Rocket Lab (RKLB)

Business Overview

Rocket Lab spans the two monetisation layers that matter in space hardware: launch and in-orbit space systems. FY2025 revenue was $601.8M, up 38% from $436.2M in FY2024. The company is not GAAP profitable: net loss was $(198.2)M and adjusted EBITDA loss was $(101.2)M. Market capitalisation was roughly $61.0B as of 10 June 2026 (575.8M shares × $105.80).

The pivot from launch provider to prime contractor shows up in backlog before it shows up in revenue. Backlog at 31 December 2025 grew faster than sales did over the year, and the balance tipped firmly toward space systems (the split is in the snapshot above). Filings do not break backlog down by customer type, so the government share of revenue is the best available proxy for how much of that forward work sits with government customers.

The anchor government programme is the $816M Space Development Agency (SDA) Tracking Layer Tranche 3 prime contract, covering 18 satellites and cited in the FY2025 release. It is large next to current revenue, and like any single contract it can be repriced or lost at recompete. The government backlog guide uses it alongside Iridium's Enhanced Mobile Satellite Services (EMSS) contract and Viasat's defence backlog as worked examples of that same concentration risk.

How the Numbers Read

Liquidity at year-end was $828.7M in cash plus $270.1M in marketable securities ($187.9M current, $82.2M non-current). FY2025 operating cash flow (OCF) was negative: the burn funds day-to-day operations while space-systems work scales up. Dividing that burn into liquidity gives the OCF runway figure in the snapshot above, which sits in the extended band (over 36 months) used in the cash runway guide, well past the point where pre-profit space names typically need to raise capital. Constellation and manufacturing capex sits on top of that burn as a separate, additive draw, in the active fleet-refresh band (15-30% of revenue) used in that same guide.

Runway buys time to reach breakeven. An equity raise stays possible if space-systems build-out accelerates faster than cash flow improves. Company guidance for Q2 2026 points to a further adjusted EBITDA loss of $(20)-$(26)M (forward-looking and unaudited).

An EV/sales read on Rocket Lab divides enterprise value (market cap plus net convertible debt, less ~$1.10B of liquidity) by filed FY2025 revenue of $601.8M. The EV/sales guide sets out the method. That is a revenue multiple by construction: there are no GAAP earnings yet for an earnings multiple to use, so the screen reads revenue growth, backlog and runway instead.

Valuation Framework

Pre-profit launch and systems names screen on EV/sales, backlog momentum and OCF runway. Cross-check the multiple against backlog growth and the launch-versus-space-systems split taught in the business models guide: as systems revenue scales, the relevant metrics shift from launch cadence toward programme margin and contract duration.

Rocket Lab's government revenue share sits below the >30% threshold this site uses to flag concentrated single-programme exposure, the same screen applied to Iridium's EMSS contract. The threshold still matters because the SDA prime is large next to current revenue, so its execution and recompete weigh more than they would at a company with several similar contracts.

What to Watch in the Financials

Backlog mix. The split between space systems and launch orders is the cleanest read on whether the prime-contract pivot is real. A rising systems share confirms it; a stall in systems orders while launch keeps growing points back to the older, more cyclical business.

Cash burn against liquidity. Track quarterly burn against the runway in the snapshot above. Capex sits on top of that burn, on a separate line.

Path to positive adjusted EBITDA. Losses continued through FY2025, and Q2 2026 guidance is still negative. A move toward breakeven would say more about the business than a single quarter's revenue beat.

How the SDA contract performs. It is Rocket Lab's largest disclosed government commitment, and it is fixed price. Milestone timing and margin on that work decide whether the backlog behind it converts into cash on attractive terms.

Key Risks

Three legs of execution risk in one year. Launch, components and prime systems each carry their own delivery risk, so a slip in one is not offset by strength in the other two.

Fixed-price prime contracts. Space-systems prime work carries cost-overrun risk that fee-for-service launch does not. The SDA contract is large enough, relative to revenue today, that an execution error there would matter more than a routine launch problem would.

Extended runway is not the same as self-funding. The operating cash flow runway in the snapshot covers ordinary operating needs, but constellation-scale capex can still force a trip to capital markets if build intensity steps up.