Reddit Posts
Small Modular Reactor Stocks may be the next tech trend. Check where to invest.
China Bans Graphite Export - Lomiko Metals $LMR $LMRMF - watchlist
ALCC - Sam Altmans SPAC, Oklo a micro nuclear reactor startup. - This thing is radioactive (Don't touch it)
The uranium sector: A lot is changing the last 3 months at the demand side. The supply side isn't ready for this (An update: the actual additional uranium demand each event creates. It's impressive) + NEW: U-turn of Sweden + NEW: Germany extending the operations of 3 reactors
The uranium sector: A lot is changing the last month at the demand side. The supply side isn't ready for this.
NuScale Power (SMR) is going to be a beast in the coming years (imo). Why?
SO Southern Company…DD and why I’m Bullish
Is this a way to get invested in a future rush on nuclear power?
Mentions
every one is talking AI, data centers, electric vehicles,these will be huge for sure, so im thinking where is all the electricity gonna come from? it must be plentiful it must be local ,it must be green as possible ,,,all these technologies will not function unless nuclear energy is in play, but a plant takes 10 years to build ,,,,wait the NRC has approved the design of a small nuclear reactor from a company called Nuscale. built in a factory in modules small enough to ship directly to a Data center or small town or factory, SMR will be the supplier of massive amounts of clean energy,,,,,,,study SMR and put all your eggs into this basket , dont listen to the diversitards, all in and wait,,,SMR in 7 years will be $1000 after 3 splits buy now and hurry
all while market tries to guess what's next at the biggest valuations since ever due to AI. I don't imagine this is a bubble popper; i personally think energy might be. The AI data centers and chips require constant, large amounts of energy that the current grid cannot supply. They need more nuclear reactors or coal power plants built, and given the pace of US construction it will likely not be in time. Then it's a choice of no power in your home but chat gpt, or having lights and no chat gpt. Wild card is the modular nuclear reactors like oklo is trying to submit plans for, and smr who have plans submitted for review to the NRC. These reactors can potentially power the grid, but also costs billions to build from materials that are sourced abroad so... tariffs.
"Oklo" Worth a read: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G4huKykWMAAUIJe?format=jpg&name=large Also a line from that Bloomberg piece: "A former senior agency official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, says Oklo “is probably the worst applicant the NRC has ever had."
> Terrestrial’s IMSR design hasn’t yet entered US NRC licensing review September 10th press release of NRC Principal Design Approval - https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/newsroom/posts/5296 > Oklo has also secured HALEU fuel access through DOE contracts - a key bottle neck that Terrestrial still faces Oklo has not “secured” the HALEU fuel, it is simply in the DOE’s Fuel Line Pilot Program which should help them secure the fuel. Terrestrial, however, does not require HALEU and instead uses SALEU. SALEU is easier to source than HALEU. Additionally, Terrestrial is also in the DOE Fuel Line Pilot Program (link - https://www.energy.gov/articles/energy-department-selects-four-companies-advanced-nuclear-fuel-line-pilot-projects) > Terrestrial’s SPAC valuation looks lower mainly because its earlier in both licensing and commercialization - it hasn’t demonstrated an operational test unit or secured federal demonstration backing. Has OKLO demonstrated an operational test unit or have they simply broken ground at their site? And if the DOE Reactor and Pilot programs are what you are counting for “secured federal demonstration backing” then Terrestrial has done this as they are in both the DOE’s pilot programs for fuel line and reactor. Fuel line program link is above, here is the reactor program link from August 12th - https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/newsroom/posts/5264 > OKLO is already several phases into the DOE pilot pipeline and under active NRC review for multiple submissions, including its Principal Design Criteria report now being reviewed on an accelerated timeline. Terrestrial already has NRC Principal Design Criteria approval, as noted by my first bullet point. I included dates for these announcements to show that all this was readily available knowledge at the time of your comment. I believe you deliberately left out/lied about information to make your favorite little stock look better but maybe you can convince me I am wrong?
Yeah, that’d be a smart play if it actually happens. Using old Cold War fuel could save ‘em a ton of time and cash. Still, nothing’s real till the NRC gives the green light. Cool story for now, but I wouldn’t go full send on OKLO just yet.
All these smr start ups are basically put a coin in the slot machine and pray. Each has a relatively small chance of success given how much competition in the sector there is. Still i would place BWRX-300 (GEV), hond (terrestrial energy) and SMR (nuscale), as the highest on the probability of success list. GEV and SMR make the most sense because they're basically scaling down established light water tech. Based on what i understand of nuclear reactors i would say there is almost a zero percent chance a "micro reactor" is at all a good idea in any context, or that the economics make sense for that matter. The US experimented with the concept back in the 60's and 70's when safety concerns were lower and nuclear innovation was on the rise, and it was unanimously decided the idea of tiny reactors distributed in remote locations is a terrible idea from a safety and proliferation stand-point. Just think about the fact that graphite moderated reactors are optimal for plutonium generation, now you're going to mass-manufacture these little things and distribute them all over the world, owned by small mining companies or remote rural townships? No way that flies with the IAEA or the NRC.
When are they targeting first commercial deployment? Has an ISMR reactor ever operated or gone through regulation in the U.S.? Do they have an own-and-operate model which allows NRC reviews for new sites to take a little as 6 months?
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.
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.
The amount of time I’ve read “XXXX is the next Oklo” these last few weeks has been insane. Oklo is the next Oklo. Terrestrial only makes sense to me if you are specifically looking for Canadian market exposure, as that’s where most of their regulatory headway and experience is in. Domestically, ISMR tech is completely unproven and will likely face more regulatory hurdles with the NRC, to which HOND has had very little experience with. Also they are targeting their first commercial build in the “early 2030s” so most optimistically that’s 5 years behind the competition.
OKLO’s COLA submission to the NRC is any day now- looking forward to the morning they announce
Yeah I’m talking about the NRC for commercialization, outside of the pilot program
They can’t even build a reactor until they have NRC approval which they haven’t yet applied for.
Oklo is not a "proven design". They have no reactor built yet and don't even have NRC license. NuScale's SMR is not a proven design, for that matter, though they at least have an NRC license, nor the BWRX-300, nor terrapower's, nor nano's. None of these smrs are proven anything because they haven't been built yet. They are all paper-reactors. When they have built one and it works it will be proven.
