LEU

ShadowMoneyLurks

LEU; NXE; UUUUranium

Whoopziedaisy

seems like the market is re pricing the AI bubble. Oh, we r still in a bubble. but looks like energy and industrial bottleneck finally catching up with data center investment ROI. Semis will lose market share while production capacity can’t keep up with chip demand. expecting a big run towards natural gas, batteries and general industrial sector over next 3-6 months. so far the only “us-ready” viable short term solution to put data centers online are natural gas turbines, followed by emerging modular battery systems with a medium time horizon. Longer term, DOE about to be shitting out money to the nuclear sector for reactors and LEU while it continues to make enemies with renewables (stupid)

Dependent-Goose8240

I have a position in a few nuclear stocks - Lightbridge, OKLO, Centrus, Constellation, SMR, and a couple others. I opened the position around July. SMR is the worst performer so far, and the only one that actually dipped into negative from open. Best performer was Oklo, at one point reaching 200% gain, now to about 100% gain due to the recent dip. LEU and LTBR are also great performers, they recently took a strong dip but peaked at around 100% a couple weeks back

polychris

LEU is a buy at this price. The only uranium fuel producer in the US for the next decade. This stock is going to $1000+ as demand ratchets up. Buy and hold.

Curious-Engine-5478

LEU

LegitimateShameHands

Buying opportunity for LEU?

juventinn1897

Any thoughts on DOCN (digital ocean), Uranium stocks (CCJ, LTBR, LEU), and BKSY?

atlasmountsenjoyer

I'm loaded with META, RDDT, LEU calls..but also some puts on PLTR, TSLA, AMD, NVDA..maybe I'll come out even.

Chris_L_

Start with this graph, then rethink your assumptions [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LEU0254477100A](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LEU0254477100A)

sunday_sassassin

There are so many competing designs in the SMR market and I'm not sure there are that many buyers lining up. Impossible to pick a winner now but if I had to it would be one of the established builders like Rolls Royce who have orders in the UK/EU, or the Bill Gates funded Terrapower. First-movers who can build economies of scale have a huge advantage when it comes to building SMRs. Using a (SA)LEU design is definitely in their favour though. Fuel supply chain security (and cost) is likely to ward buyers away from the experimental HALEU approach for at least a decade.

NotMe357

Centrus Energy: $LEU : “It’s a good company...I think you’re fine it it.” USA Rare Earth: $USAR : “You have to stay away for now.” --- Jim Cramer

Pure-Alternative-515

ETF is NUKZ. CCJ, SMR, OKLO, LEU etc.

TheEagleDied

There’s another stock you guys are sleeping on in wsb that benefits from our country embracing nuclear energy. LEU

Alchemicalw1sdom

Anyone that didn’t jump on NBIS sub 100 or LEU sub 300 is beyond retarded

Dazzling_Occasion_47

huge dip!? all the Uranium miners are near ATH, the smr start-up space is bloated with >$10B market cap companies with no revenue with 400% gains from a year ago, LEU (enricher) is 800% gain from 18 months ago. What dip are you talking about? Don't get me wrong, it's a great sector with more runway ahead, but ain't nothing dippy about it.

Dierks_Ford

Add LEU to the list.

polychris

LEU is legit if you want exposure to the nuclear power industry.

LaserBeamer17

LEU and OKLO are so bipolar I always get FOMO on these rips but breathe sighs of reliefs on times like the past two days

notreallydeep

>If true (and a big if, as inflation data has been much less reliable lately due to low survey response rates), that's a very new trend. Is it? Seems to have been going on since 2015: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?id=LEU0252881600Q, Median because I couldn't find another metric. But there's also real personal income which is basically just a straight line up for over 50 years: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI >Also, doesn't necessarily account for income growth largely going to the highest earners. The S&P 500 doesn't care about where the money is coming from, though. Consumption up -> earnings up. That's more about social commentary than stocks unless you're talking about particular companies like Target.

idlingchainsaw

LEU. It’s a good value right now, after a recent drop. And a critical choke point for HALEU uranium refinement as they’ve distinguished themselves as the only refiners capable of doing this in America.

