SpaceX has entered the countdown to a historic initial public offering (IPO). The company submitted a confidential registration statement (S-1) to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the first of last month and is preparing a roadshow with a goal of listing on Nasdaq in June.
The target valuation is between $1.75 trillion and $2 trillion, with a fundraising target of about $75 billion. That would make it the largest public offering in history, far surpassing Saudi Aramco’s $29 billion IPO in 2019.
What stands out is the retail allocation. Reports say about 30% of the shares will be reserved for individual investors, roughly three times the Wall Street average of around 10%. The move is widely seen as Elon Musk’s attempt to create a “public-participation IPO.”
The problem is for Korean investors. Direct subscription to U.S. IPOs is difficult, and the allocated amount is likely to fall far short of demand. As a result, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), as a workaround, have emerged as the practical choice.
KB Securities has divided ETF investment routes into three categories: ETFs that directly hold SpaceX shares, ETFs that broadly invest in the U.S. IPO market, and space-themed ETFs.
The three categories are not just a simple classification. The key difference is the “time lag” in how SpaceX’s value gets reflected in ETF prices.
The fastest route is “XOVR.” Asset manager ERShares has structured it through a special purpose vehicle (SPV) that secured SpaceX shares in advance. Its strength is that it can hold exposure before the company goes public. As of April 24, the position accounted for 24.9% of the portfolio.
But there is a catch. Private assets do not have a market price. Because valuation depends on the manager’s own estimate, the market price is not reflected immediately. Even after the IPO, the SPV-held position may be subject to a lock-up restriction. That means there can be a gap between the trading price and the value of the underlying asset.
The second route, “FPX” and “IPO,” consists of ETFs that automatically add newly listed U.S. stocks. They do not directly hold SpaceX, but they may naturally include it shortly after listing. FPX has previously added stocks five trading days after listing, while the IPO ETF has done so within 7 to 14 days.
The third category is space-themed ETFs. In the U.S., examples include “ARKX,” “UFO,” and “NASA.” Among them, the NASA ETF currently holds SpaceX as a single name at 12.6% through an SPV. However, a six-month lock-up applies after the IPO.
All three paths lead to the same result—exposure to SpaceX—but the speed and mechanism by which that exposure is priced in are entirely different. Choosing which ETF to buy is essentially a question of which point in time to bet on.
The optimism is clear. Starlink’s subscriber base has surpassed 7 million to 8 million users, and annual revenue for 2026 is estimated in the $22 billion to $24 billion range. Starship, space data centers, and lunar bases are being presented as the rationale for raising capital for the next generation of businesses.
But skepticism is no less strong. PitchBook estimates the company’s fair valuation at between $1.1 trillion and $1.7 trillion. That leaves a gap of hundreds of billions of dollars from the $2 trillion target.
There are two main issues. First, the valuation multiple of 87 times revenue has no comparable peer. Second, it is unclear how much the recently merged xAI contributes to the valuation. How the market views xAI’s position in the artificial intelligence (AI) competitive landscape will be a key variable.
Opinions also differ on the ETFs themselves. XOVR’s appeal lies in the possibility of entering before the IPO, but it is weakened by its reliance on private valuation. FPX and the IPO ETF offer good diversification, but their SpaceX weighting is limited, making the “direct exposure” effect weaker. Space-themed ETFs are criticized for already having much of the optimism priced in.
Domestic ETF products in Korea also face many variables. Products such as 1Q U.S. Aerospace Tech, KODEX U.S. Aerospace, and TIGER U.S. Space Tech have all only announced plans to include SpaceX; the actual timing and weight of inclusion will depend on market conditions on the day of listing.
This IPO is more than a single-stock investment event. It could become a turning point that elevates space and defense from a “theme” to an “asset class.”
If pricing is established successfully, capital is likely to flow into the broader space industry. Launch vehicles, satellite communications, Earth observation, and space infrastructure companies would all be candidates for valuation re-rating.
Conversely, if the price falls short of the target, the broader space theme could come under pressure. SpaceX effectively serves as the market’s benchmark for the industry.
Another variable is timing. Until the SEC review is completed and the public S-1 is disclosed, the financial reality remains concealed. Real price discovery will begin when revenue, margin structure, the share of defense contracts, and the accounting treatment of the xAI merger are finally made public.
For Korean investors, exchange rates are also a factor. If the dollar remains strong, buying U.S. ETFs directly becomes more burdensome; if it weakens, domestically listed ETFs become relatively more attractive.
The structural issues surrounding the SpaceX IPO can be grouped into three layers: uncertainty over valuation, gaps in access for domestic investors, and asymmetry of information about ETF products. Each layer requires a different response.
The valuation issue is first addressed through disclosure rules. The SEC requires the public S-1 filing no later than 15 days before the roadshow. Revenue composition, margin structure, the share of defense contracts, and the accounting treatment of the xAI merger will be disclosed at that stage.
This will be the point at which the basis for a $1.75 trillion valuation can be presented in a verifiable form. Investing before disclosure is essentially buying in a state of information scarcity, which is why making decisions aligned with the SEC disclosure schedule is seen as the starting point for protecting ordinary investors.
Accessibility for domestic investors is being discussed as a matter for institutional improvement. Direct subscription to U.S. IPOs is possible through Korean brokerage firms, but the allocated amount is limited and the information arrives late.
Among regulators and parts of the securities industry, proposed improvements include advance notification systems for major overseas IPO subscriptions, mandatory guidance on currency-hedging options, and Korean-language summaries of English-language disclosures. Musk’s decision to raise the retail allocation to 30% is also viewed as an extension of this trend.
Information asymmetry in ETF products is an area that can be addressed through stronger disclosure by asset managers. Seven domestic managers have announced SpaceX inclusion plans, but the timing, target weight, hedge status, and lock-up treatment differ from one product to another.
The Korea Exchange and the Financial Supervisory Service have gradually expanded disclosure items for thematic ETF reports. If a system is introduced to disclose SpaceX’s inclusion weight and timing in real time, investors’ ability to compare products would improve.
Overseas examples offer a reference point. In the U.S., the NASA ETF preannounced the lock-up terms for its SPV-held position. It also clearly stated that its exposure was 12.6%. These are efforts to reduce information asymmetry. Whether Korean space-themed ETFs can match that level of disclosure will be a key factor in determining future product credibility.
The SpaceX IPO will not end as a single event. Analysts say it could signal the beginning of a trend in which the listing of giant private companies becomes routine. IPOs of AI firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic are already being discussed. How the valuation, access, and information asymmetry issues revealed in this IPO are handled will become the first test case for the next wave of major listings.