page is the evidence behind it.
The evidence balance is Mixed ( +0.3 of a possible +2; confidence high). Revenue roughly doubled from $4,071,000,000 in the fiscal quarter ended 2025-06-30 to $7,814,000,000 in Q2 2026 (fiscal quarter ended 2026-06-30), while cost of revenue rose from $2,282,000,000 to $3,495,000,000 over the same comparison. Gross profit expanded from $1,789,000,000 (about 44.0% gross margin) to $4,319,000,000 (about 55.3% gross margin), and operating loss narrowed from -$970,000,000 to -$143,000,000 with net loss improving from -$1,008,000,000 to -$541,000,000.
The capital stack shows cash increasing from $24,747,000,000 as of 2025-12-31 to $93,522,000,000 as of 2026-06-30 and long-term debt rising from $21,659,000,000 to $38,285,000,000 over that same interval. Market signals in the packet show three‑month momentum at +25.8% (as of 2026-10-22), 30‑day and 90‑day annualized volatility at +59.6% and +75.1% (90‑day at the 90th percentile of an 882‑stock universe), a three‑year maximum drawdown of -46.3% and a current drawdown of -28.3%, and price at -2.9% relative to the 50‑day simple moving average (all as of 2026-10-22). Institutional holdings are large in the 13F snapshot — aggregate reported holdings of $653.12B and 1,784 institutions, with Alphabet and Valor Management appearing among the top five holders.
How this note was made
every stage ran before the note was writtenAnalyst desk
Mercer, Oakes, Nash, Ellis, Yates, Talbot and Archer. The desk: named AI agents, not people. Each reads one slice of the evidence and nothing else (no outside knowledge, no browsing), so every finding traces to a source you can open.
Reads the XBRL figures companies file with the SEC (revenue, margins, income, debt and share count, quarter by quarter) and reports which way the trend is running.
Revenue increased from $4,071,000,000 in the fiscal quarter 2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30 (3mo) to $7,814,000,000 in the fiscal quarter 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30 (3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-052535Cost of revenue rose from $2,282,000,000 in the fiscal quarter 2025-04-01 to 2025-06-30 (3mo) to $3,495,000,000 in the fiscal quarter 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-30 (3mo).
XBRL companyfacts · 0001628280-26-052535Reads the filings themselves, above all the year-over-year diff of Item 1A risk factors: which risks a company added, dropped or quietly reworded since its last annual report.
Nothing in this slice of the evidence rose to a claim: a quiet read, which itself is information.
Which filings the desk reads
The desk reads the annual 10-K in full: its risk factors, and how they changed since last year. Quarterly 10-Qs and event filings (8-Ks, insider Form 4s) are listed for context but not read line by line: the 10-K is where the material risk disclosures live. A brand-new company, or one we have only just begun tracking, may have no annual report on file yet; its risk analysis fills in once that lands.
Reads the signal panel above (momentum, volatility, drawdown, relative strength and beta) and ranks each against the whole research universe rather than judging it in isolation.
Three-month momentum is +25.8% as of 2026-10-22.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-10-22weakened in debate30-day annualized volatility is +59.6% and 90-day annualized volatility is +75.1%, with the 90-day volatility at the 90th percentile of a 882-stock research universe as of 2026-10-22.
Moneyta signal set · 2026-10-22Reads which funds hold the name and at what weight, plus insider Form 4 filings, to show the exposure you may already carry through index funds.
Institutions reported aggregate holdings valued at $653.12B as of the 13F reporting period ended 2026-06-30.
13F holdings · 1784 filers · as of 2026-06-30The 13F top five holders list includes Alphabet Inc. with a reported position valued at $94.18B and Valor Management LLC with $86.01B.
13F holdings · 1784 filers · as of 2026-06-30Reads recent headlines that are genuinely about this company, ignoring rating chatter and market-wide stories. Findings argue in the debate but never move the sentiment score.
CNBC reported that SpaceX recorded a $561 million investment gain from its stake in the Boring Company in the third quarter.
News · cnbc.com · 2026-10-23Multiple outlets (AOL and Yahoo Finance) published pieces noting that Elon Musk arranged a $10.5 billion SpaceX gift to his children that includes restrictions such as limited ability for families to refuse the gift and potential multi-year waits to cash out.
News · finance.yahoo.com · 2026-10-22Reads parsed Forms 3/4/5: who bought or sold, at what size, and whether a 10b5-1 plan was involved. Flags clustered open-market officer buying; treats plan sales as routine and never counts a fund or 10%-holder as an officer.
Three Form 4/Form 3 entries filed for Elon Musk (listed as CEO, CTO & Chairman) report 'action: code C' on 15 June 2026 for 282,614,850; 18,518,500; and 14,792,900 shares respectively.
