RKLB
Rocket Lab USA, Inc.NASDAQRocket Lab is an end-to-end space company providing launch services (Electron, and the in-development Neutron) and Space Systems including spacecraft, satellite components, and on-orbit management.
View company geographyValuation snapshot
Above bull casePrice is above even the bull case.
Price as of Sep 1, 2026 · Valuation Aug 25, 2026
What drives RKLB's base case?
base-case thesisRocket Lab has been compounding revenue quickly — up 38% in FY2025 and 62-63% year-over-year in the first two quarters of FY2026 — while a record $2.36B backlog and guidance for another record revenue quarter in Q3 2026 point to continued strong growth. This case assumes that growth gradually slows over five years as the revenue base gets larger, consistent with the deceleration already visible from FY2024's 78% growth to FY2025's 38%. It assumes operating losses keep narrowing along the same quarterly trend seen since early 2025 (from -48% to -25% of revenue), approaching but not fully reaching management's own long-term margin targets, while heavy capital spending on Neutron and satellite-component capacity continues to consume a large share of profits reinvested back into the business.
What shapes the assumptions
Record $2.36B backlog (+137% YoY) with guidance for another record revenue quarter in Q3 2026 supports continued strong, if moderating, growth
Contracted backlog and quarterly guidance
Raises revenue growth
GAAP operating margin improved from -48.3% in Q1 2025 to -24.6% in Q2 2026, a steady trend the base case extrapolates toward, but short of, management's mid-to-upper-20s target
GAAP operating margin trend
Raises operating margin
Space Systems is now 67% of revenue and 74% of backlog, a hardware business whose capacity build-out keeps reinvestment needs elevated relative to a pure-launch business
Segment revenue mix
Raises reinvestment
Rocket Lab carries roughly $841M of federal NOL carryforwards that can shield up to 80% of future taxable income indefinitely, moderating cash taxes as profitability approaches
Federal NOL carryforward balance
Lowers tax rate
Neutron is targeted at ~$50-55M per launch versus Falcon 9's ~$74M, positioning the vehicle to hold share in a durable, growing launch market once operational
Neutron target pricing vs. Falcon 9
Raises terminal growth
Each driver links a business metric to the forecast assumption it shapes — the basis for this case, not investment advice.
Why the gap?
No revenue growth rate in a sensible range reproduces today's price — the market appears to be valuing something this model does not capture.
What else could explain it?›
- How much of this is timing?
- The price has fallen 6.4% since this valuation was struck on 2026-08-25, so some of the gap opened up after these figures were set.
- How confident is this estimate?
- Robustness 58.0/10 (Moderate) — some of any gap is our own uncertainty rather than disagreement.
- What would change the answer?
- Which assumption this valuation swings on, and by how much.
- Share count is still growing
- Diluted shares grew 22.2% year on year. This valuation uses today's share count, not tomorrow's — continued dilution would spread the same value across more shares.
Many combinations of assumptions reproduce the same price. These are ways to read what the market might be expecting, not the market's actual view. How this is worked out
Research & assumptions
Inspect the valuation thesis, cases, risks, evidence, and model inputs.
View details
Research & assumptions
Inspect the valuation thesis, cases, risks, evidence, and model inputs.
Three independently researched cases generated automatically from published financials. Every assumption is justified and cited; the discount rate is computed from researched market inputs.
Company value drivers
Ranked operating metrics and the valuation assumptions they influence.
1. Total contracted backlog, quarter-end
The dollar value of signed contracts not yet recognized as revenue; it is the clearest forward indicator of Rocket Lab's revenue trajectory across Launch and Space Systems.
$2.4B
reported1. Contracted backlog at quarter-end
Unfulfilled contracted work indicates the amount of launch and space-systems revenue available for future conversion, subject to execution and termination provisions.
$2.4B
reported2. Electron and HASTE launches per year
Completed annual missions measure launch cadence, asset utilization and Rocket Lab's ability to turn its manifest into revenue.
21 launches
reported2. Non-GAAP gross margin, quarterly
Company-defined non-GAAP gross margin each quarter; the clearest early signal of the path toward operating profitability.
