Voyager Technologies, Inc./DE (VOYG): what the price assumes

In the published model solve dated 2026-Q2, anchored at $34.78, Voyager Technologies, Inc./DE (VOYG) is priced for today's economics sustained for ~40.0 years+. boothcheck publishes no house fair value, target price, or buy/sell rating; individual model outputs and user-controlled scenarios are analytical inputs, not Boothcheck targets. Narrative composed 2026-06-28.

Generated: 2026-08-10 · Exported: 2026-08-12 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/VOYG

Headline

FieldValue
TickerVOYG
CompanyVoyager Technologies, Inc./DE
Current price$34.78/sh
CompositionU.S. Government 86% / International Government 1% / Commercial 13%

What The Price Assumes (Inversion)

The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.

FieldValue
Inversion basisrevenue-multiple
EV / sales paid12.5x
Steady-state operating margin assumed7.2%

Beyond 25%/yr sustained for 40 years; not resolvable as a revenue bet. The inversion reports a bound, not a solved point.

The company earns no operating profit yet; the inversion runs on the revenue multiple and an assumed steady-state margin.

Solve inputs: computed at a 16.9% cost of capital; growth searched up to the 25% self-funding ceiling.

Reconcile: at the x-ray's 9.3% required return this reads ~19.1 years; the models below use their own rates.

How unusual the bet is: n/a

ReferenceValue
sustained it ~5 years at this level30%
implied end-window share0%

Valuation X-Ray

Every valuation family lands below the price. The price therefore sits beyond what those standard frames encode.

How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.

FamilyMedian price/FVModelsReads
Asset6.00x2expensive
Earnings—0—
Relative—0—
Growth1.28x1expensive

Families that call it expensive: Asset

The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 7.5%); the inversion above states its own rate.

Per-Model Detail (n=3)

ModelFamilyFVPrice/FVApplicableMethodology
DCF Perpetual GrowthGrowth$0.00—noNegative/zero FCF — equity value floored at $0
DCF Exit MultipleGrowth$0.00—noNegative/zero FCF or EBITDA — equity value floored at $0
Relative ValuationRelative——noP/S fallback (negative EPS): Sector P/S 2.0x × TTM revenue — excluded from consensus
Simple DDMGrowth——no—
Two-Stage DDMGrowth——no—
Simple Excess ReturnAsset$6.125.68xyesBook value floor: BV/sh $6.12, ROE negative
Two-Stage Excess ReturnAsset$5.516.31xyesBook value with convergence: BV/sh $6.12, ROE converges to ke
Discounted Future Market CapGrowth$27.241.28xyesRev $0.2B, growth 9% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 9.9x / 12.0x / 14.1x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 12x)
Peter Lynch Fair ValueRelative$0.00—noNegative/zero EPS — earnings-based value floored at $0
Margin TrajectoryGrowth——noMargin ramp: -50% → 12% over 7yr, rev growth 9% (input: historical growth; tapered)
Earnings Power ValueEarnings——no—
Residual IncomeAsset——no—
Graham NumberAsset——no—
EV/EBITDA RelativeRelative——no—
FCF YieldEarnings——no—
SBC-Adj FCF YieldEarnings——no—
Ben Graham FormulaEarnings——no—
ROIC-Justified P/BAsset——no—
P/Sales SectorRelative——noRevenue $0.16B × sector P/S 2.0x
PEG Fair ValueRelative——no—
Earnings YieldEarnings——no—
Funds From Operations MultipleRelative——no—
Clinical Phase NPVGrowth——no—
MertonAsset——no—
V5 Mechanical———no—

Economic-Unit Decomposition (Sum Of The Parts)

One or more material disclosed units has unresolved economics. Unknown/general is not evidence of homogeneity: segment SOTP is primary but incomplete, consolidated cash flow may remain only a secondary cross-check when every unit shares an enterprise basis, and one sector multiple or target margin is withheld.

UnitRoleValuation basisRevenueReported profitValue evidenceStatus
Defense and National Securityoperatingenterprise0.1B reported-currency—withheldunresolved no unit value
Space Solutionsoperatingenterprise0.0B reported-currency—withheldunresolved no unit value
Starlab Space Stationsoperatingenterprise0.0B reported-currency—withheldunresolved no unit value

No total common-equity value is stated. One or more material units lack a supported unit value. The displayed values are an indicative subtotal; consolidated debt and cash cannot be applied to a fraction of the company.

Solvency

FieldValue
Net debt$18.9m
Interest coverage-20.4x
Burning cashyes

Operating profit is negative or near zero and the company has no demonstrated through-cycle (mid-cycle) operating margin to normalize against, so years-to-repay cannot be computed honestly.

Bullet Takeaways

Bull Case

Valuing a company like Voyager requires the right sector lens, because a pre-profit space and defense name cannot be judged on earnings it does not yet have. The relevant questions are backlog, government relationships and the credibility of the moon-shot project, and on the first two Voyager is delivering. First-quarter bookings of $45 million drove backlog to a record $275 million, up 54% year over year, for a book-to-bill ratio of 1.3, meaning the company is signing work faster than it is recognizing revenue. That growth came from exactly the places a defense-tech investor wants to see: multiple awards tied to the Golden Dome missile-defense architecture, work on a next-generation interceptor, a contract with Raytheon for its standard missile interceptor program, and a newly announced relationship with Anduril on space-based interceptors. Those are blue-chip partners and high-priority national-security programs.

The government concentration that looks like risk is also the moat. With about 86% of revenue from the US government, Voyager is embedded in programs that carry multi-year funding, high switching costs, and barriers, security clearances, qualified facilities, flight heritage, that keep competitors out. Management raised 2026 revenue guidance to $230 million to $255 million, citing stronger conversion of pipeline into backlog and confidence that revenue accelerates through the year, with about two-thirds of the annual guide weighted to the second half. A company guiding to acceleration off a record backlog is one whose order book is ahead of its revenue line.

