With Elon Musk’s intergalactic venture SpaceX set to start trading publicly from 12 June, everyone will be able join the space race – from enthusiasts with the dream of going to Mars and building AI infrastructure in space, who are actively seeking exposure; to more grounded owners of index trackers such as the Nasdaq and the FTSE Russell, who will see SpaceX enter their portfolio via the passive route.
(S&P has refused to fast-track the stock into the S&P 500, meaning S&P index funds won't be forced buyers on day one.)
For the initial public offer (IPO), SpaceX is seeking just short of $1.8trn valuation, which would make it one of the world's most valuable companies. Yet it is still losing money, having recorded a $4.9bn loss in 2025 on $18.7bn in revenue.
Whether you are team Musk or team Muskn’t, this is almost certainly having an impact on your investments – perhaps inadvertently if you, like me, own an investment trust whose position in SpaceX has climbed the portfolio to a top holding.
As investors swing between greed and fear, so did I. My first instinct was to add to the position and ride the IPO momentum. But I'm naturally more fearful than greedy and quickly hesitated. What if I timed it wrong? What if the price surged on listing and then came back to earth?
Have we forgotten when Musk threw himself into Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the consequences that had for Tesla? European sales fell and the stock dropped sharply. SpaceX has the same person with even more concentrated control and is valued at a significantly higher price.
But to me, there is also another side to the story: SpaceX isn’t actually going public – not fully – because of something called dual-class shares, whereby public share classes carry significantly fewer voting rights.
In this case, public investors will receive one vote per share, while Musk – who will serve simultaneously serve as CEO, CTO and chair, and retain control the election of directors – will have 10 votes per share, meaning he will control around 85% of voting power while holding approximately 41% of the stock.
Around 44% of US tech IPOs now use some version of this structure, which is designed to remove possible tensions between the vision of the founder and investors trying to hold them accountable.
The concentration of power in a single visionary figure – one whose judgment cannot be formally challenged and whose continuity is built into the legal structure – has a long history outside markets as well.
I feel uneasy around the rhetoric that strong men get things done, move fast and achieve what committees cannot, because when things go wrong there is no mechanism to correct course. But that’s the direction markets are going.
SpaceX is simultaneously a launch provider, a global satellite internet business and an AI infrastructure play. Three capital-intensive businesses, each unproven at the scale being priced in, and a fourth narrative arriving via the Golden Dome defence contract.
Which of these are you paying $1.78trn for? Backing all of them requires an enormous number of things to go right, run by one person who cannot be removed.
As for me, I haven’t bought my investment trust specifically to get access to SpaceX, so I decided – perhaps cowardly – not to add or sell. My investment case in the trust is long-term and goes beyond this IPO.
I would like to know how you are preparing for this historic event. Email me at matteo.anelli@fefundinfo.com to keep the conversation going and check back on Trustnet for our upcoming SpaceX coverage.
Matteo Anelli is deputy editor at Trustnet. The views expressed above should not be taken as investment advice.