Which bank will take SpaceX public?
Short Answer
Both the model and the market overwhelmingly agree that Morgan Stanley is most likely to take SpaceX public before Jan 1, 2028, with only minor residual uncertainty.
1. Executive Verdict
- SpaceX reportedly plans IPO filing as early as mid-June 2026.
- IPO targets $1.5 trillion valuation, aiming to raise up to $50 billion.
- Starlink shows strong profitability and subscriber growth for investor confidence.
- Starlink projected to reach 18.4M subscribers, $18.7B revenue by 2026.
- Successful Starship development includes orbital refueling demonstrations by June 2026.
- Uncrewed Starship lunar landing tests are expected by June 2027.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bank of America | 86.0% | 84.0% | Research error: Internal Server Error |
| Citigroup | 44.0% | 45.0% | Research error: Internal Server Error |
| JPMorgan Chase | 81.0% | 79.5% | Research error: Internal Server Error |
| Goldman Sachs | 88.0% | 89.0% | Research error: Internal Server Error |
| Morgan Stanley | 93.0% | 92.5% | Research error: Internal Server Error |
Current Context
SpaceX is actively preparing for a potential mid-2026 IPO. SpaceX is reportedly considering an Initial Public Offering (IPO) in mid-June 2026, targeting a raise of up to $50 billion at an ambitious valuation of approximately $1.5 trillion [^]. This potential market debut would position it as one of the largest in history. Four major Wall Street banks—Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley—are reportedly lined up for senior underwriting roles, with Morgan Stanley often cited due to its existing relationship with Elon Musk [^]. In February 2026, SpaceX formally acquired Elon Musk's xAI in an all-stock deal, reportedly valuing the combined entity between $1.25 trillion and $1.5 trillion; this merger is viewed as a strategic move to consolidate high-growth technology assets and simplify investor disclosures for the IPO [^]. SpaceX is also exploring creative IPO structures, including a potential Dutch auction similar to Google's, and considering dual-class shares to allow Elon Musk to maintain control [^]. The company has entered a regulatory quiet period in December 2025 and is actively adding members to its board of directors to guide the IPO process [^]. Non-US banks are also reportedly being considered for junior underwriting roles to broaden geographic reach [^].
The proposed valuation and market impact raise significant questions. Analysts acknowledge that justifying a $1.5 trillion valuation for SpaceX with conventional metrics is challenging but is supported by secular tailwinds, including the commercialization of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and accelerated lunar projects [^]. The xAI merger is largely seen as strategic for consolidating high-growth technology assets, though some bankers express skepticism about combining a profitable asset like Starlink (estimated $15 billion in 2025 revenue, rising to $22-$24 billion in 2026) with a cash-burning AI business [^]. Experts suggest a SpaceX IPO could "redraw the 2026 roadmap for listing hopefuls," potentially drawing capital away from other companies and creating pressure for portfolio managers, while also marking a "structural turning point" for the space economy [^]. Common concerns include the realistic feasibility of the $1.5 trillion valuation, the implications of Elon Musk's control via dual-class shares, the potential impact on Tesla's stock, and limited investment access for retail investors before the IPO [^]. Furthermore, risks such as major launch failures, pricing pressure for Starlink, and the market's capacity to absorb such a massive offering alongside other potential "hectocorn" IPOs like OpenAI and Anthropic are also being discussed [^]. Investment banks are reportedly advocating for fast-track inclusion into equity benchmarks to boost early demand [^].
2. Market Behavior & Price Dynamics
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
This market, which assesses the probability of JPMorgan Chase leading the SpaceX IPO, has exhibited a long-term sideways trend, consistently trading at a high probability between 71% and 95%. The price started at 89% and currently sits at 87%, indicating stable, high confidence from traders over the market's lifetime. However, this stability was punctuated by a brief but significant period of volatility in early February 2026. The price experienced sharp drops on February 1st and 3rd, falling from a peak of 95% to a low near 71%. This suggests a rapid, temporary loss of confidence, likely fueled by speculation that a competitor, such as the frequently mentioned Morgan Stanley, was gaining an edge.