Calling Oklo a scam makes no sense- they’re literally building at a DOE site under the federal Reactor Pilot Program and just had their NRC design criteria accepted for accelerated review. You don’t get government-backed land, fuel access, and federal oversight if you’re fake. It’s one of the most regulated industries on the planet, not some crypto rug pull.
There was an episode on them on Decouple podcast. Their design got rejected by NRC. They’re trying to accomplish their goal with 200 people while countries like Russia that have actual fast sodium reactors have thousands of people working on it (a whole division of Rosatom). The only new approved design is for TerraPower, but they aren’t publicly traded
It has went under NRC review already though specifically, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has completed a Safety Evaluation for Terrestrial’s IMSR Principal Design Criteria, approving inherent reactor safety features
After I graduated college I worked at a national lab that handled the licensing applications (on behalf of the NRC) of 29 new nuclear power plants. I worked on the hydrology portion. Each application was delivered on PALLETS. Do you know how many of those 29 were built? Only one, Vogtle.
There’s no design submission. The last submission they made over 3 years ago was dismissed without prejudice. Which is incredibly rare. Usually the NRC will work with companies to things approved. I think the micro reactor technology will work eventually but they will need at least another decade to get up and running. And even then, the ROI is basically a mystery at this point. It may never cost out. Getting something approved to be built could very well be another rug pull when it doesn’t work out.
OKLO have only begun their dance with the NRC which can take 7+ years and are very likely to NOT fast track anything, particularly something new and unproven . NuScale $SMR is already past that hurdle but doesn’t have a “celebrity” investor like Altman. The tides could quickly turn if NuScale can keep their head start to market. Neither is likely to have a working reactor before 2029.
While Terrestrial Energy ($HOND) has potential, the argument that it’s “undervalued relative to Oklo” ignores key structural and regulatory realities. Oklo isn’t just a concept-stage company… it’s the first private U.S. company granted Department of Energy pilot program authority (three of the eleven total awards) and has an active reactor site at Idaho National Laboratory where it’s broken ground. Oklo’s Aurora design is a modernized version of EBR-II, a sodium-cooled fast reactor that successfully operated for three decades at the same site, giving it a uniquely proven technical foundation. By contrast, Terrestrial’s IMSR design hasn’t yet entered U.S. NRC licensing review, and the company doesn’t hold any U.S. construction or operating licenses. Its agreements so far are preliminary and largely outside the U.S. market. Oklo has also secured HALEU fuel access through DOE contracts- a key bottleneck that Terrestrial still faces… and has established power purchase and development framework agreements totaling over 14 GW, including with Switch, Equinix and Wyoming hyperscale. Terrestrial’s SPAC valuation looks lower mainly because it’s earlier in both licensing and commercialization; it hasn’t demonstrated an operational test system or secured federal demonstration backing. Meanwhile, Oklo is already several phases into the DOE pilot pipeline and under active NRC review for multiple submissions, including its Principal Design Criteria report now being reviewed on an accelerated timeline. In short, Oklo’s advantage isn’t hype… it’s positioning. It has regulatory traction, a proven reactor lineage, secured fuel and siting rights, and tangible commercial demand- all in the U.S. market where AI and data-center-driven power needs are growing fastest. Terrestrial may eventually play a role, but Oklo is clearly ahead in real-world execution.
Yeah, I think its hard to complain about 4x and 5x returns hahaha. And lets face it, OKLO is a 25B dollar company with no revenue and no NRC approved design. 25 billion is a hell of a lot for having nothing but ideas.
There are major utility companies powering data centers with Nuclear Power right now. Okolo hasn't even been able to get approved by the NRC to do testing yet.
For DoD and DOE builds, yeah. However Oklo will be submitting their COLA to NRC soon for commercial.
I didn’t realize Trump cut out the NRC. I’m going to read up in that
It’s great that the DOE can now circumvent NRC authority to build these pilot reactors- I’m sure we’ll see a lot more coming soon! Looks like their new target is mid-2026. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-30/oklo-targets-mid-2026-launch-for-us-nuclear-reactor-ceo-says?embedded-checkout=true
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.
My past several buys have all been for International Isotopes. Two pending catalysts are an uplisting to a major exchange, for which shareholders/BOD have voted for, and a $12.5 mil sell of an NRC deconversion of depleted uranium license, or DuF6 for those that want details. The announced buyer is American Fuel Resources and have applied for that license. It will be a huge catalyst for INIS and for current retail investors. Disclosure: I have been investing in the company over 10 years. Search for company name and AFR or NRC and you will find links to more info, or go to company website. [https://intisoid.com/](https://intisoid.com/) $INIS is 70% insider owned, and very much under the radar it would appears. Until recently there were not a lot of shares for sell near the trading range. The company sells radioisotopes, medical equipment, calibration standards, and sealed sources. There was a 180K ASK open late in the trading day yesterday. That was out of the norm, even for a stock that trades oddly. If one were able to build a position without running up the SP, then there might be some reason to look at this hidden gem. I saw one analyst average target price of just over 16 cents for the next 12 months. I can see something much higher than that when news of the license transfer hits the streets. Since September there has been a noted increase in followers on LinkedIn for what that is worth. The company just wrapped up a 4 day presentation of products in Spain. Other recent presentations have been in Latin America. Several key employee new hires to fill new positions indicate rapid growth for the company.
Progress * They **broke ground** on their first commercial Aurora reactor (Aurora-INL) at Idaho National Laboratory. Construction is underway. * They completed the **NRC Readiness Assessment Phase 1** for their Combined License Application (COLA); meaning they’ve satisfied several pre-application regulatory requirements. * Their NRC “Principal Design Criteria” report (setting safety, reliability, and performance requirements) was accepted for review under an accelerated timeline.
Look at HOND. Buying a nuclear company that got the same love from the NRC that OKLO did. A company that’s actually further ahead of OKLO. It’s market cap? About 50x less than OKLO. This fucker is gonna run up so hard
NRC is the regulator. Designers and manufacturers should submit their design documents to NRC for approvals. Design approv is how regulatory control starts. This will be followed by factory process approval. For example Nuscale approval documenta are available for public viewing.