41.5%
reported2. Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year
The rate at which reported quarterly revenue is growing versus the same quarter a year earlier; the primary top-line momentum signal for the DCF's revenue path.
62.0%
reported3. Quarterly GAAP operating margin
GAAP operating income divided by GAAP revenue each quarter; tracks how quickly Rocket Lab is closing the gap to sustained profitability, the key uncertainty in every case's operating-margin assumption.
-24.6%
derived3. Quarterly GAAP gross margin
Gross profit retained from each revenue dollar shows whether pricing, production yield and contract mix are improving before development and corporate costs.
36.1%
derived4. Electron launches, calendar year
The number of Electron orbital/suborbital launches completed in a calendar year; a proxy for Launch-segment capacity, execution, and fixed-cost absorption ahead of Neutron.
21 launches
reported4. First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue
This measures how much property, equipment and software spending is required for each dollar of comparable first-half revenue.
12.2%
derived4. Capital expenditures, quarterly
Cash spent per quarter on property, equipment and capitalized software, primarily Neutron and production-capacity build-out; indicates how much of cash flow is being reinvested versus returned.
$26M
reported5. Average cost per launch
Average mission cost tracks whether higher cadence and manufacturing learning are improving the economics of launch services.
$4.8M
reported5. Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue
Annual capital expenditure divided by annual revenue; measures how much of Rocket Lab's growth is being funded by heavy, ongoing investment in Neutron, Archimedes, and Space Systems capacity.
25.7%
derivedBase inputs from financials
source period →Base revenue (TTM)
$769.1M
Diluted shares
629,681,803
Net cash
$2.3B
Bear
low confidence$4.11
IV / share
-93.6% vs $63.92
- Explicit cash flows
- $0.17
- Terminal value
- $0.29
- Net cash
- $3.65
- Intrinsic value / share
- $4.11
7.0% of the value rests on the terminal value.
bear operating margin (10%) sits well above the best recent margin (-25%)
Revenue growth35.0% → 25.0% → 18.0% → 14.0% → 10.0%medium
How derived: Starting from an implied FY2026 run-rate of roughly $950M-$1.0B (H1 2026 actual of $434.4M plus Q3 2026 guidance of $250-265M plus an estimated Q4), quarterly YoY growth has already decelerated from +120.7% in Q4 2024 to the 32-63% range through 2025-2026 as comparisons toughen; the bear case assumes this deceleration continues steadily, Neutron's commercial ramp disappoints or slips further, and Space Systems backlog conversion runs slower than the 37%-within-12-months management has guided.
Why this confidence: Explicit company guidance only extends one quarter ahead (Q3 2026), leaving years 2-5 of the path unguided ↓, A clear multi-quarter deceleration pattern in reported YoY growth supports the direction of this case ↑, Neutron's timeline has already slipped from an original 'mid-2025' target, adding real execution uncertainty to any launch-driven growth estimate ↓
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year62.0%reported
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
Evidence for
- Quarterly YoY revenue growth has already fallen from a +120.7% spike in Q4 2024 to +35.7% in Q4 2025, showing a genuine cooling trend even before harder compares from the 2026 acceleration roll off.[Rocket Lab FY2025 results]· primary
- Neutron's full engine set only entered production and the vehicle remains 'on track' for pad delivery in Q4 2026 as of August 2026, with the year-end debut window described as narrowing, showing continued schedule risk on the company's next growth leg.[RKLB tops 400 Archimedes hot fires, Neutron engine set enters production]· secondary
Evidence against
- Backlog rose 137% YoY to $2.36B in Q2 2026, and Q3 2026 guidance of $250-265M implies growth accelerating versus Q1/Q2 2026, undercutting a simple decelerating-growth thesis.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results]· primary
Operating margin10.0%medium
How derived: GAAP operating margin improved from -48.3% (Q1 2025) to -24.6% (Q2 2026), a real but still deeply negative trend; the bear case assumes this improvement stalls well short of management's own mid-to-upper-20s long-term operating-margin target because Neutron delays and Iridium integration costs keep overhead elevated relative to revenue.
