Intuitive Machines, Inc. LUNR
Weak (early) Space sector · Lunar landers and NASA services — moonshot economics, literally.
🗓 Reports earnings in 37 days (2026-11-12) — calendar context, not a prediction.
Intuitive Machines, Inc. (LUNR) is an early-stage Space company, graded Weak (early) on FrontierLab's evidence-based quality rubric (data as of 2026-10-05). Revenue grew 116.5% year-over-year at a 27.3% gross margin. Gross-profits-to-assets is 0.07; Rule of 40 is 89. Net share issuance 51.4% YoY (heavy issuance). 6 risk flags are noted below. Analyst mix: 15 buy / 1 hold / 1 sell. Track record: 27% of Early-stage-graded names beat the S&P over 63 sessions (95% CI 15–44%, N=33). Median excess vs the S&P was -14.6%.
These sentences are generated from the day's data by deterministic templates.
Key quality signals
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 116.5% |
|---|---|
| Gross margin | 27.3% |
| Gross profits / assets | 0.07 |
| Rule of 40 | 89 |
| Net margin | -27.5% |
| Cash runway (months) | 34.2 |
| PEG | — |
| Price / sales | 4.8 |
Quality checklist
Each line is one quality test behind the grade — ✓ passed · ~ borderline · ✗ failed. Hover a metric in the tables below for what it means.
- ✓ Revenue growth — 116.5% (pass ≥ 20%)
- ✓ Capital efficiency
- ~ Gross margin — 27.3% (pass ≥ 45% · Space)
- ✓ Gross-margin trend — 8.4 (pass ≥ 2)
- ~ Share dilution — 51.4%
- ✗ Competitive moat — None
- ~ Market size (TAM) — Mod
- ✗ Solvency (can it pay its debts?) — warning signs of financial trouble are present, which caps the grade at Weak at best
Grade history
- 2026-08-17 — Weak (early) (from Promising (early))
- 2026-06-10 — Promising (early) (first graded)
Every grade change since FrontierLab began tracking this name — the receipts behind the current grade.
How have Early-stage-graded names performed?
The forward returns of all Early-stage-graded names since each grade was recorded — the bucket this name currently sits in, not a forecast of this individual stock.
| Window | Forward record vs the S&P | Median |
|---|---|---|
| ~1 month | 45% of Early-stage-graded names beat the S&P over 21 sessions (95% CI 29–62%, N=31). | Median excess vs the S&P was -3.2%. |
| ~3 months | 27% of Early-stage-graded names beat the S&P over 63 sessions (95% CI 15–44%, N=33). | Median excess vs the S&P was -14.6%. |
| ~6 months | building — 46 more sessions needed | |
How have this name's flags scored?
| Flag | N | Mean excess vs S&P |
|---|---|---|
| Burning cash — operating margin is negative. | 36 | -6.5% |
| Thin gross margin — keeps little of each sales dollar (judge it against its industry). | 21 | -18.4% |
| Heavy dilution (~51%/yr) — top-decile share issuers have historically underperformed. | sample still too small to report (need ≥ 8) | |
| Distress signs — negative retained earnings, negative operating cash flow, and liabilities above assets. | sample still too small to report (need ≥ 8) | |
| Hyper-expansion — assets up ~297% in a year; aggressive expanders have historically lagged. | sample still too small to report (need ≥ 8) | |
| Parabolic one-day spike (+13%) in the last month — extreme single-day moves tend to mean-revert. | sample still too small to report (need ≥ 8) | |
These per-flag figures are observational — a flag firing is not a randomized assignment, so any edge can reflect what kind of names trip a flag, not the flag itself. Descriptive, not causal.
Scope: these are forward returns vs the S&P among names still covered at each horizon's end, within the curated universe — not a survivorship-clean whole-market backtest. Names later dropped from coverage are counted as attrition (not hidden), and single-session moves beyond ±300% are treated as split/data artifacts and excluded. How this is measured → · Full track record →
How it compares
Coarse same-sector, same-stage context — not a percentile or rank. GP/A is graded on its absolute level, not position.
Fundamentals
| Market cap | $2.34B |
|---|---|
| Stage | Early |
| Share issuance (YoY) | 51.4% · heavy issuance |
| Moat | None |
| TAM | MOD |
| P/E (trailing) | — |
| EPS (trailing) | $-0.94 |
| Burn multiple | 0.3 |
| Gross-margin trend (pts) | 8.4 |
| Cash / assets | 0.19 |
| Accruals (%) | -0.2% |
| Net debt / EBITDA | — |
| Statements as of | Q2 FY2026 · filed 2026-08-13 |
Momentum context — describes the past, not a signal
Low reached Nov 20, 2025 · high reached May 28, 2026 — by daily close.
| Price | $14.71 (as of 2026-10-02) |
|---|---|
| Last session move | — |
| % off 52-wk high | -68.5% |
| RSI (14) | 47 |
| Relative volume | 1.1× |
Risk flags
Positive signals
Insider activity (90 days)
| Cluster buyers | 0 |
|---|---|
| Sellers | 4 |
Insider selling is routine diversification, not a bearish signal.
Analyst mix
| Strong buy | 4 |
|---|---|
| Buy | 11 |
| Hold | 1 |
| Sell | 1 |
| Strong sell | 0 |
Ratings are context, not a price target. "Momentum" = how the mix changed over recent weeks, not a forecast.
From the headlines
Intuitive Machines mentioned in space stock comparisons; limited specific company news.
AI take — daily, AI-generated
AI leans cautious
High growth (116.5%) is offset by weak profitability (GP/A 0.07), short runway (34 months), and lack of specific news—this looks like a speculative play on space sentiment rather than a company with durable competitive advantage.
Generated by an AI model from the day's news — an opinion for context only. Not financial advice, not a recommendation, and not a price target.
Similar Space names
← All Space names · Open LUNR in the interactive screener →
Data as of 2026-10-05 08:19 (end-of-day). How grades are computed →