You say no viable product, but Oklo’s Aurora is based directly on the EBR-II reactor that ran safely and efficiently at INL for three decades. They’ve already broken ground at the same site, completed fuel assembly flow-testing, and had their PDC topicals accepted by the NRC under an accelerated schedule. Yes, they’re pre-revenue, but in advanced nuclear, ‘viable’ means validated tech, regulatory traction, and committed demand… not a finished plant. The upside isn’t about being identical to Amazon or Tesla- it’s about being first to scale a proven design to meet exploding AI and data center power needs. If they execute, the leverage is enormous
NRC meant Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I have updated the post. Please approve.
Tomorrow is the first day that Oklo is eligible to submit their Aurora application to the NRC (10/1) per the new ADVANCE Act fees
Just means it’ll be faster to get rejected by the NRC (again). Streamlining the process is advantageous for all the players in the SMR/AMR space, particularly those with existing, functional designs!
All the faster for the NRC to decline it (again)
My bet is on International Isotopes. Ticker INIS and there is news about a sell of NRC license for deconversion of depleted uranium for $12.5 mil that should happen soon. There is talk of another buyer perhaps coming in with a higher offer if American Fuel Resources isn't able to arrange financing. INIS has given a drop dead date of next March. Looking at Level II now I see what would be a huge jump should trading go anywhere that high. Company is 70% owned by insiders and they have already voted with the other shareholders to uplist to a big board. I've been building a large core position for over 10 years. For those that follow on LinkedIn, you will have noticed several new key employee hires that indicate rapid growth. [https://intisoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/PR\_DUF6-Asset-Transaction\_20240208\_final.pdf](https://intisoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/PR_DUF6-Asset-Transaction_20240208_final.pdf)
I don't get the nuclear meme stocks. NRC and DOE approval takes decades.
Calling Oklo a ‘grifter company’ ignores the actual milestones they’ve hit. Their first COL was denied for administrative reasons, not safety, and they’ve completed an NRC readiness assessment while preparing for resubmission. They’re also building at INL under DOE pilot authority and have framework agreements with hyperscalers- real steps toward de-risking and commercialization. You haven’t provided any evidence that anything is a scam, instead you are hyper emotional and trying to distract.
Their first COL was denied for administrative reasons, not safety, and Oklo is prepping a resubmission after completing an NRC readiness assessment. With DOE pilot authority, INL construction, and hyperscaler agreements, they’re the U.S. first-mover in advanced SMRs. First-mover isn’t about a finished reactor- it’s about milestones, regulatory progress, and infrastructure, and Oklo is already ticking those boxes.
Yes, Oklo’s first COL was not approved, but it was largely due to process and formatting issues, not safety or feasibility. They’ve since resubmitted and are actively working with the NRC under updated advanced reactor frameworks, and they’re moving forward with DOE pilot program authority and actual construction at INL. Being first in line with both regulatory engagement and commercial frameworks is what makes them a U.S. first-mover- you don’t need a finished reactor to hold that position.
Respectfully, your comment seems to conflate traditional gigawatt-scale nuclear with what Oklo is actually doing. Oklo isn’t building a 1GW conventional plant that takes 10–15 years, they’re pioneering compact, advanced fission reactors designed to be smaller, modular, and faster to license and deploy. Oklo is one of the first U.S. companies to advance a commercially deployable advanced fission reactor through the NRC licensing process. That regulatory head start is significant, and most competitors are still in early design or pre-licensing stages. They have concrete plans for multiple 75MW reactors with LOIs and DOE support, so this isn’t just theoretical. By design, SMRs reduce construction and permitting timelines dramatically, we’re talking years (2027), not decades, before revenue generation. While traditional nuclear takes forever, Oklo is actually pioneering the next generation that could scale safely and profitably much faster. The stock isn’t about vaporware, it’s about being first to market in a segment with enormous regulatory and technical barriers.
Didn't the NRC deny OKLOs design and license? What do you meant leading with regulatory approvals?
Kudos for being quite consistent about your position with respect to HOND as I had remembered reading your same comment verbatim in another Reddit community and upon my searching, I see it’s in multiple forms in response to others mentioning HOND. No question that for those who were in early in OKLO they made a killing and for that they deserve praise for their foresight. But given its lofty valuation now, I don’t think there are the same opportunities for OKLO investors to 10 X their investment in the next one or two years. Perhaps the OKLO technology will succeed and that would be great for the AI world and I certainly wish them well. But unless you were in early, I don’t foresee the same kind of returns in the stock for new investors. HOND offers new investors the only publicly traded SMR company that like OKLO is on the DOE SMR pilot program and its share price is a fraction of OLKO. In other words, there is potential headroom for dramatic Share price growth - whether the stock achieves that or not is anyone’s guess. As far as the technology goes, whether either of these companies’ reactor designs wok in commercial use is anyone’s guess because neither has been tried yet in commercial use. Neither has a design approved by the US government. Personally, I hope both companies succeed and that the AI world has a source of clean, carbon free, almost unlimited power because the United States grid will never be built out to the size required by the mushrooming demand of the construction, boom and data centers. It would be fantastic if OKLO shareholders continue to get richer and richer and those of HOND join the party. Since you cut and pasted your response to HOND in multiple forms in Reddit I will paste the best response I’ve seen to your criticisms of HOND: “Whether HOND will become the next OKLO in the future has yet to be determined. You are right - the Terrestrial Energy reactors will be larger and have a new design but are designed to produce many times more power than OKLO’s reactors. In terms of speed to market I am not sure if OKLO will be first. OKLO’s first design concept was rejected by the NRC in January 2022 and it still lacks an approved reactor design. Only SMR (NuScale Power) has that albeit for a 50-MWe module - not the 77-MWe module design that it wants to move forward with. OKLO is also very expensive so, as an investment, if you are not already in it, there may not be as much upward headroom as opposed something like HOND, which is still much less expensive by comparison to either OKLO or SMR. I do not see OKLO offering any possibility to a new investor this year of a 10 X or even 5X return on a new investment as that’s already occurred. HOND offers that possibility (although of course it could go south as well.) Also, HOND has another significant advantage over competitors. Connections. The United States Commerce Secretary’s family’s investment firm, NYC powerhouse Cantor Fitzgerald (the Commerce Secretary himself was the chairman of this firm and the principal owner and controller of it until he became Commerce Secretary, and transferred that ownership and control to family trusts controlled and run by his children and family and his sons run the firm now), own over $20 million of HOND stock and warrants which, if the stock performs similar to OKLO, will be worth at least $200 million to $300 million. I would venture to believe that the stock will perform quite well if the Trump administration continues to give the necessary, regulatory approvals to the company, or takes an ownership stake in it.”
