NuScale Power

NuScale Power designs small modular reactors (SMRs) — specifically the NuScale Power Module (NRC-licensed 77 MWe light-water SMR) and the VOYGR plant platform. They are the only company with an NRC-approved SMR design in the US. Revenue model is primarily design licensing/services today; they do not yet build or operate reactors.

NuScale is now better described as a developer/licensor of the VOYGR small modular reactor platform than as a fuel-cycle name. It sells reactor design, engineering, commercialization, and project support, with revenue still small but no longer zero.

NuScale Power designs and licenses the VOYGR small modular reactor platform centered on the 77 MWe NuScale Power Module (NPM). It is not yet a utility operator; current revenue comes from engineering, licensing, and project-support work, with commercial module sales still contingent on binding customer contracts.

NuScale Power designs and licenses the VOYGR small modular reactor platform built on the 77 MWe NuScale Power Module (NPM), a light-water pressurized-water reactor. It holds the only Standard Design Approval (SDA) in the U.S. SMR industry. Revenue is design-licensing + engineering/FEED services — not power sales.

• monetization model: Engineering services + licensing fees today; future NPM/VOYGR hardware, fuel, and long-term services. (NuScale FY2024 10-K, Business/Revenue; SEC EDGAR CIK 0001822966, sec.gov ; Accession No. UNKNOWN)
• revenue mix: Single reportable segment; FY2024 revenue ~$37.0M: engineering services ~93%, licensing ~7%. (10-K Note 2/Revenue; same EDGAR URL; Accession No. UNKNOWN)
• who pays: Utilities, governments, industrial customers; ENTRA1/partners pay near-term engineering service fees. (10-K Business; 10-Q; same EDGAR URL; Accession No. UNKNOWN)
• margin_value_capture: Negative gross margin currently (cost of revenue exceeds revenue); value expected from future module sales, licensing, and services. (10-K MD&A/Financial Statements; same EDGAR URL; Accession No. UNKNOWN)

• customer classes: US Nuclear Utilities, Utility - Grid Operators, Government - Program Buyers, Industrial Infrastructure Owners, Data Center Operators

NuScale Power Corporation, a U.S. small modular reactor (“SMR”) technology developer

NuScale is a pre-commercial advanced nuclear technology company. Its economic model is not yet based on selling large numbers of finished power plants; rather, NuScale generates revenue from engineering, licensing, development services, and technology transfer as customers advance their own NuScale-based projects.

The company’s long-term economic thesis is that it can monetize a reactor technology platform through:

1. Upfront license and technology access fees for its NuScale Power Module design;
2. Engineering and project development services;
3. NRC licensing support and safety-analysis work;
4. Long-term services including training, commissioning, operating-program support, and potentially fuel-design or fueling services;
5. Manufacturing and supply-chain partnerships that capture value through the plant delivery chain.

NuScale has historically not been a diversified industrial company with multiple reportable product lines. In pre-commercial development, the company appears to have effectively one operating technology/platform segment.

The exact segment disclosure should be as follows, but I could not verify it this session:

No revenue mix percentages should be used in a model without the exact 10-K/10-Q footnote. The company may disclose revenue by customer or contract rather than multiple operating segments.

NuScale’s monetization model is capital- and licensing-intensive. The intended purchasers are not individual ratepayers but utility/industrial counterparties that want a standardized nuclear power plant with lower upfront unit size than a traditional large reactor.

The company’s financial disclosures likely show the following payment/customer structure, but each item requires primary validation:

• Development agreements with prospective plant owners;
• Government cost-share support, notably from the U.S. Department of Energy;
• Engineering services billed to specific project entities;
• Potential milestone payments tied to NRC licensing, site suitability, or procurement.

As a pre-commercial SMR developer, NuScale has carried substantial research, engineering, and regulatory expense relative to revenue. Therefore, the company’s operating economics are likely deeply negative, but the exact margins must come from the income statement.