Why this confidence: Six consecutive quarters of steadily improving (less negative) GAAP operating margin support the direction of continued, if slower, improvement ↑, Long five-year forecast horizon over which a single terminal margin figure must hold ↓, Pending Iridium acquisition integration costs are not yet reflected in any reported quarter, so their margin impact is unmeasured ↓
Measured by
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Non-GAAP gross margin, quarterly41.5%reported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- Quarterly GAAP gross margin36.1%derived
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- GAAP operating margin has never been positive in any of the last eight reported quarters, ranging from -48.3% to -24.6%.[Rocket Lab quarterly filings/releases (company-reported figures)]· primary
- Q3 2026 GAAP gross margin is guided down to 29-31% (from higher recent levels) due to space-systems mix shift and acquisition integration costs, working against near-term operating leverage.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results, Q3 guidance]· primary
Evidence against
- Management has stated a long-term corporate target of roughly 50%+ gross margin and mid-to-upper-20s operating margin, well above the bear case's 10% assumption.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 earnings call transcript]· secondary
Tax rate26.0%medium
How derived: Rocket Lab holds $840.9M of federal NOL carryforwards (plus $549.5M state) as of year-end 2025 that can shield up to 80% of future taxable income indefinitely, but the bear case assumes slower profitability ramp spreads a fixed NOL pool thinly while state-tax exposure (company is headquartered in Long Beach, CA) keeps the effective combined rate near the higher end of a typical U.S. federal-plus-state statutory range once the shield is exhausted.
Why this confidence: The NOL balance is a hard, filed number directly from the 10-K, not an estimate ↑, Timing of when the company becomes consistently taxable is unknown given continued GAAP losses ↓
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- Federal NOLs generated after 2017 ($783.8M of the $840.9M total) can only offset up to 80% of taxable income each year, meaning some cash tax is owed even while large NOLs remain outstanding.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Evidence against
- The size of the NOL pool ($840.9M federal, $549.5M state) is large relative to Rocket Lab's current revenue base, implying several years of low effective cash taxes are plausible even in a slow-growth case.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Reinvestment rate70.0%low
How derived: FY2025 capital expenditure of approximately $154.7M against $601.8M of revenue (about 26% of revenue) shows a capital-intensive build phase for Neutron, Archimedes production and Space Systems capacity; the bear case assumes this intensity persists at a high share of thin operating profit because Neutron's ramp and the pending Iridium integration keep requiring heavy reinvestment without a commensurate near-term payoff.
Why this confidence: Capex/revenue ratio is a hard, filed number for FY2025 only, not yet reflecting Iridium-related capex ↓, Reinvestment need is inferred rather than directly guided by management as a target ratio ↓
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Capital expenditures, quarterly$26Mreported
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- Rocket Lab has secured a $3.6B, 364-day senior secured bridge loan from Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo to help fund the cash portion of the ~$8B Iridium acquisition, adding a large near-term financing and integration burden.[Rocket Lab to acquire Iridium in historic deal]· primary
Evidence against
- Rocket Lab held $2.3B of cash and investments against only minimal reported debt as of the most recent quarter, giving it capacity to fund growth capex without necessarily straining returns.[Rocket Lab capital structure (company-reported)]· primary
Terminal growth2.0%low
How derived: The bear case assumes that once Neutron and Space Systems mature, Rocket Lab's growth converges to roughly long-run nominal GDP growth as the launch and satellite-component markets become more competitive (e.g., against SpaceX's Falcon 9, priced at ~$74M per the same competitive set Neutron targets at $50-55M), leaving little durable excess growth.