Yeah $OKLO has giga-tendie potential, but it can also nuke faster than my Robinhood account on CPI day. They’ve got no revenue yet, just vibes, and they’re burning cash like a Tesla fire while praying those LOIs actually turn into contracts. Regulators are the final boss here, one NRC hiccup and this thing faceplants 50% before lunch. Execution risk is huge too, because building a mini reactor isn’t like backtesting an RSI strategy, it’s supply chains, fuel, and safety, a lot of ways to rug. The stock’s already running more on Sam Altman hype than fundamentals, which means if he sneezes wrong, OKLO bleeds. And if they need more cash, dilution is coming and your “diamond hands” turn into confetti. So yeah, it *could* hit $200 if every catalyst lands perfectly, but it could just as easily crater if one domino tips. Trade the volatility, don’t marry the reactor.
Oklo’s initial COL was denied due to process deficiencies, not technical concerns, and the NRC has since revised its licensing framework for advanced reactors. In contrast to NuScale’s large-scale, high-capex design, Oklo is targeting smaller, modular systems with a clearer commercial pathway. Importantly, Oklo recently broke ground at Idaho National Lab as part of the DOE reactor pilot program, marking the tangible start of infrastructure construction. Insider alignment, including Sam Altman’s ongoing holdings, further contradicts the idea of a near-term ‘enrichment scheme.’
Oklo’s 2022 COL application was denied for process deficiencies, not safety grounds. Since then, the NRC has updated its approach for advanced reactors, and Oklo has DOE pilot backing that lets them proceed with site and infrastructure work. While commercial deployment is long lead, the company is aiming for first criticality around 2026. The key difference from a ‘pump and dump’ is that Oklo has insider alignment, DOE program support, and an active regulatory pathway. They just began site construction last week! https://www.power-eng.com/nuclear/smrs/oklo-breaks-ground-on-its-first-nuclear-powerhouse/
Reactor is being constructed via DOE authority as a part of the Reactor Pilot program award, authorized via EO and aiming to demonstrate criticality by July 4th 2026. Separately, OKLO is constructing the Aurora building and other infrastructure needed for the reactor, which the NRC allows for up until approval.
you just need to look at market reaction, did OKLO rip more off the announcement of the 1.7B investment into recycling? you’re treating it as a guaranteed money maker for them, it’s not, it’s money spent on their end. They could burn $1.68B, face NRC permitting delays, and still not have a profitable fuel recycling business by 2030. But you’re assuming it’s going to be a game changer for them when they could probably still be operating a loss in 2030. So idk what it is you think you have figured out that no one else has. Either way, you’re clearly set in your view. The thing is, I had oklo at 30, I managed to sell close to the peak at 125-130, I would not be buying back in here. I’m still holding about 10 percent of my original shares. All the best.
I bought a ton of $OKLO in the $6-7 range and now I'm riding this rocket to the moon. If they get NRC approval it's an easy 50-100% pop from current price. Indeed, no revenue, no production power plant, but a lot of hopium. I'm playing the CC game now and it's just as wild. Honestly I don't know how this stock is worth over $50 but I'm happy to rake in some call premium when it pops.
Don't get me wrong, I like the tech and am big on nuclear in general, but they are still likely many years away from producing any power. I know their guidance says Summer 2026, but I think that's salesman level optimism. Right now is way too early stage and the risk is way too high with no commercial project operating and no regulatory approval from the NRC. If this company delivers on its promises it will have a massive impact on the energy space. I totally understand wanting to get your foot in the door early and wish you luck, but I'd rather catch the momentum wave after they've started regular operations and collecting revenue as the risk to reward ratio is a lot more attractive then.
Hey- someone else has asked; it depends largely on the timing of their COL submission to the NRC, which could be as soon as next Wednesday (10/1) when the reduced cost structure hits via the ADVANCE Act. I’d expect that piece to happen relatively sooner than later. For a potential OpenAI partnership, that would likely happen sometime over the next month or two, given Altman’s latest blog post.
Oklo’s 75 MWe units generate about $75–95M revenue each at $0.12–0.15/kWh. To justify a $50–100B valuation (about $96–192/share on 520M FD shares), they’d need 50–100 units deployed, or 3.7–7.5 GW. With 40–50% margins, that’s $1.5–4B EBITDA on $4–10B revenue. If NRC approval, PPAs, HALEU supply, and early projects succeed, the math supports $150–200+ per share. This doesn’t represent the entire 14GW in order pipeline (200+ reactors) through LOI/MOUs.
Depends on the timing of the catalysts mentioned above. Earliest that OKLO could submit their COL to the NRC is next Wednesday, so would expect that piece to happen relatively sooner than later. Any potential OpenAI partnership would happen sometime over the next month or two, given Altman’s latest blog post.
You think a stock that has gone up ~1600% in a year based off nothing other than hype, and is the highest valued no revenue company has a bull case to keep climbing and stay there? Lmao. Just wait in 12 months when there is a construction delay or a regulatory delay. They haven’t even reapplied with the NRC. This shit will go back to $10 a share before it goes over $200
You are right - the Terrestrial Energy reactors will be larger and have a new design but are designed to produce many times more power than OKLO’s reactors. In terms of speed to market I am not sure if OKLO will be first. OKLO’s first design concept was rejected by the NRC in January 2022 and it still lacks an approved reactor design. Only SMR (NuScale Power) has that albeit for a 50-MWe module - not the 77-MWe module design that it wants to move forward with. OKLO is also very expensive so, as an investment, if you are not already in it, there may not be as much upward headroom as opposed something like HOND, which is still much less expensive by comparison to either OKLO or SMR. I do not see OKLO offering any possibility to a new investor this year of a 10 X or even 5X return on a new investment as that’s already occurred. HOND offers that possibility (although of course it could go south as well.) Also, HOND has another significant advantage over competitors. Connections. The United States Commerce Secretary’s family’s investment firm, NYC powerhouse Cantor Fitzgerald (the Commerce Secretary himself was the chairman of this firm and the principal owner and controller of it until he became Commerce Secretary, and transferred that ownership and control to family trusts controlled and run by his children and family and his sons run the firm now), own over $20 million of HOND stock and warrants which, if the stock performs similar to OKLO, will be worth at least $200 million to $300 million. I would venture to believe that the stock will perform quite well if the Trump administration continues to give the necessary, regulatory approvals to the company, or takes an ownership stake in it.