Think_Commercial2658

LEU

burmese_python2

If you think this is crazy. You should look into MTRN, LEU, BWXT.  Those guys are the real key players in this puzzle for nuclear energy. Not financial advice.

SnooRegrets6428

Short LEU

Pendulumswingsfreely

Makes sense. They ran up gold hard then take profits. Probably need to keep an eye on China too. Where are you long. I got UUUU an eyeing LEU. But first love is gold.

figlu

ASPI being the supplier of critical isotopes for the West. Notably Si28 for quantum computing and HALEU for SMRs. They use quantum enrichment separation instead of traditional centrifuge methods which has lower Capex. LEU ran had already this stock only mildly up. Recent offering at $11.5 per share and current SP is $10

newbirdhunter

Or LEU. They actually deliver stuff. Or so says the press.

Pluth

I have loved nuclear power since I wrote a paper on it in high school. I also love blowing shit up. Invest in what you love. LEU, LMT.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge first mover advantage. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. Terrestrial’s upcoming merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s upcoming merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s upcoming merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. Regulatory progress also isn’t in the same league. Oklo’s topical report was accepted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an accelerated review, and they represent 3 out of the 11 projects for the DOE’s pilot reactor program. Terrestrial, meanwhile, is still navigating pre-licensing stages in both the U.S. and Canada. That’s not insignificant, but there’s a big difference between being in pre-app review versus actually pouring concrete on U.S. federal land. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s upcoming merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. Regulatory progress also isn’t in the same league. Oklo’s topical report was accepted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an accelerated review, and they represent 3 out of the 11 projects for the DOE’s pilot reactor program. Terrestrial, meanwhile, is still navigating pre-licensing stages in both the U.S. and Canada. That’s not insignificant, but there’s a big difference between being in pre-app review versus actually pouring concrete on U.S. federal land. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else. At the end of the day, HOND is a concept stock where Oklo is actively transitioning into an execution story. Oklo is already building on a reactor design that literally powered the grid decades ago, has government fuel supply support, and is the first microreactor company to break ground at a national lab. Terrestrial’s molten salt approach is exciting, but it’s still theoretical at the commercial level. If we’re talking asymmetric upside, I’d rather put my money in the company that’s already proving it works instead of one that hopes to by the 2030s.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s SPAC merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. Regulatory progress also isn’t in the same league. Oklo’s topical report was accepted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an accelerated review, and they represent 3 out of the 11 projects for the DOE’s pilot reactor program. Terrestrial, meanwhile, is still navigating pre-licensing stages in both the U.S. and Canada. That’s not insignificant, but there’s a big difference between being in pre-app review versus actually pouring concrete on U.S. federal land. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else. At the end of the day, HOND is a concept stock where Oklo is actively transitioning into an execution story. Oklo is already building on a reactor design that literally powered the grid decades ago, has government fuel supply support, and is the first microreactor company to break ground at a national lab. Terrestrial’s molten salt approach is exciting, but it’s still theoretical at the commercial level. If we’re talking asymmetric upside, I’d rather put my money in the company that’s already proving it works instead of one that hopes to by the 2030s.