Why this confidence: Terminal-year assumptions are inherently the least verifiable input in any DCF, decades removed from current data ↓, Anchored to a widely used macro proxy (long-run nominal GDP) rather than a company-specific guess ↑
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- SpaceX raised Falcon 9 pricing to $74M in February 2026 while Neutron is priced at $50-55M, implying intense price competition once Neutron is operational rather than pricing power.[Space launch cost comparison 2026]· secondary
Evidence against
- Backlog of $2.36B growing 137% YoY suggests demand for launch and space-hardware services is currently outstripping supply, arguing against a low-growth terminal state.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results]· primary
Base
low confidence$5.46
IV / share
-91.5% vs $63.92
- Explicit cash flows
- $0.61
- Terminal value
- $1.20
- Net cash
- $3.65
- Intrinsic value / share
- $5.46
22.0% of the value rests on the terminal value.
base operating margin (18%) sits well above the best recent margin (-25%)
Revenue growth45.0% → 35.0% → 28.0% → 22.0% → 18.0%medium
How derived: Off an implied FY2026 base of roughly $950M-$1.0B (H1 actual $434.4M plus Q3 guidance of $250-265M plus an estimated Q4), the base case extrapolates the company's own guided trajectory and record $2.36B backlog (+137% YoY) into a growth path that gradually decelerates as the revenue base scales, similar in shape to (but starting from a higher level than) the deceleration already visible from FY2024's 78% growth to FY2025's 38%.
Why this confidence: Grounded in the company's own most recent quarterly guidance and reported backlog growth, both primary and current ↑, Five-year horizon extends far beyond the one-quarter guidance window management actually provides ↓
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year62.0%reported
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
Evidence for
- Backlog grew 137% YoY to $2.36B in Q2 2026, with management citing over $1B of new contracts already signed in Q3, supporting continued strong forward growth.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results]· primary
- Q3 2026 revenue is guided to $250-265M, another sequential and YoY record, implying growth in the low-to-mid 60s% versus Q3 2025's $155.1M.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results, Q3 guidance]· primary
Evidence against
- Annual revenue growth has already decelerated sharply, from +78.3% in FY2024 to +38.0% in FY2025, showing that even strong absolute growth is trending down as the base scales.[Rocket Lab FY2025 results]· primary
Operating margin18.0%medium
How derived: GAAP operating margin improved steadily from -48.3% (Q1 2025) to -24.6% (Q2 2026), roughly 6-8 points of improvement per quarter on average; the base case extrapolates continued, moderating improvement toward but short of management's own stated mid-to-upper-20s long-term operating-margin target, reflecting execution risk around Neutron ramp and Iridium integration.
Why this confidence: Six consecutive quarters of measured, steadily improving operating margin give a concrete empirical trend to extrapolate ↑, Company's own long-term target provides an independent anchor point consistent with the extrapolated direction ↑, Guided near-term gross margin compression (Q3 2026) shows the trend is not monotonic quarter to quarter ↓
Measured by
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Non-GAAP gross margin, quarterly41.5%reported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- Quarterly GAAP gross margin36.1%derived
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- GAAP operating margin improved in six of the last six reported quarters shown (Q1 2025 through Q2 2026), from -48.3% to -24.6%, a clear and consistent trend.[Rocket Lab quarterly filings/releases]· primary
- Management has articulated a long-term target of roughly 50%+ gross margin and mid-to-upper-20s operating margin at scale.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 earnings call transcript]· secondary
Evidence against
- Q3 2026 non-GAAP gross margin is guided down to 35-37% versus recent levels, due to space-systems mix shift and acquisition integration costs, showing the path to target margins is not linear.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results, Q3 guidance]· primary
Tax rate24.0%medium
How derived: With $840.9M of federal NOLs (able to offset up to 80% of taxable income indefinitely) and $549.5M of state NOLs as of year-end 2025, the base case assumes an effective tax rate below the full ~26-27% combined federal-plus-California-state statutory rate for a meaningful stretch of the forecast as the shield is drawn down, before drifting toward a more typical blended corporate rate.
Why this confidence: NOL balances are directly filed, verifiable figures from the 10-K ↑, Exact year the company turns sustainably taxable is not disclosed and must be estimated ↓
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- Federal NOLs generated after 2017 ($783.8M) carry forward indefinitely and can offset up to 80% of future taxable income each year, directly reducing cash taxes once the company is GAAP-profitable.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Evidence against
- The 80%-of-taxable-income offset limit means some cash tax is due even with a large NOL balance outstanding, so the effective rate cannot be assumed near zero.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Reinvestment rate55.0%low
How derived: FY2025 capex of about $154.7M (roughly 26% of revenue) reflects the current buildout of Neutron production, Archimedes engine manufacturing, and Space Systems capacity; the base case assumes this intensity moderates over the forecast as facilities built now are utilized across a larger revenue base, but remains above a mature aerospace peer's reinvestment rate given the pending Iridium integration.