When I was working for Westinghouse in the 1990s, most of my work related to address issues raised by NRC, not the utility clients. NRC added the cost of operating a NPP to the point that none of them was making money, and most of them were not going to renew their licenses when they expire
Duration risk isn’t due to long construction windows like prior technologies as you describe. It’s more due to new regulatory burden of new designs instead of vetted designs with a lot of traditional large onsite construction. These SMR’s that are the push are much quicker to build in a vacuum and can be built more offsite than traditional style. HOWEVER someone needs to navigate it on utility scale to finish to prove out the duration risk isn’t valid since they have to get new technology licensed by NRC as part of the initial wave and being a guinea pig. Fragile is not a word I would use to describe the technology and landscape of nuclear power. It has more resilient protections built in than all other technologies and a stellar track record in terms of the last 20 years of US fleet performance. The wave of data centers may be the next five years but the wave of new capital in the US especially the southeast will continue for longer and need new load growth. But NONE of the technologies are situation for multiple reasons to truly meet the demand of hyperscalers. It’s about triage and arbitrage and picking and choosing because none can meet it.
This has no bearing on the US market. You can’t buy a gas turbine right now. Lead time is 5 years. Nuclear, if you can get a permit from the NRC, will be >10 years and over budget after you get through all the NIMBY delays and engineering issues. Last time US built a coal plant was mid-2010. Even if you could get a permit to build who’s going to build it?
They are submitting their application to the NRC in October to take advantage of the reduced fees via the ADVANCE Act.
Are they actively building the reactor? Have they submitted anything for approval from the NRC?
What exactly did Oklo break ground on today? They don't have blueprints, NRC approval, or funds necessary to start building for at least a few more years.
There's a bit more to this, as is so often on Reddit threads: it has no revenue, true, as it's in the R&D phase. I would NOT buy based on the current superinflated current value, but it wears watching for ups and downs, like SMR (which also back up). Nuke stocks have been going crazy for about 3-4 years now - started when DOE under the Biden administration declared both funding, and a quickened regulatory environment. Check out SMR... still wished I'd bought a ton at $2, but I made a pretty penny. The current administration has talked about further reduction in regulatory hurdles. The only company with an approved design is NuCore (SMR). It's the only design approved by NRC in the entire existence of the agency. Dr. No indeed! [https://newsletter.doomberg.com/p/nuclear-waste](https://newsletter.doomberg.com/p/nuclear-waste) . So, not having an "approved" design puts them in with the rest of the pack, including some backed by Bill Gates. A simple Google search reveals: \- **Oklo**... headed to Oak Ridge (aka, for testing). \- Started by two MIT PhD's, \- the technology has been built and operated before I don't know if this Fast Breeder design is the new cat's meow, but Liberty Energy thinks so, so there's that. I think we all can agree it would be great if the design works & is cost effective.
from Stock Advisor: "After rising nearly 2,000% in 12 months, Oklo now has a market cap of $19.2 billion. Its shares outstanding keep rising due to common stock offerings, which will increase its market cap without the share price going higher. It is hard to value Oklo stock because it generates zero revenue. However, we do know that in five years it will likely also be generating zero in revenue since it still hasn't gotten the Aurora plant approved by the NRC. That is zero dollars in revenue, let alone thinking about generating a profit. Even if Oklo begins building nuclear power plants, it is unclear why it deserves a $19-plus billion market cap. These are capital-intensive projects with slim margins. If profits materialize at all, it will be over a decade from now. With this context, it is clear that investors should avoid buying Oklo stock, as **it is extremely overvalued** at current prices and may never generate any revenue. This stock price will likely be lower five years from now."
But they don’t build them, they are hoping to be able to build them in the future. Look into the NRC rejection of their Aurora from 3 years ago - whilst denied without prejudice, it’s pretty damning in between the lines. Several other nuclear companies, both public (Rolls Royce) or private (X-energy) are much further ahead!
Very Risky Investoment / Current valuation reflect producing at least 20 to 30 reactors per year. But Maximum production could be 2 or 3 max. NOT proven techknowledge. NO license approved by Gov. NO production facility. Here is a breakdown of the primary risks associated with Oklo stock: 1. Financial and Business Model Risks **Pre-Revenue Status:** Oklo has not yet generated significant revenue. The company is in the development and licensing phase, which requires substantial capital. Its first commercial reactor is not expected to be operational until late 2027 or 2028. This means the company's valuation is based on future potential, not current financial performance, making it highly susceptible to changes in market sentiment. * **High Cash Burn:** As a pre-revenue company, Oklo is burning through cash for research and development, operational expenses, and licensing fees. The company's financial stability and ability to continue its operations depend on its cash reserves and its ability to raise additional funds. This could lead to a need for more financing, which may dilute the value of existing shares. * **High Volatility:** The stock has experienced extreme volatility. Its price can swing dramatically based on news, analyst ratings, and investor speculation. This makes it a high-risk investment and not suitable for conservative portfolios or investors who are not prepared for significant price fluctuations. 2. Regulatory and Technical Risks **Complex Regulatory Environment:** The nuclear energy industry is one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the world. Oklo's success is entirely dependent on its ability to navigate the complex and stringent regulatory process with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Any delays, setbacks, or denials in the licensing process could severely impact the company's timeline and financial viability. The company has already faced a setback with an initial application denial from the NRC. No**nproven Commercial Technology:** Oklo's technology, while promising, has not been commercially deployed. The company's small modular reactor (SMR) design is innovative, but the technical challenges and potential for unforeseen issues during the final stages of development, construction, and operation are significant. Any technical problems could delay projects and erode investor confidence. **Nuclear Event Risk:** While Oklo's technology is designed with advanced safety features, any major nuclear-related incident, even one at another company or in another country, could negatively affect public perception and the entire nuclear industry, potentially leading to increased regulations and a drop in the company's stock price. 3. Market and Competition Risks **Intense Competition:** Oklo operates in a competitive and rapidly evolving market. It faces competition from other advanced nuclear companies like NuScale Power, as well as from established energy providers and other clean energy technologies. The company's ability to secure contracts and market share is not guaranteed. * **Market Adoption:** The adoption of advanced nuclear technology, particularly for new applications like powering data centers, is not certain. While demand for clean energy is growing, Oklo must successfully convince potential customers to invest in a novel and capital-intensive power solution. * **Reliance on a Specific Market:** A significant portion of the current investor hype around Oklo is tied to the demand for power from the AI and data center sectors. A slowdown or shift in this market could have a disproportionately negative impact on the company's stock price.
