SpaceX’s underwriters published, and the range is a punchline: Goldman (GS) $205, Morgan Stanley (MS) $300, UBS $210 — and Raymond James $800, which would value a money-losing rocket company at roughly $10 trillion. It closed Wednesday at $148.30.
This isn’t a forecast; it’s a food fight with a research header. And the data has an opinion: Trivariate finds that wide target dispersion historically underperforms — when the analysts can’t agree within a factor of four, the stock tends to disappoint.
The deeper tell is directional. Oracle (ORCL) would need to rise 80% just to reach its own average target, while Nvidia’s (NVDA) targets have politely chased its price higher all year. Which is the whole problem: targets follow prices; portfolios shouldn’t follow targets.
So SpaceX stays on the watch bench — $165-to-$800 isn’t a forecast, it’s a range wide enough to be useless. NVDA stays a core hold on its own signed demand, not on anyone’s target.
SpaceX stays on the watch bench — a $205-to-$800 underwriter range isn’t a forecast, it’s a food fight with a research header, and wide dispersion historically underperforms. NVDA stays a core hold on its own signed demand, not on anyone’s target. The discipline generalizes: targets follow prices, portfolios shouldn’t follow targets. When a price target makes you feel something, that’s marketing, not math.