Why this confidence: Only one full fiscal year (FY2025) of clean capex-to-revenue data is available to anchor the estimate ↓, Iridium deal, not yet closed, will materially change the capex/reinvestment profile in ways not yet reflected in reported financials ↓
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Capital expenditures, quarterly$26Mreported
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- Space Systems, the larger and faster-growing segment (66.9% of FY2025 revenue), is a hardware manufacturing business that typically requires ongoing capex to add production capacity as backlog converts.[Rocket Lab FY2025 results, segment detail]· primary
Evidence against
- Neutron is designed for first-stage reuse across up to 20 flights per booster, which should reduce incremental capex per launch once operational, moderating reinvestment intensity over time.[Rocket Lab Neutron overview]· secondary
Terminal growth2.5%low
How derived: The base case assumes Rocket Lab's terminal growth settles slightly above long-run U.S. nominal GDP growth, reflecting a structurally growing launch and satellite-services market (Neutron priced at $50-55M versus Falcon 9's ~$74M, positioning it to retain share) balanced against intensifying competition once the market matures.
Why this confidence: Terminal growth is the least directly observable of all DCF inputs and decades removed from current data ↓, Anchored to a standard macro proxy rather than an aggressive company-specific extrapolation ↑
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- Neutron's targeted $50-55M price point undercuts Falcon 9's ~$74M, giving Rocket Lab a durable competitive pricing position in a growing launch market.[Space launch cost comparison 2026]· secondary
Evidence against
- SpaceX's scale and reusability lead remain formidable, and Falcon 9's continued high launch cadence could cap the pricing power and share Neutron can capture long-term.[Rocket Lab Neutron: Faces Scrutiny Over Launch Timeline and Financial Viability]· secondary
Bull
low confidence$8.62
IV / share
-86.5% vs $63.92
- Explicit cash flows
- $1.53
- Terminal value
- $3.44
- Net cash
- $3.65
- Intrinsic value / share
- $8.62
39.9% of the value rests on the terminal value.
bull operating margin (27%) sits well above the best recent margin (-25%)
Revenue growth55.0% → 45.0% → 35.0% → 28.0% → 22.0%low
How derived: Backlog growth (+137% YoY to $2.36B) has been outrunning already-fast revenue growth (+62% YoY) for several consecutive quarters; the bull case assumes this gap keeps closing faster than management's own 37%-within-12-months conversion guidance, Neutron begins flying on schedule and wins commercial share from Falcon 9, and the pending ~$8B Iridium acquisition (targeted to close mid-2027) adds a large incremental revenue base once consolidated, lifting growth above the base case throughout the horizon.
Why this confidence: Requires multiple favorable outcomes to compound (Neutron on-schedule success, faster-than-guided backlog conversion, and a successful Iridium close) rather than a single driver ↓, Grounded in real, recently reported backlog and bookings momentum rather than pure speculation ↑
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year62.0%reported
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
Evidence for
- Rocket Lab cited over $1B of new contracts already signed in Q3 2026 alone, on top of a $2.36B backlog, suggesting a bookings pace that could sustain growth well above the base case.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results]· primary
- The Iridium deal would combine Rocket Lab's launch and satellite manufacturing with Iridium's LEO network serving more than 2.55 million active subscribers, a large incremental revenue base once the deal closes.[Rocket Lab to acquire Iridium in historic deal]· primary
Evidence against
- The Iridium transaction is not expected to close until mid-2027, is subject to regulatory and shareholder approvals, and stock fell 5.2% on lingering deal-related concerns as of August 25, 2026, showing the market is not fully pricing this upside as a certainty.[RKLB stock price, Aug 25 2026]· secondary
Operating margin27.0%low
How derived: The bull case assumes Rocket Lab actually reaches management's own stated long-term target of roughly 50%+ gross margin and mid-to-upper-20s operating margin, supported by the fact that over 400 Archimedes hot-fire tests have been completed and the full Neutron engine set is now in production, implying the reusable, higher-margin launch vehicle reaches steady cadence largely on schedule.