The market sentiment reversed dramatically on February 4th with a 16-percentage-point spike, driving the price from 71% back to its current level of 87%. This powerful recovery directly correlates with the news of SpaceX's acquisition of xAI. Traders likely interpreted this complex merger, aimed at simplifying IPO disclosures, as a factor that would favor a large, highly experienced institution like JPMorgan Chase to manage one of history's largest and most intricate public offerings. The total traded volume of over 25,000 contracts indicates an active market with significant conviction behind these price moves.
From a technical perspective, the market has established a clear support level at the $0.71 price point, which marked the bottom of the recent sell-off and prompted a strong buying response. Resistance is evident at the market's all-time high of $0.95, a level that has proven difficult to sustain. Overall, the chart indicates a strong and resilient market consensus that JPMorgan Chase is the front-runner for the SpaceX IPO, with the current 87% probability reflecting the market's interpretation of recent strategic moves by SpaceX as favorable to the bank's chances.
3. Significant Price Movements
Notable price changes detected in the chart, along with research into what caused each movement.
Outcome: JPMorgan Chase
📉 February 24, 2026: 10.0pp drop
Price decreased from 87.0% to 77.0%
What happened: On February 24, 2026, the 10.0 percentage point drop for "JPMorgan Chase" in the "Which bank will take SpaceX public?" prediction market appears to be primarily driven by a consolidation of sentiment within prediction markets favoring other institutions for a lead underwriting role, rather than a specific social media post [^]. While no single social media activity from key figures directly caused the drop, prediction market data from February 24, 2026, indicated Goldman Sachs as the favored lead bank in SpaceX's IPO at 52%, with JPMorgan Chase showing a significant 8.3 percentage point drop in its 24-hour probability for the lead role, reaching a low of 0.3% on one platform [^]. This shift coincided with ongoing news reports from January and February 2026, consistently naming Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as leading contenders for senior roles in SpaceX's anticipated mid-2026 IPO [^]. Social media activity was (c) mostly noise or (d) irrelevant, as no specific posts from influential figures directly explaining the drop for JPMorgan Chase were identified [^]. The primary driver was a perceived shift in the banking syndicate, highlighted by prediction market movements and traditional financial news reports positioning other banks as stronger candidates for the lead underwriting role [^].
📈 February 21, 2026: 9.0pp spike
Price increased from 82.0% to 91.0%
What happened: The 9.0 percentage point spike for "JPMorgan Chase" in the "Which bank will take SpaceX public?" prediction market on February 21, 2026, was primarily driven by continued traditional news coverage reinforcing the bank's expected lead underwriting role [^]. While major Wall Street banks, including JPMorgan Chase, were initially reported as lead underwriters for the anticipated SpaceX IPO in late January and early February 2026, an article from ION Analytics published on February 18, 2026, explicitly stated that "Market participants broadly expect Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan to occupy senior roles, though a final lineup has not been announced." There was no identifiable social media post from key figures like Elon Musk or a viral narrative directly preceding or coinciding with the February 21 spike that specifically highlighted JPMorgan Chase's role beyond what was already circulating in traditional news [^]. This reaffirmation in a reputable financial news source likely served as a timely catalyst for the price movement [^]. Social media was mostly noise in this specific instance, as no direct, impactful posts from key figures related to JPMorgan Chase and the SpaceX IPO were identified around the exact time of the price spike [^].
📉 February 12, 2026: 12.0pp drop
Price decreased from 93.0% to 81.0%
What happened: The 12.0 percentage point drop for "JPMorgan Chase" in the "Which bank will take SpaceX public?" prediction market on February 12, 2026, was primarily driven by market adjustments to ongoing news regarding a multi-bank underwriting syndicate rather than a single lead institution [^]. Traditional news reports from late January and early February consistently indicated that SpaceX was considering four major Wall Street banks—Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley—for lead roles in its anticipated IPO [^]. This sustained reporting of a competitive "bake-off" among multiple banks for lead underwriting positions, rather than a clear frontrunner, likely diluted the perceived sole or dominant role of any single bank, leading to the price correction for JPMorgan Chase [^]. Social media activity was irrelevant in driving this particular price movement [^].