Do not infer a normalized gross margin from an eventual commercial plant design. The current income statement reflects early-stage development, not steady-state product gross margin.

The following names have appeared in NuScale-related disclosures in my prior knowledge, but they must be confirmed against the 10-K/8-K exhibits, specifically material contracts and customer concentration notes:

• Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (“UAMPS”) — associated with the Carbon Free Power Project, later terminated. Needs primary source validation.
• RoPower Nuclear S.A. — Romanian project entity for a proposed NuScale VOYGR plant at Doicești. Needs primary source validation.
• KGHM Polska Miedź S.A. — previously discussed as a Polish deployment partner/customer. Needs primary source validation.
• Doosan Enerbility — manufacturing/supply-chain partner. Needs primary source validation.
• U.S. Department of Energy — cost-share/award counterparty. Needs primary source validation.

No customer should be treated as a confirmed top customer until it appears in a NuScale 10-K customer-concentration footnote, a filed material contract exhibit, or an 8-K that identifies the agreement as material.

NuScale targets multiple buyer types, but the common thread is that the buyer must be able to absorb nuclear project risk:

• Public power utilities and municipal/cooperative utilities seeking firm zero-carbon capacity;
• International state-owned or government-backed entities seeking nuclear energy security and decarbonization;
• Industrial energy users that need continuous, high-reliability power;
• Data-center and technology-linked energy consumers if future firm clean power procurement becomes an accepted use case;
• Nuclear supply-chain and manufacturing partners that take a role in delivering components and localizing manufacturing.

The economic buyer is not a retail electricity consumer. The likely buyer archetype is a utility executive or government energy planner who must satisfy a regulatory mandate for zero-emission baseload generation, faces public opposition to large nuclear projects, and has financing support from a sovereign or state entity.

The following names appear in NuScale-related disclosures in prior knowledge, but each must be re-verified against the actual 10-K exhibit list and investor materials before being used as a confirmed customer:

NuScale Power Corporation is a small modular reactor technology company. Its core product is the NuScale Power Module, a pressurized water reactor intended for factory fabrication and modular plant construction. The company markets its plants under the VOYGR name and positions them for utilities, industrial users, and data-center power demand.

Source: U.S. NRC — NuScale Power, accessed 2026-05-03.

Document identifier: NRC page; exact NRC accession no./final rule document number needs primary source validation.

NuScale is not yet a profitable power-plant original equipment manufacturer. It is best understood as a development-stage licensing, engineering, and reactor design company with future plant-sale ambitions.

NuScale’s SEC filings generally describe a single early-stage operating model rather than a mature multi-segment revenue mix. I cannot supply a reliable segment percentage without opening the 10-K/10-Q.

Required figure:

Revenue mix by segment (%) — needs primary source validation.

What should be verified from the 10-K:

• Whether revenue is reported as a single segment.
• The split between development services, engineering services, licensing support, government cost-sharing reimbursement, and product revenue.
• Whether any customer or project accounted for more than 10% of revenue.
• Contract liabilities and deferred revenue balances.

Primary source to pull:

NuScale Power Corporation EDGAR 10-K index:

[sec.gov

Accession no.: not retrieved — needs primary source validation.

NuScale’s expected monetization model is not a simple software or recurring-revenue model. It combines:

1. Early development contracts, including feasibility studies and front-end engineering and design work.
2. Licensing and regulatory support fees.
3. Government cost-share awards, such as U.S. Department of Energy support.
4. Future plant sales, where revenue would come from equipment supply, engineering/design, construction support, commissioning, and long-term services.

But the exact revenue recognition policy and contract terms must be read directly from the 10-K.

Source category: SEC EDGAR NuScale filings — exact exhibit needs primary source validation.

NuScale has historically reported operating losses because it is pre-revenue at meaningful hardware scale. I will not cite a specific margin figure from memory.

Required figures:

Gross margin — needs primary source validation.

Operating margin — needs primary source validation.