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the early 2030s before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first commercial Aurora reactor by 2027, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. Your point that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the primary bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s SPAC merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. Regulatory progress also isn’t in the same league. Oklo’s topical report was accepted by the NRC for an accelerated review, and they represent 3 out of the 11 projects for the DOE’s pilot reactor program. Terrestrial, meanwhile, is still navigating pre-licensing stages in both the U.S. and Canada. That’s not insignificant, but there’s a big difference between being in pre-app review versus actually pouring concrete on U.S. federal land. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s current $4B (post-merger) valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. This also doesn’t factor in the close connections that OKLO has with DOE leadership (Chris Wright), Sam Altman, and the current administration- which to many investors, means a lot more than everything else. At the end of the day, HOND is a concept stock where Oklo is actively transitioning into an execution story. Oklo is already building on a reactor design that literally powered the grid decades ago, has government fuel supply support, and is the first microreactor company to break ground at a national lab. Terrestrial’s molten salt approach is exciting, but it’s still theoretical at the commercial level. If we’re talking asymmetric upside, I’d rather put my money in the company that’s already proving it works instead of one that hopes to by the 2030s.

wrongrobertpatrick

Also check out the value of LEU 59 days ago it’ll blow your mind

C130J_Darkstar

I’ve dug deep into both OKLO and HOND, and I just don’t see how anyone can claim HOND is the “safer” or “smarter” play here. On paper, Terrestrial Energy’s molten salt design sounds great- efficient, high-temp, low-pressure… but investors keep glossing over the fact that it’s still pre-commercial and years away from deployment. Their own public timelines point to the **early 2030s** before first power, and that’s assuming no regulatory or engineering delays (which are almost guaranteed in nuclear). Oklo, on the other hand, has already broken ground at Idaho National Lab, has multiple DOE pilot awards, and is targeting operation of its first Aurora reactor by 2027–2028, which is a huge lead in a sector where first mover advantage is everything. The idea that HOND is “less risky” because it uses LEU is pretty shallow. Sure, low-enriched uranium is easier to source, but fuel isn’t the bottleneck in the U.S. right now, licensing and demonstration are. Oklo’s design is based on the EBR-II, a reactor that ran safely for three decades at INL. That gives it a proven operational lineage that molten salt reactors simply don’t have. Oklo is also one of the few companies with a DOE HALEU fuel award, and their fuel assembly testing at Argonne is already validating their core models. This combined with the fact that they recently announced a $1.7B HALEU recycling center in Tennessee is a hedge against fuel sourcing risk and provides a strong moat. And let’s talk money, because that’s what most people miss. Terrestrial’s SPAC merger brings in about $280M in gross proceeds. That’s not nothing, but for a company that doesn’t plan to produce a single watt until the next decade, it’s a short runway. Oklo, by contrast, already has over half a billion dollars in cash, multiple government-backed contracts, and major framework agreements with partners like Switch and Equinix. They’re also vertically integrated- meaning they build, own, and operate- which takes more upfront capital, but it also means when their reactors come online, they’ll be generating recurring revenue directly. Terrestrial is pursuing a licensing model that sounds leaner but puts control in other people’s hands. It’s dependent on third-party builders actually licensing and constructing those reactors… good luck keeping that on schedule. Regulatory progress also isn’t in the same league. Oklo’s topical report was accepted by the NRC for an accelerated review, and they represent 3 out of the 11 projects for the DOE’s pilot reactor program. Terrestrial, meanwhile, is still navigating pre-licensing stages in both the U.S. and Canada. That’s not insignificant, but there’s a big difference between being in pre-app review versus actually pouring concrete on U.S. federal land. And the “valuation gap” argument is just frankly lazy math. The market isn’t mispricing Terrestrial- it’s pricing in risk. A $26B market cap for Oklo isn’t irrational when you consider its cash reserves, DOE backing, licensing progress, and 2027 operational timeline. Terrestrial’s $600–700M valuation makes sense because it’s effectively a decade out with higher technical and regulatory uncertainty. The idea that it “should” 7x just to match Oklo assumes the two are on equal footing… they’re not even close. At the end of the day, HOND is a concept stock. Oklo is an emerging execution story. Oklo is already building on a reactor design that literally powered the grid decades ago, has government fuel supply support, and is the first microreactor company to break ground at a national lab. Terrestrial’s molten salt approach is exciting, but it’s still theoretical at the commercial level. If we’re talking asymmetric upside, I’d rather put my money in the company that’s already proving it works instead of one that hopes to by the 2030s.

