Space goes public: How $89 billion in IPOs is powering the new space economy

The number shows how much the space industry has changed. Space companies were once largely dependent on governments and venture capital firms for funding. Today, they are increasingly turning to stock markets to raise the huge amounts of money needed to build rockets, satellites, communications networks and other space infrastructure.

The biggest example is SpaceX. Its public listing raised more than $86 billion, which made it the largest IPO in history, according to Goldman Sachs. The size of the deal is important not only for SpaceX but for the wider space industry. With a financially strong launch provider in place, smaller space companies can have greater confidence that they will have reliable access to rockets and connectivity.

Other companies have also raised significant amounts of money from investors. Firefly’s IPO raised about $999 million after the success of its Blue Ghost lunar mission. York Space Systems raised around $629 million, helped by its position as a major supplier to the national-security space sector. HawkEye 360 raised about $478 million to expand its satellite-based signals intelligence business.

Companies such as Karman Holdings and Voyager Technologies have also added to the growing list of space businesses turning to public markets. Goldman Sachs sees this as a sign that investors are beginning to treat space as a long-term industry rather than a risky side bet.

Why space companies need public money

Building space infrastructure is extremely expensive. Companies need money not only to develop rockets and satellites, but also to build factories, communications systems and infrastructure that could eventually support activity on the Moon and beyond.

Venture capital can help companies in their early stages, but it may not be enough to finance the next phase of growth. Once a company needs billions of dollars to expand its operations, the public markets offer access to a much larger pool of investors.

Goldman Sachs believes this is creating a new advantage for companies that can attract public-market investors. Companies that can prove they have strong technology, reliable operations and a clear path to making money may find it easier to raise the capital they need.

Money itself is becoming an important part of the space race. Companies that can raise large amounts of capital can build faster, launch more often and expand their businesses more quickly.

How space funding has changed

The way space projects are funded has changed dramatically over the past few decades. During the Apollo programme, the US government carried most of the financial and technical risk. Goldman Sachs estimates that the Apollo programme cost $26 billion at the time, which would be about $318 billion in today’s money.

The government’s spending also helped other industries. For example, government demand for integrated circuits in the early 1960s accounted for nearly the entire chip market. As production increased, the cost of a microchip fell from $32 in 1961 to $1.25 by 1971.

But the government-led space model gradually changed after the Cold War. NASA’s budget fell from a peak of 4.5% of US federal spending to less than 0.5% today.

NASA also began relying more heavily on fixed-price contracts in the early 2000s. Under these contracts, private companies had to take on more of the risk if projects went over budget or fell behind schedule.

Goldman Sachs says this helped create a culture of “fail-fix” innovation. Instead of governments paying for every mistake, private companies had a stronger reason to find cheaper and faster ways to solve problems. This change helped to create the commercial space industry that exists today.

Getting to space is much cheaper

One of the biggest changes in the space industry has been the falling cost of launching things into orbit. Goldman Sachs estimates that the cost of sending one kilogram into low Earth orbit has fallen about 25 times since 1981. During the Space Shuttle era, the cost was about $65,400 per kilogram. Today, the report puts the cost at roughly $1,500 per kilogram on SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy.

Reusable rockets are a major reason for this decline. Instead of building a completely new rocket for every launch, companies can reuse parts of their launch vehicles. The lower cost of launches has made it possible for smaller companies to send satellites into space. This has helped create what Goldman Sachs calls the “SmallSat revolution”.

In the past, companies often depended on large satellites that could cost $100 million to $200 million each. These satellites were built for specific purposes and were expected to operate for many years.

Today, companies can build and launch much smaller satellites in large numbers. Instead of relying on one expensive satellite, they can create a constellation of hundreds or thousands of smaller satellites. This has opened space to many more businesses.

Satellites are becoming part of everyday life

One of the biggest commercial opportunities in space is connectivity.Low Earth orbit satellites are increasingly being used to provide internet and communications services. Goldman Sachs points to Starlink as the clearest example.

According to the report, Starlink generated $11 billion in revenue in 2025 and had more than 10 million customers, supported by nearly 10,000 satellites.

Instead of relying entirely on cables, mobile towers or traditional communications infrastructure on Earth, satellites can provide connectivity from above.

Amazon is also building a competing network, Amazon Leo. Its acquisition of Globalstar gives Amazon access to spectrum that can be used for direct-to-cell services.

The two approaches are slightly different. Starlink generally requires customers to use a special terminal to connect to its satellites. These terminals cost between $200 and $600.