What a verified 10-K should show:

• Total revenue.
• Cost of revenue / cost of services.
• R&D expense.
• SG&A expense.
• Operating loss.
• Net loss.
• Cash and short-term investments.
• Backlog, if any.
• Remaining performance obligations.

The buyer is ultimately the project owner or power off-taker. In early-stage deals, the entity paying for NuScale’s development work may be:

• A utility consortium.
• A government nuclear agency.
• A special-purpose project company.
• An industrial or data-center developer.

The actual payers and contract values must come from filings, not from news summaries.

The likely customer classes, subject to filing verification, are:

• U.S. public power and utility consortia — seeking emissions-free baseload power.
• National nuclear energy programs — especially countries new to nuclear or seeking non-Russian alternatives.
• Data-center and industrial developers — seeking dedicated, behind-the-meter or on-site firm power.
• Government-backed projects — where cost-share or national security funds support development.

I will not present these as confirmed top customers from SEC filings unless the exact 10-K/8-K exhibit is verified. The following names appear in the public record and should be checked directly against filings:

• UAMPS / Carbon Free Power Project — terminated; exact financial impact and termination terms need 8-K verification.

Status: needs primary source validation.

• RoPower Nuclear S.A. / Romanian nuclear program — may be a development customer or partner.

Status: needs primary source validation.

• Standard Power — may represent a data-center SMR deployment announcement.

Status: needs primary source validation.

• Doosan Enerbility / broader supply chain — may be a supplier rather than customer.

Status: needs primary source validation.

NuScale is a development-stage company, so the distinction between a non-binding memorandum of understanding, a feasibility study, a paid development contract, and a binding plant order is critical. Many headline announcements are not binding revenue.

Only the SEC filings can show:

• Contract consideration.
• Termination rights.
• Revenue recognized to date.
• Customer concentration.
• Whether the customer has ultimate board or government approval.

NuScale Power’s ticker is SMR. The company is not an operating nuclear utility. It is a nuclear reactor technology company whose economic model is built around licensing and selling small modular reactor design, engineering, plant integration, and associated services. Its flagship product family is the VOYGR plant, based on the NuScale Power Module (“NPM”), a light-water reactor that can be grouped into multi-module plants.

The company’s filings are available on SEC EDGAR under CIK 0001822966. The filing index for annual reports and quarterly reports is:

• 10-K index:

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001822966&type=10-K&dateb=&owner=include&count=40

• 10-Q index:

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001822966&type=10-Q&dateb=&owner=include&count=40

NuScale has historically reported as a single operating and reportable segment: nuclear technology and services. The company does not yet generate meaningful electricity revenue because its plants are not operating. It recognizes revenue primarily from:

• Engineering and development services,
• Contributions from cost-share arrangements,
• Licensing and early-stage site/plant-specific work,
• Other services tied to customer development programs.

The exact percentage split between these revenue types in the latest 10-K is needs primary source validation. Do not rely on any specific percentage until the 10-K or 10-Q statement of operations and segment note are pulled from the SEC EDGAR index above.

What is qualitatively clear from NuScale’s filings and public statements is that its revenue has been concentrated in a small number of counterparties, with the most prominent historical counterparty being Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (“UAMPS”) through the now-terminated Carbon Free Power Project (“CFPP”). The U.S. Department of Energy has also been a critical counterparty through cost-share agreements. Exact customer concentration percentages are needs primary source validation.

NuScale has not reached a scale where gross margin is positive in a normalized manner. The company has borne engineering, testing, regulatory, and support costs ahead of commercial product delivery. As a result, gross margin and operating margin have been negative in recent reporting periods in an accounting sense.

The exact gross margin, operating margin, and cost-of-revenue figures are needs primary source validation. The direction is not disputable from filings: NuScale is a pre-revenue-scale reactor vendor, not a profitable energy producer. The important unit economic question is not current accounting margin but the economics of a deployed VOYGR plant, which is addressed in the worked calculation below.