The optionality is Starlab, and it is the reason the stock carries a space-premium multiple. Starlab is Voyager's majority-owned venture to build the commercial successor to the International Space Station, it has already won a $217.5 million NASA Phase 1 development contract, and the next milestone, NASA's Phase 2 commercial low-Earth-orbit award expected in the summer of 2026, would validate the project and the partner ecosystem behind it. The analyst community is constructive, with a buy consensus and an average target around $45, and recent increases from Jefferies to $60 and Wolfe to $55. The bull case is a defense-tech franchise with accelerating, government-backed bookings and a free option on owning a piece of the post-ISS economy.

Bear Case

The first crack in the story is that the near-term numbers went the wrong way, which undercuts the moat-erosion defense. Q1 2026 revenue actually fell about 23% year over year to $35.2 million and missed consensus, while the operating loss widened 85% to $44.6 million. A company priced for hypergrowth posting a revenue decline, even one management frames as timing, is a reminder that government revenue is lumpy and that program timing, contract delays, and procurement cycles can stall the top line regardless of how strong the backlog looks. A record backlog only matters if it converts on schedule, and the heavy second-half weighting in guidance means most of the year's revenue has yet to be proven.

The deeper problem is cash and dilution, the structural vulnerability of any pre-profit company building something enormous. Voyager is burning cash, with operating losses running in the tens of millions a quarter and capital spending of $51.1 million in the quarter alone, much of it on Starlab. The company itself estimates total Starlab development cost as high as $2.8 billion to $3.3 billion, an amount vastly larger than its current cash balance, which means the project, if it proceeds, will require waves of additional funding through equity raises, convertible notes, partners or government awards. Each of those dilutes shareholders or adds leverage. The lock-up structure from the IPO and convertible-note dynamics add further potential supply of shares. A holder today is funding a multi-year, multi-billion-dollar build with no guarantee of the capital path.

Finally, the valuation leaves no room for the bet to go wrong. The stock trades at roughly 11 to 15 times sales against a 5-to-7-times sector norm, and no valuation family in the X-ray reaches the price; the implied path requires revenue growth beyond 25% a year for decades and an eventual operating margin around 7%, neither of which the company has demonstrated. Starlab does not generate revenue today and is not expected to in the near term, and its fate hinges on NASA's Phase 2 award, a binary event later this summer. If that award goes elsewhere, or comes smaller than hoped, the central justification for the premium evaporates and the cash-burn problem accelerates. This is a name where the downside is not a modest de-rating but a fundamental repricing of the whole thesis.

Valuation

Voyager is not yet earning a normal operating profit, so the price has to be set against sales, and even then it is a bound rather than a solved point. At $37.56 (June 28, 2026) the stock trades at roughly 11 to 15 times revenue, depending on the basis, and the inversion shows the price implies an eventual operating margin around 7% together with a path of revenue growth beyond 25% a year sustained for something like four decades, a combination the model flags as not resolvable as a clean revenue bet and assigns low reliability.

The X-ray confirms the speculative character. With the company unprofitable, the earnings family is empty, the asset-based and relative-multiple families land many times below the price, and even the forward-growth family does not reach it. The two operating-income bases diverge by more than 100%, which is itself a sign of how noisy and early the financials are. None of this means the stock is mispriced downward; it means the price is a venture-style wager on a future that the present financials cannot underwrite.

The honest synthesis is that this is a binary, optionality-driven valuation, not a value calculation. The premium to the 5-to-7-times sales sector norm is the market paying for two things: an accelerating, government-backed defense-tech book of business, and a free option on Starlab becoming the commercial successor to the ISS. The defense revenue gives the company a floor of real, contracted work, but the bulk of the upside, and the justification for the multiple, rests on Starlab clearing NASA's Phase 2 award and on the company funding a multi-billion-dollar build without crippling dilution. The analyst targets in the forties to sixties reflect that optionality; so does the wide low-to-high range. The conclusion is that the price is a high-variance bet whose payoff depends on milestones, not on any value visible in today's statements.

Catalysts

The single most important catalyst is NASA's Phase 2 commercial low-Earth-orbit award for Starlab, expected in the summer of 2026. Voyager has a $217.5 million Phase 1 contract, but Phase 2 is the decision that validates the commercial-space-station thesis and shapes the funding path for a project the company estimates could cost $2.8 billion to $3.3 billion. The outcome is close to binary for the stock's premium valuation.

The defense book is the near-term operating catalyst. Q1 2026 bookings of $45 million pushed backlog to a record $275 million, up 54%, with a 1.3 book-to-bill, driven by Golden Dome missile-defense awards, next-generation interceptor work, a Raytheon standard-missile contract, and a new Anduril relationship on space-based interceptors. Management raised 2026 revenue guidance to $230 million to $255 million with about two-thirds weighted to the second half, so the key checkpoint is whether the backlog converts and revenue re-accelerates after the Q1 decline.

Cash and dilution are the recurring swing factors. Voyager is burning cash, with a wide operating loss and $51.1 million of capital spending in the quarter, much of it on Starlab, so any equity raise, convertible issuance, or new partner funding is a catalyst that moves the share count. Watch the cash balance, the funding milestones, and the IPO lock-up expirations, all of which affect supply and the runway. The analyst consensus is a buy with an average target around $45 and a wide range, reflecting how much hinges on the Starlab decision.

Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)

Defense and National Security (reported)

Space Solutions (reported)

Starlab Space Stations (reported)

Methodology Note

Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.

View the full interactive VOYG report on boothcheck