NextFin News - Elon Musk became the world's first trillionaire when SpaceX completed the largest initial public offering in history on June 12, yet the company that built his fortune spent the rest of the summer in a slow-motion retreat. Tesla shares have fallen about 19% over the three months through early September, underperforming the S&P 500's 2.8% gain over the same stretch, after a second-quarter earnings report that delivered record vehicle deliveries alongside a profit miss, negative free cash flow, and the thinnest operating margin in years.
The divergence is the story: SpaceX's debut valued Musk's rocket and AI business above $2 trillion, while Tesla's market value sank toward $1 trillion in late July, erasing nearly a fifth of the stock's value since the start of 2026. The summer turned into a referendum on a single question - whether Tesla's record volume can justify a valuation built on artificial intelligence and autonomy when the core car business is paying for that future with cash it no longer generates.
The Two Musk Companies, Moving in Opposite Directions
SpaceX priced 555,555,555 Class A shares at $135 on June 11, raising roughly $75 billion at a $1.77 trillion target valuation. The stock closed its first trading day at $160.95, up 19%, pushing the company's market capitalization above $2 trillion and making Musk the first person in history with a net worth exceeding $1 trillion. It was the kind of event that usually lifts the entire ecosystem around it.
Tesla did not get that lift. The stock was already down about 6.6% in the week before the SpaceX pricing, as investors weighed the prospect of a second Musk-controlled stock competing for the same pool of capital. Then, on July 22, Tesla reported second-quarter results that split cleanly down the middle. Revenue of $28.24 billion beat the $26.43 billion consensus by 6.8%. Deliveries hit a record 480,126 vehicles, up 25% from a year earlier and well above the roughly 406,000 analysts had expected. Energy storage deployments reached 13.5 GWh, up more than 40% year over year, and trailing-twelve-month revenue crossed $100 billion for the first time.
Almost none of it reached the bottom line. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at 33 cents, a 38% miss against the 53-to-54-cent consensus. Gross margin slipped to 16.8% from 17.2% a year earlier and well below the 19.4% analysts had forecast. Operating income fell to $398 million, and free cash flow turned negative at minus $1.09 billion. The stock fell nearly 15% the next day to around $320, its lowest level in nearly a year.
The timing could not have been starker. On June 12, Musk rang the opening bell as the world's first trillionaire. Six weeks later, his flagship company was leading the S&P 500's decliners. By late July, SpaceX itself had given back most of its IPO pop, trading near $113.50 on July 27 - down from a peak of $225.64 in June - erasing more than $1.2 trillion in market value since its high, almost exactly the value of Tesla at that moment.
Why the Earnings Miss Cut Deeper Than the Numbers
The market's reaction was not just about an EPS miss. It was about what the miss revealed about the direction of the business. Tesla has spent the past decade building a reputation as a manufacturer that could scale volume while holding margins. The second quarter broke that compact: volume hit a record, yet operating margin compressed to 1.4%.
Three things drove the compression. First, average selling prices fell as Tesla leaned on pricing to drive the delivery beat. Second, regulatory credit revenue - the sale of emissions credits to other automakers - jumped to about $890 million in the quarter, up from $442 million in the first quarter. Wells Fargo analyst Colin Langan called the results "low quality" for that reason: a larger share of the profit came from credits rather than from selling cars.
It's been a great quarter. We achieved record Q2 deliveries. Model Y, I think it's now the best-selling car of any kind in the world, and is setting records across the board.
Musk said on the July 22 earnings call, even as the profit line collapsed. Third, spending exploded. Capital expenditures surged as Tesla funded what management has described as the fastest industrial-scale expansion in the United States since World War II, centered on AI training infrastructure, a semiconductor development fab, and Optimus robot manufacturing.
Musk framed the spending as deliberate. He said the company had already ordered equipment for a "development fab" and declined to give details on what he called "high-risk, high-payoff bets" around AI chips. Chief Financial Officer Vaibhav Taneja told investors that operating expenditures would "grow in 2026 and beyond," adding that "commodity price increases and interest rate changes will all continue to add to Tesla's costs."
The guidance for total 2026 capital expenditure sits above $25 billion. Morgan Stanley now models nearly $30 billion of capex in 2027, up from a prior estimate of $20 billion, and projects free cash flow burn of approximately $14 billion next year versus a previous estimate of $5 billion. The bank cut its 2026 EBITDA estimate by 7% and its 2027 estimate by 12%.
That is the mechanism behind the stock's summer: a company that investors priced as a high-margin software-and-autonomy franchise is revealing itself, in the near term, as a capital-intensive industrial builder. Every dollar of AI infrastructure spending is a dollar not flowing to shareholders today, and the market is discounting the promise of robotaxis against the reality of negative free cash flow.
The SpaceX Stake: A Hidden Asset That Did Not Rescue the Shares
There was supposed to be a floor under Tesla's stock. The company owns 18,990,195 shares of SpaceX - less than 1% of the outstanding stock, according to the rocket maker's S-1 filing - a stake built in part by converting Tesla's $2 billion investment in Musk's xAI into SpaceX Class A shares after a merger completed in February. For years that holding sat on Tesla's books as an asset with no clear public market value. The IPO was meant to change that, marking the stake to a public price for the first time.