Outcome: Citigroup
📉 February 22, 2026: 9.0pp drop
Price decreased from 52.0% to 43.0%
What happened: The 9.0 percentage point drop in the "Citigroup" outcome for the "Which bank will take SpaceX public?" prediction market on February 22, 2026, was primarily driven by the sustained absence of Citigroup from reports naming lead underwriters for the anticipated SpaceX IPO [^]. Throughout January 2026, major financial news outlets, citing sources like the Financial Times and Reuters, consistently reported that SpaceX was engaging Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley for lead roles in its potential 2026 public offering [^]. While no specific social media post or news announcement on February 22 directly excluded Citigroup, the continued prominence of these four banks, and the lack of mention of Citigroup in lead underwriting discussions, likely led prediction market participants to reassess Citigroup's probability [^]. This traditional news reporting acted as the primary driver [^].
📈 February 06, 2026: 13.0pp spike
Price increased from 52.0% to 65.0%
What happened: No clear primary driver from social media activity or traditional news outlets was identified for the 13.0 percentage point spike in Citigroup's prediction market price on February 06, 2026, for "Which bank will take SpaceX public?" [^]. News reports preceding this date consistently named Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley as the four lead underwriters for a potential SpaceX IPO, with Citigroup not listed in a prominent role [^]. While a prediction market in late December 2025 did show Citigroup as a contender to take SpaceX public, its implied probability was noted to be slightly decreasing at that time [^]. Therefore, the cause of this specific price movement remains unidentifiable from the provided information, suggesting it could be due to uncaptured information or market structure factors [^].
4. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
The market concerns which bank will take SpaceX public, with 2028 as the relevant timeframe for this event. A YES resolution is triggered if a bank takes SpaceX public, and a NO resolution occurs if no bank does. No special settlement conditions are specified in the provided content.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Implied probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morgan Stanley | $0.93 | $0.08 | 93% |
| Goldman Sachs | $0.88 | $0.13 | 88% |
| Bank of America | $0.86 | $0.16 | 86% |
| JPMorgan Chase | $0.81 | $0.21 | 81% |
| Citigroup | $0.44 | $0.57 | 44% |
Market Discussion
Discussions surrounding which banks will take SpaceX public consistently point to four major Wall Street institutions: Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley, reportedly being lined up for senior roles in what is anticipated to be one of the largest initial public offerings (IPOs) in history [^]. While these four banks are repeatedly named, prediction markets show varying frontrunners for the lead underwriting role, with some favoring Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, and others highlighting Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase [^]. The complexity of the potential offering, including SpaceX's diverse assets and its merger with xAI, is also a key point of discussion among experts [^].
5. What Caused the Research Query to Encounter an Error?
| Research Outcome | Failed |
|---|---|
| Error Type | Internal Server Error |
| Data Retrieved | None |
Research execution failed due to an internal system error. An attempt to investigate which of the four contender banks (Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Bank of America) has the most significant, documented history as the primary financial advisor on Elon Musk's major corporate and personal capital transactions since 2022 encountered an 'Internal Server Error'. This indicates a critical issue within the research system that prevented the successful processing of the query and the retrieval of any relevant information.
No specific financial advisor findings were retrieved. Due to this system-level error, no specific findings, key data points, or supporting citations could be extracted or formatted. Consequently, no content pertaining to the original research question, specifically concerning the Twitter/X acquisition, Tesla's capital raises, and xAI's funding rounds, is available at this time.
6. Why Was Research Data Unavailable Due to Server Error?
| Research Outcome | Internal Server Error |
|---|---|
| Data Retrieved | None |
| Analysis Status | Not Performed |
An internal server error prevented the retrieval of requested IPO data. The research process encountered a critical system failure, specifically an internal server error, which blocked the retrieval of any relevant data or findings for the specified analysis. This error meant no information could be extracted or analyzed concerning global IPO league tables since 2020, lead-left underwriter roles on technology IPOs over $10 billion, or their day-one price performance.
Consequently, the research question cannot be answered at this time. Due to this critical system failure, it is currently impossible to provide a summary, specific data points, or an answer to the original research question. Further investigation into the internal server error is necessary to resolve the technical issue and enable subsequent data processing and analysis.
7. Why Is Research Information Currently Unavailable?
| Research Status | Internal Server Error (System) |
|---|---|
| Data Availability | None (System) |
| Information Found | 0 (System) |
Research completion was prevented by an internal server error. This technical issue made it impossible to retrieve any relevant data or information for the query, which sought to identify superior combined research and investment banking dominance among contender banks in the legacy Aerospace & Defense and emerging Generative AI sectors. Consequently, no specific findings or metrics regarding M&A advisory volume or the number of top-rated equity research analysts are available for summarization.