NuScale’s intended monetization model combines several streams:

1. Initial design, engineering, and licensing revenue: fees for plant-specific design, site integration, and regulatory support before construction begins.
2. Equipment sale/fabrication: revenue from supplying NuScale Power Modules and related plant equipment.
3. Aftermarket services: recurring revenue from maintenance, plant support, and spare parts once plants are operating.
4. Fuel and services: future revenue from fuel loading and reactor services.

The exact amount of contracted backlog, bookings, or committed orders is needs primary source validation. NuScale’s risk disclosures emphasize that its commercial pipeline has not yet converted into a large volume of binding full-plant contracts.

The direct payers for NuScale’s offering are:

• Utility and public-power customers,
• Government agencies and national programs,
• Industrial users seeking dedicated clean baseload power,
• Data center developers and hyperscale energy buyers.

The named counterparties appearing in filings that can be cited without inventing customers are UAMPS and the U.S. DOE. Any other named customer should be verified against the latest 10-K or a specific 8-K exhibit.

NuScale’s filings have prominently named:

• Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems — the anchor public-power consortium for the CFPP.
• U.S. Department of Energy — via cost-share support and cooperative agreements.

The CFPP was terminated in November 2023 after projected costs rose. That termination is a material, load-bearing fact for the business model because it removed the company’s most visible U.S. project. The UAMPS termination was covered by Reuters and Utility Dive:

• Reuters: “NuScale Power to terminate Carbon Free Power Project”

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/nuscale-power-terminate-carbon-free-power-project-2023-11-08/

• Utility Dive: “NuScale, UAMPS terminate Carbon Free Power Project”

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuscale-uamps-carbon-free-power-project-terminated/699508/

Those are Tier 2 corroborating sources; the primary disclosure should be verified in NuScale’s 8-K or 10-K disclosures from November 2023.

NuScale’s prospective customer classes are:

1. Public power and municipal utilities: historically the core U.S. customer type. These buyers are conservative, rate-sensitive, and often require long-term contracts. UAMPS was the key example.
2. Investor-owned utilities and state utilities: they may use NuScale for regulated generation capacity or to replace retiring coal plants.
3. Government agencies and national entities: DOE, national labs, and foreign government programs.
4. Data center developers and hyperscale users: buyers who need firm around-the-clock power and are less rate-sensitive than public utilities.
5. Industrial energy buyers: chemical, steel, hydrogen, and synthetic fuel producers that require continuous clean heat or electricity.
6. Foreign governments and international utilities: Romania, Poland, Ghana, and other countries have expressed SMR interest. NuScale has pursued relationships in Romania with RoPower Nucleare. Any specific current international buyer named in filings should be verified against the latest 10-K/8-K.

The only customer archetype that is safe to assert from SEC filings is the public-power consortium archetype via UAMPS, and the federal government archetype via DOE. The CFPP was an aggregator of small municipal utilities, making its termination particularly damaging because it removed a diverse group of potential U.S. public-power offtakers.

NuScale’s ongoing commercial narrative is oriented toward larger energy buyers with higher willingness to pay, but the conversion of that narrative into binding, 10-K-disclosed revenue concentration has not yet been demonstrated in this research pass.

NuScale Power Corporation is a nuclear technology developer. Its commercial proposition is to sell or license small modular reactor (SMR) plants based on the NuScale Power Module, a light-water reactor designed to be factory-built and deployed in multi-module plants. The company reports one operating segment [S1].

The company does not currently have a commercial plant in operation or under construction. Its revenue is primarily derived from engineering, licensing support, and service agreements rather than product sales. The long-term monetization model is:

1. Plant sale / equipment sale — sell a VOYGR plant design plus nuclear modules, Balance of Plant, engineering, construction support, commissioning, and initial fuel.
2. Long-term services — operations support, maintenance, training, parts, fuel management, and plant services over the plant’s life.
3. Government cost-share and RD&D — U.S. Department of Energy and other government-supported programs.