Very Risky Investoment / Current valuation reflect producing at least 20 to 30 reactors per year. But Maximum production could be 2 or 3 max. NOT proven techknowledge. NO license approved by Gov. NO production facility. Here is a breakdown of the primary risks associated with Oklo stock: 1. Financial and Business Model Risks **Pre-Revenue Status:** Oklo has not yet generated significant revenue. The company is in the development and licensing phase, which requires substantial capital. Its first commercial reactor is not expected to be operational until late 2027 or 2028. This means the company's valuation is based on future potential, not current financial performance, making it highly susceptible to changes in market sentiment. * **High Cash Burn:** As a pre-revenue company, Oklo is burning through cash for research and development, operational expenses, and licensing fees. The company's financial stability and ability to continue its operations depend on its cash reserves and its ability to raise additional funds. This could lead to a need for more financing, which may dilute the value of existing shares. * **High Volatility:** The stock has experienced extreme volatility. Its price can swing dramatically based on news, analyst ratings, and investor speculation. This makes it a high-risk investment and not suitable for conservative portfolios or investors who are not prepared for significant price fluctuations. 2. Regulatory and Technical Risks **Complex Regulatory Environment:** The nuclear energy industry is one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the world. Oklo's success is entirely dependent on its ability to navigate the complex and stringent regulatory process with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Any delays, setbacks, or denials in the licensing process could severely impact the company's timeline and financial viability. The company has already faced a setback with an initial application denial from the NRC. No**nproven Commercial Technology:** Oklo's technology, while promising, has not been commercially deployed. The company's small modular reactor (SMR) design is innovative, but the technical challenges and potential for unforeseen issues during the final stages of development, construction, and operation are significant. Any technical problems could delay projects and erode investor confidence. **Nuclear Event Risk:** While Oklo's technology is designed with advanced safety features, any major nuclear-related incident, even one at another company or in another country, could negatively affect public perception and the entire nuclear industry, potentially leading to increased regulations and a drop in the company's stock price. 3. Market and Competition Risks **Intense Competition:** Oklo operates in a competitive and rapidly evolving market. It faces competition from other advanced nuclear companies like NuScale Power, as well as from established energy providers and other clean energy technologies. The company's ability to secure contracts and market share is not guaranteed. * **Market Adoption:** The adoption of advanced nuclear technology, particularly for new applications like powering data centers, is not certain. While demand for clean energy is growing, Oklo must successfully convince potential customers to invest in a novel and capital-intensive power solution. * **Reliance on a Specific Market:** A significant portion of the current investor hype around Oklo is tied to the demand for power from the AI and data center sectors. A slowdown or shift in this market could have a disproportionately negative impact on the company's stock price.
As a nuclear company, their combined construction and operation license application was flat out rejected by the NRC (nuclear regulatory commission). This is rare to not get comments, but instead only noted significant gaps in key areas associated with nuclear analysis, accident analyses and safety classifications of structures, systems, and components. If the market was rational, I would be shorting this.
5,400 data centers in the US with 20-100 MWe average yearly consumption. OKLO has 3 sites, Aurora being capable of 75 MWe. If they meet the DoE objective for demonstrating criticality by next summer and pass NRC hurdles, this could turn into a thousand micro-reactor sites by 2035. Looks like that's being priced in. Congrats bulls. I won't buy puts unless there's a hiccup in the approval process.
**GTER Globa Terra Acquisition** 0.12 152.2 - Deeply undervalued SPAC, good potential for arbitrage +++ ~~ORIQ Origin Investment~~ I 0.13 60.6 - Trust fund is too small ~~LWAC LightWave Acquisition 0.16 215.7~~ \- Bad team, several failures (Moolec, View, AEye), overly beneficial to sponsors (26.8% promote). With only one success CF Finance Acquisition Corp. I -> GCM Grosvenor. SOCA Solarius Capital Acquisition 0.17 173.4 - Specialists in M&A and private equity, no experience in SPAC niche. Warrants are cheap. ~~OBA Oxley Bridge Acquisition 0.17 253.1~~ \- Bad team. Southeast Asia. Nah. ~~PACH Pioneer Acquisition I 0.17 253.2~~ \- Bad team. All previous deals are complete disaster. ~~FIGX FIGX Capital Acquisition 0.18 150.6~~ \- Bad team, several failures (failed Bleuacacia + AAGR) *BLUW Blue Water Acquisition III 0.18 253.6* \- Not my niche, no idea (?) **IPOD Dune Acquisition II** 0.19 145 - Undervalued, theoretically can find a 10 bagger in AI niche VNME Vendome Acquisition I 0.20 200 - Elite team, experts in restructuring and private equity, but no experience in SPAC niche. ~~COPL Copley Acquisition 0.20 174.5~~ \- Asia. TACH Titan Acquisition 0.23 280 - OKAY TEAM, fair price. Successes - Paya, Payoneer, Perella Weinberg Partners. But several delisted zombie SPACs. **PAII Pyrophyte Acquisition II** 0.24 200.4 - Decent SPAC, can potentially find a oil/mining company TVA Texas Ventures Acquisition III 0.24 227.9 - OKAY SPAC, previous deals - Arbe Robotics + NEXT Renewable Fuels (failed to complete merger). Sneaky warrant terms favoring insiders. **EVAC EQV Ventures Acquisition II** 0.28 460 - TOP TIER SPAC, STRONG BUY +++++ **CGCT Cartesian Growth III** 0.28 277.8 - STRONG BUY, might find a target soon +++++ **NHIC NewHold Investment III** 0.29 202.9 - A team of professionals from private equity are playing "SPAC game". The SPAC leader Kevin Charlton was a president in Hennessy acquisition, previous deals - Blue Bird, Daseke, NRC Group. They focus on "boring" businesses mostly. First SPAC merged with Evolv Technologies ++ ~~GSHR Gesher Acquisition II 0.30 144.3~~ \- Meh, I'd avoid Israel related companies + low cap
**HCM II Acquisition Corp. (HOND), HONDW** NRC Completes Safety Evaluation and Approves Terrestrial Energy IMSR Principal Design Criteria Including its Mechanism for Inherent Reactor Power Control. September 10, 2025. Terrestrial Energy Selected for DOE Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Reactor Pilot Program for Accelerated Development. August 12, 2025.