At the IPO price of $135, the stake is worth roughly $2.6 billion. Even at SpaceX's June peak above $225, it would have been worth about $4.3 billion - meaningful, but not large enough to offset the roughly $250 billion in market value Tesla itself lost during the summer. The hidden asset turned out to be an anchor, not a lifeboat: it tied Tesla's fortunes to a sibling stock that promptly retraced most of its debut gains.
The unlock also carried a second-order risk that investors priced in quickly. SpaceX structured staggered share unlocks after its earnings announcement in early to mid-August: 20% of insider shares, plus 10% if the stock traded 30% above the IPO price, with further tranches around August 21 and September 10. Each unlock window brought the prospect of fresh supply into a stock that had more than doubled from its offer price at its peak. The selling pressure on SpaceX fed back into Tesla through the Musk-ecosystem trade: when one Musk stock wobbled, investors re-priced the others.
Cyclical Dip or Structural Re-Rating?
The central question for Tesla investors is whether this summer is a cyclical setback that will reverse once the spending wave passes, or a structural re-rating that resets what the stock is worth. The evidence points to structural - and that is the harder case for bulls.
A cyclical read rests on real strengths. Demand is not the problem: deliveries grew 25% year over year, the order backlog is the largest since 2023, and Model Y set sales records in markets including the Netherlands, Australia, and New Zealand. Musk told analysts on the call that Model Y is the best-selling car of any kind in the world. If the only issue were temporary margin pressure from a price war, history would suggest mean reversion - Tesla's gross margin has rebounded from compression before.
But three structural shifts argue that this is different. First, the capital-intensity regime has changed permanently. A company guiding to more than $25 billion of annual capex and modeled for $30 billion is not the same business that generated $7 billion of free cash flow over the trailing twelve months; it is a company making a multi-year bet that AI and robotics will matter more than near-term profitability. Second, the margin structure has shifted: with gross margin at 16.8% against a 19.4% expectation, and operating margin at 1.4%, the earnings power embedded in a stock that traded at roughly 373 times trailing earnings in mid-July has been reset. Third, the valuation multiple itself has been re-rated by a rotation out of the mega-cap growth cohort. The S&P 500 gained 9.6% in the first half of 2026 while the Magnificent Seven were collectively in the red - a dispersion that says investors are rotating out of mega-cap growth, not just away from Tesla.
The cleanest way to state the call: the cyclical leg - strong demand, a large backlog, record energy deployments - sets a floor under the stock. The structural leg - a capital-intensive AI buildout that turns free cash flow negative while compressing margins - sets the ceiling. Until investors see evidence that the spending is converting into software-like returns, the multiple stays compressed.
The Counter-Thesis, and What Would Break It
The strongest case against this view comes from the bull camp, and it is not a strawman. Wedbush analyst Dan Ives maintains an Outperform rating with a $600 price target, arguing that Tesla and Musk are heading into a very important chapter of their growth story as the AI Revolution takes hold and the Robotaxi opportunity is now a reality on the doorstep. In this reading, the second quarter is noise on the path to a robotaxi network that could generate software margins on every mile driven. The negative free cash flow is not a warning sign; it is the price of admission to the next S-curve.
That thesis has internal logic. Tesla's energy business is already growing at 40% a year. Full self-driving take rates are high where approved, and Musk says some customers are buying Tesla Full Self-Driving with a car attached to it as opposed to a car with FSD. If autonomy monetizes at scale, today's capex will look cheap in retrospect - the same way Tesla's early Gigafactory spending looked excessive before the Model 3 ramp.
But the counter-thesis rests on timing, and timing is where it is most exposed. The market is being asked to fund a multi-year AI buildout on a valuation that already assumes success, while the core auto business - which still generates virtually all of the company's revenue - is losing margin. The gap between what is priced and what is delivered is the risk.
The falsifying signal for the structural re-rating view is specific: if Tesla reports two consecutive quarters with operating margin above 8% while keeping capital expenditure below 8% of revenue and growing deliveries more than 15% year over year, the re-rating thesis is wrong and this summer was a cyclical dip. For the bulls, the warning signal is equally concrete: if trailing-twelve-month free cash flow remains negative through the fourth quarter of 2026 while quarterly capex exceeds $7 billion, and automotive gross margin excluding regulatory credits prints below 14% for two consecutive quarters, the multiple has further to fall.
What Comes Next
In the short term, the stock is likely to remain range-bound and news-driven. The next earnings report, due in late October, will be judged almost entirely on cash flow and margin trajectory rather than deliveries - investors have already seen that volume alone does not move the needle. Analyst targets reflect the split: the consensus sits around $400 to $408, implying roughly 6% to 12% upside from current levels, but the range runs from $24.86 at GLJ Research to $600 at Wedbush - a dispersion that itself signals deep uncertainty about which Tesla is the real one.
Over the medium term, the key is whether the AI spending converts into visible revenue. Robotaxi progress, FSD subscription growth, and Optimus milestones will be the catalysts bulls need. Over the long term, the question is structural: can Tesla become a high-margin software and robotics company, or will it remain a capital-intensive automaker with a valuable but minority stake in Musk's broader empire?
For now, the two Musk companies tell two different stories. SpaceX's IPO delivered the largest debut in market history and made its founder a trillionaire. Tesla's summer delivered record cars and negative cash - a reminder that in the space between a vision and a valuation, the market still demands receipts.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