Form 4 · Musk Elon (CEO, CTO & Chairman) · $0 code C · 2026-06-15Each of the three transactions shows 'value: "$0"' in the filing record.
Form 4 · Musk Elon (CEO, CTO & Chairman) · $0 code C · 2026-06-15Reads the implied-expectations math built from the company's own filings (the growth rate today's price would justify, and the multiples beside it) and argues whether the market's bar looks high or low for this business. Never turns the math into a target.
The filings on record don't carry four quarters of both operating cash flow and capital expenditure. IFRS filers report no common capex concept, so no FCF claim is made..
Debate and risk review
A bull and a bear contest the claims and the chair rules on each; the risk review stress-tests what survived.
A bull and a bear argue the analysts' claims across two rounds, then a chair rules on each one. Only what survives feeds the score. The argument is shown, not hidden, so you can judge the reasoning yourself.
The claims jointly paint a favorable operational and institutional picture: reported revenue more than doubled year-over-year while gross profit and implied gross margin expanded materially (fundamentals-0, fundamentals-2). Operating and net losses narrowed significantly (fundamentals-3), and point-in-time cash on the balance sheet rose sharply alongside higher debt (fundamentals-5), suggesting stronger liquidity capacity to support growth initiatives. Institutional ownership is large and broad, with 1,784 reported institutions and very sizable aggregate positions (ownership-0, ownership-2), and sell‑side coverage in the provided consensus skews toward Buy with multiple high-profile firms initiating or reiterating Buy ratings (third-party street consensus). Short-term price momentum is positive (market-0), and a reported investment gain in a subsidiary provides an incremental positive earnings item (news-0). While volatility and share-count increases are present in the record, the operational improvements and strong institutional backing strengthen a favorable read on the company’s recent performance and market reception.
Chair's verdict, claim by claim
Fragility · computed, not argued
balanced0.40
26 surviving claims rest on 9 distinct sources; the heaviest analyst carries 23% of them, and 98% of what the desk raised survived the debate.
The read rests on a modest number of distinct sources and a high debate survival rate, which increases apparent internal consistency but also signals potential overconfidence: one analyst accounts for nearly a quarter of surviving claims and most claims trace to a small set of documents. That concentration—plus heavy reliance on a few filings and media pieces—means the analysis can carry useful, documentary-backed signals but is relatively fragile to a small number of new filings or market moves.
Disconfirming evidence · base rates · falsifiers
Context
Outside consensus, and where this name already sits in your own portfolio.
Third-party consensus shown for context. It never enters Moneyta sentiment. When the two diverge, the debate above is where the why lives.
What this was built from
Every figure on this page traces to one of these. The desk reads only what is listed here (no outside knowledge, no browsing), and each card shows who read it and what it contributed to the score.
1 filing
SEC XBRL filings
Quarterly figures as filed with the SEC, read straight from EDGAR's structured data, not retyped or estimated.
Read by Mercer+0.5 to the score
1 signal set
Moneyta signal set
Computed from our own end-of-day price history and ranked against the whole research universe. No AI involved.
Read by Nash−0.5 to the score
1 holdings record
Fund holdings
Which funds hold this name and at what weight, plus insider Form 4 filings.
Read by Ellis+1.0 to the score
8 headlines· 2 cited
News coverage
Recent headlines about this company, rating chatter excluded and nothing published after the report date.
Read by Yatesnothing survived
1 filing
Insider filings
Parsed Forms 3/4/5 from EDGAR: named insiders, share counts, prices, and 10b5-1 plan state, with stated and inferred flags kept apart.
Read by Talbot+0.0 to the score
1 record· 0 cited
Company profile
Sector, industry and company details.
1 record· 0 cited
Analyst consensus
Third-party consensus, shown for context only; it never enters Moneyta sentiment.
Read means we pulled and handed it to an analyst; cited means a claim on this page points at it. Reading twelve quarters to state one trend is normal; the gap is shown rather than hidden.
Written by AI, checked against sources
The analysts, the bull–bear debate and the editor's note are AI agents reading only the evidence listed on this page. They can misread a filing or a headline, which is why every claim cites a source you can open and check yourself. The sentiment score is arithmetic over the claims that survived the debate, not a language model's opinion.
Educational analysis of published data. Moneyta does not give investment advice or make recommendations. Past patterns do not indicate future results.
The full terminal on SPCX Gold
Who holds it, who's buying, what the Street thinks: live behind the lock, updated as filings land.
Institutional holders
Net institutional flow, Q/Q
Largest holder position
Insider buys, 90 days
Clustered insider value
Street target range
The real figures are for members. Educational analysis, not advice.
Get this for the names you actually hold
Every name in your portfolio, researched the same way, plus the one thing no sample can show: how each one sits inside what you already own.
Educational analysis of published data. Moneyta does not give investment advice or make recommendations.