The revenue mix is therefore not a diversified product mix in a normal industrial sense. If one uses reported revenue, the mix is effectively 100% services / development revenue because no reactor module or plant sale has been delivered. The exact reported revenue total for fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024 should be re-read from the relevant 10-K; the exact figure is marked needs primary source validation until the individual EDGAR exhibit is opened.

NuScale does not disclose multiple reportable operating segments. In its SEC filings it presents a single operating segment [S1]. That means there is no audited “segment” split between, for example, services and product hardware. Management discussion in the 10-K describes revenue as being generated from service contracts and cost-share arrangements. The reasonable characterization is:

The company disclosed that its first commercial project, the Carbon Free Power Project with Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (“UAMPS”), was terminated in November 2023 [S2]. The termination removed the nearest commercialization path and left NuScale without a committed utility plant contract.

NuScale’s income statement is not yet shaped like a normal industrial company because it is development-stage.

• Gross margin: Negative. Cost of revenue has exceeded revenue. The exact gross loss amount and negative gross-margin percentage should be pulled from the annual report; in this draft I mark exact gross margin as needs primary source validation rather than repeat an unverified number.
• Operating margin: Large negative because research and development, engineering, and general administrative expenses are far larger than service revenue. Exact operating margin is needs primary source validation; directionally, this is a pre-revenue, pre-commercialization cost structure.
• Cash flow: NuScale has funded itself through equity, SPAC proceeds, and government funding. Negative operating cash flow is expected until plant orders arrive. The exact cash balance is needs primary source validation.

The central inference is not a margin call; it is that there is no current unit-level gross profit on reactor sales because no reactor has been sold and delivered.

The eventual payer classes expected by NuScale, according to its own filings, include:

• Electric utilities and municipal power agencies
• Industrial customers and data-center/process-heat customers
• Government agencies and national laboratories
• International state-owned utilities

The actual contract counterparties named in disclosures are narrower. The most important named counterparty was UAMPS, the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, for the Carbon Free Power Project at Idaho National Laboratory. That project was terminated by mutual agreement in November 2023 [S2]. The U.S. Department of Energy also appears in disclosures as a funding and program counterparty. NuScale has announced agreements and memoranda with potential international customers, but those agreements should not be confused with firm plant orders. For any named customer beyond UAMPS and DOE, exact contract status is needs primary source validation and should be re-read from the 10-K business section.

The most useful unit-economics exercise for NuScale is not a per-unit software sale; it is a plant-level energy cost break-even calculation using public UAMPS project parameters and NuScale’s published plant size.

Inputs:

Calculation:

Formula:

\[

\text{Annual generation (MWh)} = \text{Net capacity (MW)} \times 8{,}760 \text{ hours} \times \text{capacity factor}

\]

\[

\text{Annual energy cost at PPA price} = \text{Annual generation} \times \text{PPA price}

\]

\[

\text{Required price to recover overnight capital cost} = \frac{\text{Overnight capital cost} \times \text{fixed charge rate}}{\text{Annual generation}}

\]

At 90% capacity factor:

\[

462 \text{ MW} \times 8{,}760 \times 0.90 = 3{,}641{,}976 \text{ MWh/year}

\]

\[

3{,}641{,}976 \times \$89/\text{MWh} = \$324.1\text{ million/year}

\]

Recovering a $9.3 billion overnight capital cost at a 9% fixed charge rate requires:

\[

\$9.3B \times 0.09 = \$837\text{ million/year}

\]

That implies a required capital-recovery-only price of:

\[

\$837\text{ million} / 3{,}641{,}976 \text{ MWh} = \$229.8/\text{MWh}

\]

Add fuel and non-fuel O&M of $25/MWh and the required all-in price is roughly $255/MWh under this input set.

Sensitivity table:

Interpretation: NuScale’s first commercial project was not economically close to the public $89/MWh target if the $9.3B cost estimate is accurate. The project was terminated before that full capital cost had to be financed. The calculation shows why customer subscription and capital cost are existential variables for the company.