I invest in what I think I know best, follow it closely, know how it trades, and try to keep aware of both what you know and what you might NOT know. Keep searching for news on various sources. Message boards can greatly sway your thoughts, so let all thoughts be well thought out. My fav penny stock at this time is INIS. Much to share, but do your own DD please. The stock has traded up this year with occasional high volume days, but has recently dropped below the 52 wk avg. Company is mostly insider owned. I recently searched the company name "International Isotopes" in quotes and "AFR" and found additional info that is important to retail investors in the company. The search should give insight into income coming to the company shortly and when it happens $INIS will be interesting to follow. The deal requires NRC approval for the transfer of a license for deconversion of depleted uranium (UF6) and that was forecast to have happened already. License is for construction and operation. Proposed location is/was Hobbs, NM and the environmental impact studies have already been completed. Sale includes transfer of patents dealing with deconversion. Also found some news about Texas Nuclear Alliance. There is some sort of connection there that I've not quite figured out. Seems
Full list of microreactors in pre application with NRC https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/who-were-working-with/pre-application-activities.html
Without massive reform at the NRC, solar and wind blow nuclear away with their drastically lower costs, even if you include battery storage for on-demand power. When it takes billions just to get past the design phase of a nuclear plant there's simply no competition. And the US has a ton of empty desert that would be great for solar.
I did not say they make nuclear reactors. Here, let me quote you: **HALEU Demand Risk**: The demand for HALEU fuel is dependent on the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approving HALEU-based SMRs, which is not yet a certainty. SMR stands for Small Modular Reactor. Nuclear Reactor. Now go re-read my comment and try banging those two neurons of yours together and make a spark.
I interned at the NRC and couldn’t believe how slow they were to do fucking anything. Anytime they needed to approve something, they were told just find a similar example from previous 20 years and apply that. I mean I was an intern so doubt I was exposed to much, and it was 2011 during Fukushima so all hands on deck but it was mind fucking numbing.
OKLO is complete garbage that was laughed out of the NRC review process. All they do is release powerpoints of A-frame reactor buildings that would not have enough shielding for any reactor. They will never build a reactor and any valuation above that of ENRON in 2024 is too high. The only reason the stock price is so high is someone on its board of directors is now energy secretary and is pumping it. https://old.reddit.com/r/nuclear/comments/1kuji7e/we_need_to_talk_about_this_is_oklo_a_fraud/ NuScale is almost as bad, however they actually have an NRC-approved design that they lied about predicted costs for years, until they actually had someone willing to build one, at which point their predicted costs kept going up until the participating municipalities dropped out and the project was cancelled https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuscale-uamps-project-small-modular-reactor-ramanasmr-/705717/ Fact is most new electrical generation globally is now wind and solar because its cheap. All these small nuclear companies are just trying to do what was abandoned decades ago for being too expensive and gambling on people forgetting history.
Oklo is way more promising than RYCEY, it’s not even close. Summary below doesn’t even factor in that they were awarded 3/11 of the DOE pilot projects for 2026 deployment. Oklo is positioned ahead in the SMR space because it has a much earlier deployment target, aiming for its first plant in 2027–2028 compared to Rolls-Royce’s likely 2030s timeline. It has already progressed into site preparation, licensing, and NRC reapplication, while Rolls-Royce remains in design and regulatory assessment. Oklo also has concrete commercial traction, with letters of intent in place and a confirmed U.S. Air Force project, whereas Rolls-Royce has global interest but no firm orders. Partnerships with companies like Vertiv and KHNP provide Oklo with strategic advantages, and it benefits from strong funding and investor support. Finally, its market focus is on active U.S. deployment and direct engagement with energy customers, in contrast to Rolls-Royce’s design-first approach and longer-term strategic development.
Oklo is way more promising than RYCEY, it’s not even close. Summary below doesn’t even factor in that they were awarded 3/11 of the DOE pilot projects for 2026 deployment. > Oklo is positioned ahead in the SMR space because it has a much earlier deployment target, aiming for its first plant in 2027–2028 compared to Rolls-Royce’s likely 2030s timeline. It has already progressed into site preparation, licensing, and NRC reapplication, while Rolls-Royce remains in design and regulatory assessment. Oklo also has concrete commercial traction, with letters of intent in place and a confirmed U.S. Air Force project, whereas Rolls-Royce has global interest but no firm orders. Partnerships with companies like Vertiv and KHNP provide Oklo with strategic advantages, and it benefits from strong funding and investor support. Finally, its market focus is on active U.S. deployment and direct engagement with energy customers, in contrast to Rolls-Royce’s design-first approach and longer-term strategic development.
It’s common knowledge that Oklo is way more promising than RYCEY: > Oklo is positioned ahead in the SMR space because it has a much earlier deployment target, aiming for its first plant in 2027–2028 compared to Rolls-Royce’s likely 2030s timeline. It has already progressed into site preparation, licensing, and NRC reapplication, while Rolls-Royce remains in design and regulatory assessment. Oklo also has concrete commercial traction, with letters of intent in place and a confirmed U.S. Air Force project, whereas Rolls-Royce has global interest but no firm orders. Partnerships with companies like Vertiv and KHNP provide Oklo with strategic advantages, and it benefits from strong funding and investor support. Finally, its market focus is on active U.S. deployment and direct engagement with energy customers, in contrast to Rolls-Royce’s design-first approach and longer-term strategic development.