The report currently lacks all required data points. As a direct result of this system error, the report cannot provide concrete details on the research question. All data points and narrative summaries are unavailable, indicating a need to re-attempt the research process to gather the required information.
8. Why Was Research Unsuccessful for This Request?
| Research Outcome | Failed |
|---|---|
| Error Type | Internal Server Error |
| Data Availability | None |
Research encountered a server error, preventing data retrieval. The automated research process experienced an unexpected issue while attempting to retrieve information for the requested topic. Consequently, no specific findings or data points could be extracted at this time.
The reported 'Internal Server Error' indicates a temporary service malfunction. The system specifically reported an 'Internal Server Error', which suggests a problem within the research service itself rather than with the provided query. This type of error is typically indicative of a temporary technical malfunction.
Consequently, no findings were generated; a retry is recommended. Due to this server error, it was impossible to generate any key data points or a summary of findings for the requested topic. It is advisable to consider retrying the research request at a later time.
9. Why Was Research Data Unavailable Due to Internal Server Error?
| Research Outcome | Internal Server Error |
|---|---|
| Data Availability | Not retrieved |
| Source Information | Unavailable |
An internal server error prevented retrieval of relevant research information. The research query encountered an internal server error, critically preventing the retrieval of any information regarding recent senior-level personnel movements. This system issue meant no specific findings, data points, or supporting evidence could be extracted or analyzed concerning potential transfers from Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, or Bank of America into SpaceX's finance or corporate development teams.
Consequently, no analysis or insights are currently available. Due to this critical error, it is impossible to provide an analysis of the topic, identify key trends, or cite any specific sources. The absence of retrieved data means no meaningful insights can be offered regarding a finalized relationship indicated by personnel movements. Therefore, further research attempts are required to gather the necessary data before any comprehensive insights can be provided.
10. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
Key bullish catalysts include a formal IPO announcement and filing by SpaceX, which is reportedly preparing for an IPO as early as mid-June 2026, targeting a potential valuation of $1.5 trillion and aiming to raise up to $50 billion [^] . Continued strong profitability and subscriber growth for Starlink, a significant revenue driver for SpaceX, would further enhance investor confidence, with projections of reaching 18.4 million subscribers and $18.7 billion in revenue by 2026 [^]. Successful Starship development, marked by milestones such as orbital refueling demonstrations in June 2026 and uncrewed lunar landing tests by June 2027 for the HLS program, would also validate SpaceX's long-term vision and revenue potential [^].
Conversely, significant delays or failures in Starship development, particularly regarding orbital refueling or reusability, could impede key missions and dampen investor enthusiasm for an IPO [^] . A deterioration of Starlink's financial performance or subscriber growth, or increased competition in the satellite internet market, would negatively impact SpaceX's valuation and IPO prospects [^]. Furthermore, an overall market downturn, unfavorable IPO conditions, or increased regulatory hurdles could compel SpaceX to delay or reconsider its public offering [^].
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Expiration: January 08, 2028
- Closes: January 01, 2028
11. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: Key bullish catalysts include a formal IPO announcement and filing by SpaceX, which is reportedly preparing for an IPO as early as mid-June 2026, targeting a potential valuation of $1.5 trillion and aiming to raise up to $50 billion [^] .
- Trigger: Continued strong profitability and subscriber growth for Starlink, a significant revenue driver for SpaceX, would further enhance investor confidence, with projections of reaching 18.4 million subscribers and $18.7 billion in revenue by 2026 [^] .
- Trigger: Successful Starship development, marked by milestones such as orbital refueling demonstrations in June 2026 and uncrewed lunar landing tests by June 2027 for the HLS program, would also validate SpaceX's long-term vision and revenue potential [^] .
- Trigger: Conversely, significant delays or failures in Starship development, particularly regarding orbital refueling or reusability, could impede key missions and dampen investor enthusiasm for an IPO [^] .
13. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
Get Real-Time Research Updates
Sign up for early access to live reports, historical data, and AI-powered market insights delivered to your inbox.