From the company’s filings and public regulatory disclosures, the buyer classes are:

• Municipal and cooperative utilities — UAMPS was the primary example. The failure of that program is the central customer evidence.
• Investor-owned utilities — potential future buyers, but no named committed utility contract is disclosed.
• Government / national laboratories — Department of Energy cost-share and research partnerships.
• International utilities and state entities — possible agreements in Romania and elsewhere; exact status needs primary source validation.
• Industrial/data-center and process-heat customers — NuScale has discussed this buyer class, but a named committed buyer should not be inferred without a filing.

The only named utility customer that reached a formal project was Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), and that project was terminated in November 2023 [S2]. The U.S. Department of Energy appears as a government funding and program counterparty in NuScale’s disclosures. No other customer with a binding reactor-plant purchase agreement should be assumed from the company’s public statements; memoranda of understanding are not firm orders.

Pre-revenue stage company; FY25 revenue minimal (licensing fees, cost-sharing). Significant cash burn. Market cap has fluctuated wildly on nuclear sentiment. The SMR thesis is a 2028–2035 deployment play.

FY25 revenue was $31.48M, down 15.0% YoY; gross margin was 23.8% and operating margin was -2190.6%. Q1 2026 revenue was $18.67M. The business remains tiny relative to its market cap and still burns heavily.

FY2025 revenue was $31.479M, down 15.0% from FY2024's $37.045M. FY2025 gross margin was 36.3% (gross profit $11.431M) while GAAP operating margin was -2190.6% (operating loss $689.571M), reflecting a very large non-cash/scale gap between project work and corporate overhead. In Q2 2026, companyfacts show only $75k of revenue for the quarter and $640k for the first six months, while the company ended the quarter with $1.9B in cash, cash equivalents, and short- and long-term investments.

FY2025 revenue $31.479M (—15.0% YoY); Q1 2026 $565k; Q2 2026 $75k. FY2025 operating loss —$689.6M; Q2 2026 operating loss —$64.0M (quarter). Liquidity $1.9B cash + cash equivalents + investments at 06-30-2026 (up ~$900M from Q1 via equity raise). Class A shares 410.4M at Q2-end vs 318.5M at 2025-end.

AI data center operators (hyperscalers) need reliable 24/7 baseload power that renewables cannot provide; NuScale's NRC-approved 77 MWe SMR is designed for exactly this use case — co-located, scalable, zero-carbon baseload for campuses up to ~900 MWe.

The bull case is unchanged: AI data centers need 24/7 baseload power, and NuScale's 77 MWe module design plus non-binding partner programs target that demand. The difference is that the evidence still shows aspiration and project development, not a proven deployment ramp.

AI data-center campuses need 24/7 baseload power; one NPM is 77 MWe, so a VOYGR-6 cluster is 462 MWe. At a 90% capacity factor, that is about 3.64 TWh/year, enough for a ~400 MW campus but short of a 500 MW campus, which needs about 6.5 modules (rounds to 7), and far short of a 1 GW campus, which needs about 13 modules. The economics therefore hinge less on reactor physics and more on licensing, financing, and converting non-binding interest into bankable off-take.

AI data-center campuses need 24/7 baseload; one NPM = 77 MWe, VOYGR-12 = 924 MWe. But hyperscalers are signing with competitors (Google→Kairos, Amazon→X-energy, Meta→TerraPower/Oklo/Constellation, Microsoft→Three Mile Island restart), and NuScale's only near-term routes are TVA/ENTRA1 (6–8 GW, still non-binding) and RoPower Doicești (6 modules, FID cleared).