Why this confidence: Requires hitting the high end of management's own stated long-term target rather than a conservative extrapolation of trend ↓, Neutron and Iridium integration both carry real, currently unresolved execution risk not yet reflected in reported margins ↓
Measured by
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Non-GAAP gross margin, quarterly41.5%reported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- Quarterly GAAP gross margin36.1%derived
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- Archimedes has completed more than 400 hot-fire tests and the full engine set for Neutron's maiden launch is now in production, a concrete sign of engineering maturity ahead of first flight.[RKLB tops 400 Archimedes hot fires]· secondary
- GAAP operating margin has improved by roughly 24 points over six quarters (-48.3% to -24.6%), a pace that, if sustained, could plausibly reach positive-double-digit margins within the forecast window.[Rocket Lab quarterly filings/releases]· primary
Evidence against
- Q3 2026 non-GAAP gross margin guidance of 35-37% is down from recent levels due to space-systems mix shift and acquisition integration costs, showing near-term pressure against the margin-ramp thesis.[Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results, Q3 guidance]· primary
Tax rate21.0%medium
How derived: With $840.9M of federal NOLs able to shield up to 80% of taxable income indefinitely, the bull case assumes faster profitability growth lets the company use the federal statutory rate of 21% as its effective rate for most of the forecast window, since the large NOL pool combined with ongoing R&D tax credits keeps the effective cash tax rate near the federal floor for longer.
Why this confidence: Federal statutory rate of 21% is a known, fixed reference point, not an estimate ↑, Assumes faster profitability ramp than currently observed, which is not yet confirmed by reported results ↓
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- Federal NOLs generated after 2017 ($783.8M) carry forward indefinitely with no expiration, giving a long runway of tax-shielded taxable income under a faster-growth path.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Evidence against
- State NOL carryforwards of $549.5M begin to expire starting in 2035, meaning the state-tax shield is finite even if federal NOLs are not.[Rocket Lab FY2025 10-K]· primary
Reinvestment rate40.0%low
How derived: Against FY2025 capex of ~26% of revenue, the bull case assumes Neutron's designed reusability (up to 20 flights per booster) and Space Systems operating leverage from existing new facilities lower the reinvestment needed per dollar of NOPAT over time, so a smaller share of profit needs to be plowed back to sustain the higher bull-case growth path.
Why this confidence: Reusability payoff has not yet been demonstrated in a single Neutron flight as of the current date ↓, Iridium deal financing structure adds a large, not-yet-reflected capital need that could offset any Neutron capex efficiency gain ↓
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Capital expenditures, quarterly$26Mreported
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Evidence for
- Neutron's first stage is designed for reuse across up to 20 flights per booster, which should structurally reduce incremental capex per launch versus an expendable vehicle once the design is proven.[Rocket Lab Neutron overview]· secondary
Evidence against
- The pending Iridium acquisition is being financed partly with a $3.6B bridge loan and additional debt/equity, which could keep total reinvestment and financing needs elevated regardless of Neutron's capital efficiency.[Rocket Lab to acquire Iridium in historic deal]· primary
Terminal growth3.0%low
How derived: The bull case assumes Rocket Lab's terminal growth settles moderately above long-run nominal GDP growth, reflecting a structurally expanding launch and satellite-services market where Neutron's lower price point ($50-55M vs. Falcon 9's ~$74M) plus a consolidated Iridium subscriber base sustain above-average growth even at maturity, while staying below the current risk-free rate to remain a conservative terminal assumption.
Why this confidence: Terminal growth is the least directly observable of all DCF inputs and rests on a strategic thesis (space economy structurally outgrowing GDP) rather than measured data ↓, Kept below the current risk-free rate as a standard sanity check on terminal-value assumptions ↑
No tracked driver measures this assumption yet.