Direct-to-cell services work differently. They can connect satellites directly to existing mobile phones through mobile networks. This means customers may not need to buy additional hardware.

Goldman Sachs states this could eventually lead to what it calls “ambient connectivity”. In this world, connectivity would become something people and businesses simply have access to, rather than something that depends on where they are. This could be particularly useful for industries such as shipping, aviation and remote infrastructure.

The next step could be manufacturing in space

The space industry may eventually move beyond simply launching satellites and providing connectivity. One area Goldman Sachs focuses on is in-space servicing, assembly and manufacturing, or ISAM.

The idea is that some large structures could be built directly in space instead of being launched from Earth in one piece. Satellites could also potentially be repaired, refuelled or upgraded while they are already in orbit. This could make it possible to build structures that are too large to fit inside a rocket.

Microgravity could also create opportunities for manufacturing products that are difficult or expensive to make on Earth. Biomanufacturing is one area that could benefit from these conditions.

Another possibility is putting computing infrastructure in space. The idea of orbital data centres is still highly speculative, but Goldman Sachs sees it as a potential long-term opportunity. Data centres on Earth require huge amounts of electricity and land. Some areas are already struggling to provide enough power and suitable locations for new facilities.

Putting computing systems in orbit could eventually offer another option. There are major challenges, however. Computers generate heat, and getting rid of that heat in space is difficult. Processors also need protection from radiation, while repairing equipment in orbit remains extremely complicated.

Space is also becoming a security issue

The commercial space industry cannot be separated from national security anymore. Goldman Sachs uses the term “astropolitics” to describe the growing connection between space, economics and military power.

The US Department of Defense is expected to spend $57.7 billion on space in fiscal 2026, with a proposed $71 billion for fiscal 2027. The report also indicates the $175 billion Golden Dome missile-defence initiative.

The US remains the dominant player in space. American entities accounted for about 82% of all objects launched into orbit last year, according to the report. China, however, is rapidly expanding its space capabilities. Its space spending increased from $340 million in 2015 to $2.9 billion in 2024.

The US and China are also taking different approaches. The US increasingly relies on private companies for important space capabilities. Starlink’s role in maintaining communications in Ukraine is one example of how a commercial satellite network can become strategically important during a conflict.

China’s commercial space industry, meanwhile, is more closely connected to the country’s broader government and military strategy. This creates a problem for countries that do not have their own space capabilities. If they depend on another country for satellite communications, launch services or other space infrastructure, that dependence could eventually become a political and economic vulnerability. Goldman Sachs calls this risk “sovereign dependency”.

Space is growing faster than the rules

The rapid expansion of the space industry is also creating a regulatory problem. More satellites mean more possibilities for useful services, but they also mean more objects moving around in orbit. Goldman Sachs expects the number of satellite deployments to reach 20,000 by 2030.

The risk of collisions therefore becomes increasingly important. The problem is that many of the rules governing space were created decades ago, during the Cold War. They were not designed for today’s commercial space industry, where thousands of private satellites can be launched and companies are considering activities such as lunar mining and manufacturing in space.

The International Telecommunication Union still allocates orbital slots largely on a first-come, first-served basis. As more companies and countries compete for space, that system could become increasingly difficult to manage.

The US-led Artemis Accords are one attempt to create common rules for future space activity. The agreements now have 61 signatories and aim to establish standards around issues such as transparency and cooperation. But Russia and China are not part of the accords. That leaves the world with competing approaches to how space should be managed.

The space economy is entering a new phase

Goldman Sachs’claim is that space is no longer simply about rockets and astronauts. The industry is becoming part of the economy. Satellites provide internet and communications. Space companies support defence and national security. Lower launch costs are allowing smaller businesses to enter the market. In the future, manufacturing and computing could also move into orbit.

The $89 billion raised through IPOs since the beginning of 2025 is therefore more than just a large fundraising figure. It shows that investors are willing to put substantial amounts of public-market money behind the next phase of the space industry.

The challenge is that the industry is growing faster than the systems designed to govern it. Companies are developing new technologies, governments are increasing spending and investors are providing billions of dollars, while regulations are still catching up. The result is a space economy that is becoming larger, cheaper and more commercially important, but also more strategically sensitive.

The next space race may therefore not be about simply reaching the Moon or Mars. It could be about who controls the infrastructure, capital and technology that make space an increasingly important part of life on Earth.