News
SpaceX Starlink, Starship programs crush funding goals, raise $2 billion
On the heels of a successful ~$350 million fundraising round, SpaceX has crushed its own expectations of a second, far more ambitious fundraiser, likely ensuring stable Starship and Starlink development for years to come.
First reported by Bloomberg on July 23rd, SpaceX’s second investment round of 2020 initially pursued $1 billion in funding, boosting the company’s valuation to $44 billion. Less than four weeks later, an August 18th SEC filing revealed that SpaceX had more than doubled its offering after it received overwhelming interest from prospective investors.
According to the regulatory document, SpaceX has now secured an incredibly $1.9 billion of a $2.06 billion of new funding for its Starlink and Starship programs, likely guaranteeing the health of both expensive development programs for 12-18+ months. Alternatively, the company could feasibly speed up either or both programs by a substantial amount with such a massive capital injection, shrinking the time required for Starship to reach orbit and begin operational launches and for Starlink to begin serving customers and generating revenue.
Prior to August 2020, SpaceX had raised a total of ~$3.4 billion over ~12 years of major funding rounds. In 2015, Google and Fidelity invested $1 billion in SpaceX – a round that remained the company’s biggest until now. Once again primarily driven by Fidelity, if SpaceX successfully closes the $2 billion series it kicked off last month, the company’s funding to date will jump nearly 60% in a single round.
Very few companies in history can claim to have closed an oversubscribed $2 billion funding round, making it easy to say that SpaceX is currently one of the hottest private investment opportunities in the world. There are several likely reasons that help explain why.
The track record of companies run by Elon Musk likely plays a huge role in investor confidence. Against all odds and in the face of hordes of detractors and naysayers, Tesla has shaped itself into the world’s premier electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer and managed to do so while still becoming a profitable (or at least sustainable) company. As a result, the value of $TSLA has exploded in 2019 and 2020, turning it into one of the most lucrative investments in years.
SpaceX has proven itself to be just as disruptive – if not more so – in the aerospace industry, designing, building, and fielding industry-leading rockets and spacecraft that are years ahead of “competition” and doing so with cost efficiency that competitors and national space agencies did not believe was possible. As a result, SpaceX now owns a vast majority of the global commercial launch market, is the only entity on Earth operating orbital-class reusable rockets, and is the only company capable of both building and launching its own satellite constellations.
From an investment perspective, the commercial launch market likely makes most eyes glaze over. Starlink, however, has the potential to tap into a large portion of a global communications market worth hundreds of billions to more than a trillion dollars. Building a satellite constellation large and capable enough to do so is an extraordinarily expensive ordeal no matter how efficient SpaceX is, but once it’s even partially complete, it could almost effortlessly magnify the company’s annual revenue by 5-10x.
Once Starlink is able to serve millions of customers, it could easily become self-sustaining. With tens of millions of customers, it could become a veritable cash cow, generating >$6 billion in annual revenue on annual upkeep and operating costs of $1-2 billion at most (conservatively estimating 24 Starlink launches per year for $50 million each).
This doesn’t even account for Starship, which could effectively create whole new markets for space access if SpaceX is able to achieve its ambitious design goals. For Starlink, though, Starship would be equally game-changing by making constellation deployment at least ~7 times more cost-effective than Falcon 9 (~400 vs. ~60 satellites per launch).
Regardless, with at least $1.9 billion soon to be in the bank, it should be clear that any doubt that SpaceX has the resources it needs to sustain its Starlink and Starship development programs for one or several more years is woefully misplaced.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
