SpaceX and Amazon converge in infrastructure while financial gap stays wide

SpaceX and Amazon are starting to resemble each other as infrastructure companies, even as their financial results remain far apart. A Fortune analysis by Amanda Gerut says the comparison is testing how investors price growth stories tied to AI, cloud computing and satellite connectivity.

Amazon, founded by Jeff Bezos, and SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk, have a combined market value of about $4.5 trillion, according to Fortune. Gerut’s analysis focuses on why investors appear prepared to give SpaceX valuation multiples similar to Amazon’s while SpaceX produces only a small fraction of Amazon’s revenue and is still posting operating losses.

The companies now overlap in several core areas, Fortune reported. Both operate satellite internet networks, both are spending heavily on large-scale data centers and AI infrastructure, and both are trying to control the systems that carry digital traffic, whether those systems are in space or on the ground.

Gerut described the companies as increasingly similar infrastructure conglomerates, with one major distinction: their current earnings power. Fortune reported that Amazon generated $716.9 billion in revenue in 2025 and $80 billion in operating income, while SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in revenue and recorded a $2.6 billion operating loss.

That gap is central to the valuation debate. Fortune said investors are weighing SpaceX’s future opportunities in satellite connectivity, AI infrastructure and other platform businesses against the company’s current financial performance.

Investors price the promise of infrastructure

According to Fortune, the case for comparing the two companies rests on the idea that infrastructure ownership can create long-lasting advantages. Amazon built a large business around e-commerce and cloud computing, while SpaceX has expanded from rockets into satellite internet and other networked services.

Both companies are betting that owning critical infrastructure can give them pricing power across multiple lines of business, Gerut reported. For Amazon, that includes cloud computing capacity and data centers. For SpaceX, it includes launch capability and orbital communications assets.

The comparison also points to a broader question for corporate finance teams, Fortune said: how much value markets should place on future optionality before earnings arrive. Gerut’s analysis framed the issue around capital discipline, risk pricing, cost of capital and boardroom pressure from executives asking why their companies do not receive similar valuation treatment.

Fortune said the SpaceX-Amazon comparison reflects the premium investors are currently placing on businesses tied to AI and infrastructure. The risk is that market enthusiasm may outrun present-day results; the opportunity is that a platform with durable infrastructure could grow into today’s expectations.

Gerut’s analysis leaves open whether SpaceX will follow an Amazon-like path or become an example of excessive growth expectations. For now, Fortune reported, the two companies show how founder-led businesses pursuing trillion-dollar markets can attract valuations based as much on future possibilities as on current earnings.

This story draws on original reporting from Fortune.