polychris

My 401k was locked up during my divorce. A year ago i finally got my portion separated and I moved it to Roth and Traditional IRA and I started actively trading it. Up 77% (traditional) and 63% (Roth) in 1 year. My biggest winners are LEU @ $60, CRWV @ $34, UURAF @ $1.24, and GOOG @ $180, but I also did a lot of swing trading leveraged ETFs https://preview.redd.it/yut4ppnuldvf1.jpeg?width=3264&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2fcc9f06cfea256c0308920a6ebca74487e35514

OddDescription4523

Unless you need the money for something big now (like buying a house) or you're closing in on retirement, leave them alone! I just posted crying about my own stupid sell, 220 shares of LEU at about 175/share. It's currently about 440/share. I robbed myself out of about 80k in gains by trying to time the market. Now, if you're close to retirement, it makes sense regardless of how well they've performed to rebalance into lower-risk commodities, but if you've got 10, 20 or more years before you'll need it, just let it ride. A correction, even a big one, will almost certainly work itself out by the time you need to sell.

pain474

LEU is fucking unstoppable.

Complete_Park6605

LEU doing some funny stuff pre market, think it'll drop right at open?

syedahmed211

What is your view on LEU. It's up by 360% this year. What's driving it and does it have room to climb more?

Alupang

I bought $LEU in 2021 @ $30 basis. Round tripped to $88 & back to $30s again. So pissed at myself I doubled down @ $30ish. Still holdind my 1250 shares @ $400 today. No stops. No trimming. Long term cap tax rate keeps me in. I do plan to sell 50 shares @ $700ish.

stillyourking

LEU is up 500% in the last 6m

pain474

LEU is one of the most disgusting stocks lately and nobody talks about it.

MrChadWhite

I’ve been holding and purchasing many uranium stocks since early 2020 my average is $3.30 for UUUU. I also have a bunch of short & long calls. My average is also $23 in LEU….some of us do hold for 5 years. It’s rare but some of us do

atlasmountsenjoyer

I sorta fucked around a lot with TSLA puts, NVO/UNH calls. Those mainly were what sent me to -30%. I saved my account by buying some puts on LEU, AMD (when it pumped 34% that one day) and some other smaller plays. https://preview.redd.it/qrexioi8lwuf1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf6be2588a03448ea260070535153f56c068ffd7

newbirdhunter

LEU

MrNovember13

I had about 50k of Centrus (LEU) in an IRA. I started to DCA aggressively when I found that they were basically the only provider of low-enrichment uranium, which every modern reactor will need. I started buying when it was $50ish. I changed brokerage firms earlier this year and didn't do an in-kind transfer, so it sold at $110ish and I never rebought in the new IRA. LEU closed at $365 on Friday. But hey, I didn't lose money, which is rule #1!

blindhog66

All the miner positions saved me today. MP, LEU, CCJ, URG all spiked.

Economy_Tune8120

LEU is my new tendie machine nom nom nom

Economy_Tune8120

Been saying it for the last 12 months, $LEU is the real champ

rocier

LEU giving me vertigo

polychris

Everyone freaking out over PATH meanwhile I’ve been holding LEU since $58 and y’all be sleeping on it

Commercial_Leek6987

It is, but next week it will be have another 52 weeks high, next month another 52 weeks high. It seems this thing just keeps going up. I’d rather invest in an established company with revenue in a booming market. Share price is still not too high. LEU is over 300 dollars.

