• SpaceX (SPCX) (ticker SPCX) shares extended losses, falling about 8.8% to around $168.50, continuing a sharp pullback after early post-IPO strength.
  • The decline is driven by upcoming lockup expirations and limited free float, amplifying selling pressure.
  • The broader rotation out of high-valuation tech and space equities has added to the headwinds, with no company-specific fundamental deterioration reported.

Volatility Persists as Lockup Looms

SpaceX shares tumbled again on Thursday, dropping 8.8% to $168.50, extending a losing streak that has erased much of the gains since the stock began trading publicly. The latest move comes as investors brace for the expiration of lockup agreements that could flood the market with additional shares, according to people familiar with the matter.

The stock, which debuted with much fanfare at around $200, has been volatile as traders navigate a thin float. “The limited supply of shares has amplified swings, and the upcoming unlock is a key risk,” one analyst said. SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment.

The pullback mirrors similar patterns seen in other high-profile IPOs, where early euphoria gives way to profit-taking and liquidity concerns. The broader sell-off in space and tech stocks has compounded the pressure, with the ARK Space Exploration ETF falling 3% on the same day.

Market Mechanics in Focus

Without a deal to extend lockups, the company could see a significant increase in tradable shares, potentially weighing on the price further. The situation has drawn comparisons to past debuts where lockup expirations triggered double-digit declines.

Despite the near-term turbulence, SpaceX remains a dominant player in aerospace and satellite services, with a strong backlog of launch contracts and ambitious Starship development. “Long-term fundamentals are intact, but the stock is pricing in a lot of optimism,” a portfolio manager noted. “The next few weeks will be telling.”

Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated the stock’s IPO price. It was $200, not $210.