Evidence for
- The Iridium network supports more than 2.55 million active subscribers, including maritime fleets, giving a bull-case combined entity a large recurring-revenue base that could support above-GDP terminal growth.[Rocket Lab to acquire Iridium in historic deal]· primary
Evidence against
- SpaceX's scale, launch cadence, and reusability lead remain the dominant force in the launch market, which could cap Rocket Lab's terminal share and growth regardless of Neutron's pricing.[Rocket Lab faces scrutiny over Neutron launch timeline and financial viability]· secondary
Valuation robustness
reliability of the estimate, not a stock rating58 / 100 · Moderate
Formula v1.0.0. Higher means a more reliable estimate — not a recommendation.
Quality checks
Automated model-risk flags — warnings, not recommendations.
- The reinvestment assumption is low-confidence.→ reinvestment
- The terminal growth assumption is low-confidence.→ terminal growth
- Diluted share count grew 22% year over year, which reduces per-share participation in business growth.→ per-share economics
Per-share economics
Business growth after changes in the diluted share count.
| Period | Revenue growth | FCF/share | FCF/share growth | Shares | Share growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 2025 | 32.1% | -0.16 | -269.1% | 505.61M | 3.2% |
| Q2 2025 | 36.0% | -0.11 | -87.1% | 515.09M | 4.2% |
| Q3 2025 | 48.0% | -0.13 | -55.9% | 528.73M | 6.2% |
| Q4 2025 | 35.7% | -8.1 | 33.9% | 14.1M | 621.9% |
| Q1 2026 | 63.5% | -0.13 | 22.0% | 605.43M | 19.7% |
| Q2 2026 | 62.0% | -0.17 | -62.9% | 629.68M | 22.2% |
Valuation history every run
Why intrinsic value changed
Why
Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year moved from an unreported prior value to 62.0%, as reported in Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results (revenue +62% YoY).
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year62.0%reported
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
Why
Quarterly GAAP operating margin moved from an unreported prior value to -24.6%, as reported in Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results.
Measured by
- Electron and HASTE launches per year21 launchesreported
- Non-GAAP gross margin, quarterly41.5%reported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- Quarterly GAAP gross margin36.1%derived
- Electron launches, calendar year21 launchesreported
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Why
No sourced event is linked to this change yet — the researched assumption moved without a cited driver observation behind it.
Why
Quarterly GAAP operating margin moved from an unreported prior value to -24.6%, as reported in Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results.
Measured by
- Total contracted backlog, quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Contracted backlog at quarter-end$2.4Breported
- Quarterly GAAP operating margin-24.6%derived
- First-half capital purchases as a share of revenue12.2%derived
- Capital expenditures, quarterly$26Mreported
- Average cost per launch$4.8Mreported
- Capital expenditure as a share of annual revenue25.7%derived
Sequential deterministic bridge · order-dependent contributions · exactly reconciled
Material event timeline
6/30/2026
Quarterly GAAP operating margin moved from an unreported prior value to -24.6%, as reported in Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results.
Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results ↗6/30/2026
Quarterly GAAP revenue growth, year-over-year moved from an unreported prior value to 62.0%, as reported in Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results (revenue +62% YoY).
Rocket Lab Q2 2026 results (revenue +62% YoY) ↗Market inputs researched
Used the most recently quoted 10-year U.S. Treasury note yield (4.65% as of 3:30pm ET Aug 24, 2026) as the risk-free rate proxy for a USD-denominated DCF.
Used Rocket Lab's reported 5-year monthly beta of 2.18, reflecting the stock's high historical volatility as a small-cap, pre-full-profitability aerospace/space-launch name.
Used Aswath Damodaran's forward-looking (implied) U.S. equity risk premium of 4.45% from his July 2026 data update, derived from S&P 500 index level, dividend/buyback yield, and prevailing Treasury rates.
Used the intraday/closing quoted price for RKLB on NASDAQ as of Aug 25, 2026, the current date for this analysis.
Rocket Lab's $355M of 4.25% convertible senior notes (issued February 2024) carried an effective interest rate of approximately 5.0% once discount and issuance-cost amortization are included, per the company's SEC filings; used as the pre-tax cost of debt given the company's minimal other rated debt outstanding.
Generated 8/25/2026, 3:34:36 AM · pipeline v1.2.0