ShadowMoneyLurks

My watchlist runners: UAMY, GGAL, NBIS, GPRO, UUUU, LEU, AQMS

Hardcoreposer7

I'm just saying it's way more legit than GSRT, which I think is pretty obvious. It seems to be more comparable to the 'legit' players like OKLO/SMR, except at a fraction of their market cap. At $18, $HOND is only $2.3B vs. SMR at $11.6B and OKLO at $20.4B. to answer your question though, here's what ChatGPT 5 Thinking said for reference (feel free to point out something you think it got wrong): # So…what makes HOND / Terrestrial Energy “legit” vs. faster-looking peers? 1. **Regulatory substance, not sizzle.** Terrestrial just cleared an **NRC Safety Evaluation** of its **Principal Design Criteria**—including acceptance of its **inherent power control** concept—**a first** for a molten-salt power reactor. That’s a real, bankable step in the U.S. process many peers haven’t matched.  2. **Binational de-risking.** It already completed **CNSC Phase-2 Vendor Design Review** in Canada, with coordinated NRC-CNSC workstreams. That cross-jurisdiction work reduces “unknown unknowns” for future U.S./Canada projects.  3. **Fuel advantage.** IMSR is designed for **LEU/SALEU**, avoiding near-term **HALEU** bottlenecks that loom over fast-reactor and many microreactor roadmaps (Oklo, others).  4. **Two DOE ‘fast-track’ lanes.** It’s selected for both the **Reactor Pilot Program** *and* the **Fuel Line Pilot Program**—that pairing shortens the path to a first build and sets up future NRC licensing with fewer gaps. (Pilot reactors are DOE-authorized; commercial fleets still need NRC.)  5. **Commercial siting pathways.** MoU with **EnergySolutions** on multiple brownfield nuclear sites and an invitation from **Texas A&M (RELLIS)** build optionality for FOAK/early units—exactly what many peers still lack.  **Bottom line:** Some developers publicized earlier CODs before the DOE “fast-track” push, but HOND/Terrestrial’s **regulatory depth + LEU fuel strategy + DOE selections** give it a credible, *financeable* lane now. The market hasn’t priced it like OKLO yet (very different multiples), but on execution signals, it’s one of the more “real” advanced-nuclear SPACs.

callsonreddit

Fuck me. I bought LEO instead of LEU

rocier

Of the 1000 shares of LEU I bought for $40 a year ago I've sold 450 and another 200 will be called away over the next month. This shit wont stop going up.

callsonreddit

I don't get why LEU is not talked about more here It's +84% 1M

callsonreddit

Why isn't LEU free money?

1ess_than_zer0

$NBIS, $IREN, $LUMN also look at some of the modular nuclear or energy stocks - think $OKLO, $SMR, $LEU. Personally have a ton of money wrapped up in $ASTS because I believe in them being a 10-30x in the next 3-5 years. I’m already up 10x…

Rayvdub

BITF, PSKY, UUUU, LEU are a few of what have done really well. I’ve made the mistake of selling too soo on some but profit is profit. TMC is my biggest winner but I bought because the CEO was on Shawn Ryan podcast lol and never heard of it anywhere else.

AsbestosDude

There's lots, depends on what stage you want, active mines id go for LEU probably, but I like the mines which are close to coming online so stuff like DNN, NXE, UUUU.  I also like early stage explorers but theyre basically high risk pennystocks. Not for the faint of heart. Realistically I would look at the ETFs URNJ, URNM, see what they're holding and dig into those companies. Or just buy the ETFs, safer move all things considered

DaddysHome8750

LEU uraniums hot

SirLocohead

In this market environment when so many names are up 100%+ in a month, buy 10 call options for roughly $1,000, set a limit order to sell at $5,000 and be ready to adjust it upward if it starts rippin higher at a fast pace, while simultaneously putting $1,000 on 10 put options for the same security and set your limit sell order at $5,000 or higher. Keep riding the ridiculous high flyers and always maintain both sides. It’s a binary environment, you must hedge every trade in this environment. In other words, take the other side of your own trade. Have your cake and eat it too. This environment is shooting fish in a barrel, everyone should be winning. My God, IONQ, QUBT, QBTS, RGTI, USAR, IREN, OKLO, LEU, NNE, MP, the list goes on, keep riding them higher, while always maintaining puts, then make another fortune on the way down. You’re Welcome ✌️. It’s a STRANGLE environment. Party on.