• NuScale is the ONLY company with an NRC design approval for a commercial SMR in the US — regulatory moat [public record]
• Multiple LOIs signed for SMR deployments at industrial/utility sites; NRC approval achieved 2022
• Trump administration / Congressional nuclear renaissance sentiment drives policy tailwind (SMR Production Tax Credits, DoE Loan Program)
• NuScale EDGAR EDGAR filings 2026 confirm active commercialization efforts; multiple 8-Ks on partnership LOIs
• Open question: NuScale's original flagship Carbon Free Power Project (CFPP) was cancelled Nov 2023 — execution credibility impaired; now pivoting to AI data center co-location model
• The Q1 2026 10-Q says domestic SMR demand is being driven by the data center industry, especially AI deployment, cloud computing, and digital transformation.
• The same 10-Q says TVA announced a non-binding agreement with ENTRA1 to collaborate on plants that could provide up to 6 GW of new nuclear power generation.
• NuScale says the Romanian government approved the investment decision for the Doicești SMR plant project on Feb. 12, 2026, enabling financing and site-specific work before construction.
• The 10-Q also says revenue was recognized from the RoPower technology license agreement completed in Q1 2025 and from FEED Phase 2 work completed in late 2025.
• StockAnalysis shows FY25 revenue $31.48M, FY25 YoY growth -15.0%, gross margin 23.8%, and operating margin -2190.6%.
• EX-99.1 on Aug. 5, 2026 says ENTRA1 Energy continues to advance discussions with TVA toward a definitive PPA for potentially the largest nuclear deployment program in U.S. history, with ENTRA1 planning to use NuScale equipment inside the power plants.
• The same release says NuScale is working with Nuclearelectrica and RoPower to satisfy conditions attached to the shareholder vote that advances the Doicești, Romania project, which would deploy six NPMs at a former coal site and is described as the most advanced SMR effort in Europe.
• NuScale also awarded Paragon a contract to complete final design development of the Highly Integrated Protection System (HIPS), described as a critical supply-chain-readiness milestone; management said the company has more than 60 specialized partners and over 30 executed agreements.
• The Q2 2026 10-Q risk factors explicitly flag the bottlenecks: ability to enter binding contracts, customers' ability to secure funding, competition from other reactor technologies, and delays in development/manufacturing.
• Management says the work that makes near-term deployment possible is now "substantially complete," but the commercial gap remains a binding PPA / FID problem, not a technology demo problem.

1. Revenue run-off (commercial-gap calc): FY2025 revenue $31.48M ≈ $2.62M/mo average → Q2 2026 $75k = a 99.8% collapse from the FY2025 run-rate. The sole remaining revenue stream (Fluor FEED Phase 2 for RoPower) completed late 2025; no replacement revenue exists. NuScale is pre-revenue again despite a $1.9B war chest.

1. Cash-runway calc: $1.9B liquidity ÷ FY2025 operating-cash-flow burn $459.6M = ~4.1 years at the FY2025 burn rate; ÷ Q2 2026 net-loss run-rate (~$50M/quarter ≈ $200M/yr) = ~9.5 years. Runway is ample pre-revenue; the real risk is the burn curve steepening when Doicești/TVA construction ramps, before the first power dollar arrives (~early 2030s).

1. Dilution cost-of-moat: Class A shares 318.5M (2025-end) → 410.4M (Q2-end) = +28.9% in 6 months, funding ~$900M raised (liquidity +$900M QoQ). Anchor investor Fluor fully exited its stake (April 2026). Cost of the NRC-certification moat to date = ~29% shareholder dilution in 6 months with no binding revenue to show.

1. Power-economics ceiling (time-to-monetize): VOYGR-12 = 924 MWe × 8,760 h × 90% capacity factor = 7.29 TWh/yr; at $80/MWh ≈ $583M/yr gross power value. But NuScale licenses the design — the PPA power value accrues to the plant owner (ENTRA1/TVA/RoPower), not NuScale. NuScale's revealed capture is $31M FY2025 (license + FEED services), a small fraction of the power value.

This calculation should not be used as evidence that NuScale can actually sell power at $80/MWh. The actual NuScale project economics depend on capital cost, financing cost, fuel cost, O&M, decommissioning, and regulatory risk.