RichardFlower7

LEU at 80% with a 70% gain. It went to the moon.

thewildgingerbeast1

LEU.

ChairmanMeow1986

NVDA tbh, I have a CC on LEU also.

rocier

Depends on if I think the stocks gonna go up more and what my posistion is. I've gotten creamed on CC on LEU this year but have let them all go thru because as the stock has gone up 10x I wanna trim my expouser. But I bought back my TSM calls because I think its got room to grow and is less speculative and my posistion is smaller use your brain idiot!

Wireless_Helpplz

OKLO is the meme play of the sector. LEU, ASPI/QLE, BWXT and LTBR - they're going to be integral in the US uranium conversion and enrichment cycle

polychris

Nuclear is the only energy source that can power AI in the long term. We need about 10000% ‘ore nuclear power. This industry is just waking up and LEU has a monopoly on refining uranium into fissile material

shmoopdoop6969

LEU still??

polychris

I’m up 500% on LEU so far. This is the Exxon mobile of the next 100 years. Nuclear power is the only path forward

rocier

God damn. LEU is at $350 and you clowns are buying RDDT

DLD1123

What is a LEU fundamental value estimate from wise investors here? I just gamble on uppies and downies but I’m bi-curious about it. Seems like a leap candidate.

rocier

Sold LEU call a couple weeks ago for $800, currently worth $10,000

DemandOk5785

LEU and Oklo then

Inside-Leadership-48

Is LEU ever going to dip. Been waiting for weeks to buy in

Pluth

LEU has been saving me.

CaptSteam

LEU. Low market cap. Profitable, planning on huge expansion and in many nuclear ETFs! 🥳

AALen

LEU

Pluth

LEU has been free money all year.

Love_Nuggets

The heavy hitters here were LEU, Tesla and AMD. I bought most of my LEU back when it was around 63 and just sold the last of it a few days ago.

No_Ad6143

LEU and amkr

rocier

They actually make money, unlike OKLO. All nuke companies are streched. You asked what an actual nuke co is... Its LEU.

rocier

LEU

rocier

You own OKLO, I own LEU, we are not the same

Pluth

LEU. I still love it

Mother-Chipmunk2778

Haha not to shabby my man nice, at least the LEU is covering the IOVA loss lol

polychris

I bought LEU at 63, CRWV at 34, UURAF at 1.23, and IOVA at 11.

SeaPossibility6106

Are EFT's the same as mutual funds? If so I do have the majority of my assets within mutual funds! It just tends to get so little kickback. That's why I started into dividends but only for value stocks which for canada banks tend to be very secure long term. I think the LEU is me trying to branch out a bit. But what I am finding from the comments is I have very little knowledge in this area and need to reach out to an investor before proceeding further. There's a lot of research and unknowns for me right now and I don't feel comfortable with doing direct investing.

rocier

OKLO dorks shoulda gone with LEU s nuke company that actually makes money

rocier

LEU went from -6% to +12% and really bout to hit ATH in a single day

KoiWalker

LEU the sleeper of the day as always

rocier

LEU

Pluth

I love LEU

rocier

LEU with the casual 12% swing in under an hour

Broke4Life

Followed him into nuclear energy for the first time in my life. He signed the EO on cutting red tape on nuclear, I bought in LEU and made out well. Then he put 100 million into bonds, so I researched and positioned in TLT. When he spoke of the golden dome defense I invested in some defense funds and am seeing good returns. So far you just listen to what they are doing, Google around a bit, locate some plays, execute. I dunno, shrug.

rocier

noooo, LEU my baby

conanmack

Is LEU still a buy at this price? The AI race (bubble) continues and power demands are not easing up.

conanmack

OP, you absolutely nailed it with this DD. I learned about LEU recently and wish I found this post sooner. I'm buying on any major correction.