Couldn’t disagree more… Oklo is worth way more and it’s not even close. They have a first-mover advantage, backed by a highly scalable model with roughly 14 GW in their order pipeline, strong DoD and DOE partnerships, additional revenue verticals in nuclear fuel recycling and medical/industrial radioisotopes, proven reactor technology, and the strongest balance sheet amongst SMR projects. Their leadership team consists of MIT PhDs who have deep ties to both government and major tech companies, positioning them perfectly for markets like data centers, microgrids, and remote industrial sites. The current valuation reflects only a small fraction of the contracted and anticipated future revenue stream. NuScale, while further along in traditional NRC processes, is at least three years behind Oklo in timelines, uses less advanced Gen-III PWR technology, has fewer strategic partnerships, and is hampered by a utility-scale model that is slower, more capital intensive, and less adaptable to the distributed energy shift. Their design certification is not the same as an immediate build approval… any project would still require lengthy, site-specific construction and operating permits from any potential buyers of their design, adding at least another 3-4 years before deployment. In contrast, Oklo’s microreactor design allows for factory fabrication, rapid transport, and on-site installation, bypassing many of the bottlenecks of large-scale nuclear builds. Their COLA application route also allows for subsequent review windows of 18 months, and that doesn’t factor in tailwinds from the recent executive orders. Most importantly, Oklo’s ability to project-finance debt against future recurring revenues creates a structural scaling advantage, enabling them to roll out multiple units in parallel through the 2030s while many competitors will still be in initial deployment. Just this week, both Oklo and their radioisotope partner Atomic Alchemy were officially selected for the DOE’s reactor pilot program, streamlining the path to their first operational units by July 4, 2026. NuScale wasn’t selected and one of their largest investors, Flour, is publicly looking to exit their 15 million shares position.
According to the NRC: "...bankruptcies and change of control of licensed activities can lead to a potential loss of control of radioactive material and resultant threat to public health and safety..." https://www.nrc.gov/materials/toolboxes/llrw/bankruptcy.html If there is an oversupply of data centers at some time in the future then bankruptcies are possible. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/career-map/sell-side/capital-markets/dotcom-bubble/ Wouldn't it be safer to require a licensee to reserve space in a NRC approved and operational nuclear waste disposal facility and to post a bond large enough to safely decommision a nuclear power plant before a license is granted? Or should we just store the nuclear waste adjacent to Interstate 5 like San Onofre in California? https://voiceofsandiego.org/2025/07/18/sacramento-report-costs-are-climbing-for-nuclear-waste-disposal-at-san-onofre/
NRC regulation requires licensees to financially assure a funding mechanism to cover decommissioning costs. It's a law.
My understanding was they needed to get approval from the NRC before they can build in the US. Is that old news? I thought NuScale was the only SMR company that had the approval to build, which is supposedly a long and painful process.
Hell yeah, fellow degenerate—WSB's motto is "loss porn or bust," so why not torch that $750 on $OKLO calls at open Monday? Sentiment on X is lit with nuclear hype, analysts jacking PTs to $75+, and charts showing a potential breakout past $80 if AI energy demands keep spiking. But let's be real: this stock's got zero revenue, a history of regulatory faceplants (NRC said no thanks before), and could crater on any whiff of market fear—your $15k bath last week proves the house always wins eventually. If we all YOLO in, maybe we pump it to the moon for memes; if not, post the screenshot when it hits zero. Verify latest prices on Yahoo Finance or TradingView pre-open. Apes together strong? Or just broke. 🚀🦍💥 Sources: - https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OKLO/ - https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/NYSE-OKLO/ - https://www.cnn.com/markets/stocks/OKLO
KTOS. It hurt to sell but I needed the money for something else. Archer Aviation is about to get FAA approval. SMR just took a hit after earnings and is in a prime spot to buy. They just received NRC approval.
A bunch of legacy nuclear engineers and laid off NRC staff threatened by emerging technology, privatization and deregulation? Not surprised.
Short oklo. Biggest scam company there is. Basically last NRC application they told them to stop making numbers up, its all conceptual. Can't believe people made these guys billionaires. "Oklo provided conceptual information consistent with the information already contained in the Aurora custom combined license application but did not provide detailed technical information responsive to the staff’s requests for details about the safety of the Aurora design. Specifically, Oklo did not provide sufficiently detailed technical information to explain how Oklo arrived at the results of its MCA analysis or Oklo’s assertion that safety-related SSCs are not required to control reactivity, remove heat, and retain radioactive material." [https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2135/ML21357A034.pdf](https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2135/ML21357A034.pdf)
Problem is it's running on hopes and dreams. It's pretty revenue and doing 84 per share? It's pre recenue not making money until late 2027 assuming everything goes according to plan. And worse is if this is pricing in its value now it won't climb much higher once it is up and running. I'm much more skeptical into buying in now because it doesn't deserve this pricing when it hasn't even received NRC approval.
OKLO.. bought in btwn 18-23. Sold when it reached the 40-45 range. Thought it was near the top, they didn’t (and still don’t) even have design approval from the NRC (nuclear regulatory commission) and I was nervous about Trump’s economy. I knew former OKLO was head of energy which would give it a bump, but still. Never did j imagine it would go into the 70s without any revenue and still 5+ years away from having any. They have agreements but considering they need design approval and then have to build their reactors and pay for it, I just didn’t imagine it would get so much momentum 😫😫 Oh well, can’t dwell on the past
No, they're high risk. They're all high risk. Think for a minute and write down a consecutive list of all the regulatory hurdles. From the NRC to the IAEA. To the state and local governments. To the regional environmental impacts and risk assessments from stakeholders in the community. There's the regulatory risk from the EPA and the DOE. Then there's the risk of manufacturing and constructing a plant. If there's a small issue with hardware regulating temperature cooling, or controlling isotope waste purity. Even if there's a much smaller issue of some element of the compatibility of some simple non-reactor related parts. This may affect the entire design of the reactor and it might need to go back to square one for approval from the NRC, IAEA, DOE... Etc. There's also the very real risk of a community simply rejecting having a nuclear power plant in their backyard. And there's the very real political risk that in 4 years there's a new administration that wants to take a heavier hand in regulation to slow walk nuclear development more safely. There's also the other very real risk of scalability. SMRs designs make the promise to bring economies of scale to the nuclear reactor manufacture, this lowering the overall cost. But can you really see a US built reactor being shipped overseas to Europe, Asia, the middle east, south America? These other countries would much rather support their own local industries in their efforts to bring nuclear, rather than support a US based company. The potential scale of this industry has a ceiling, even if the rare scenario that theyre adopted quickly in the US, there's a snowballs chance in hell that these innovative designs from these US based companies will be exported to other countries. I'm sorry but I agree with your perspective of the bull case. But for you to not acknowledge the fact that there are very real risks to a nascent industry that hasn't even broken ground on any real projects yet, is simply short sighted friend. Yes, big money CEOs are talking about nuclear, and new reactor designs, and blah blah blah. I have small speculative amounts in OKLO and SMR fwiw. But I have zero intention of raising my exposure to these. A sign of intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.
This guy is either short or works for a competitor, he always trolls any conversation on Oklo. Most of what he said is flat out inaccurate. > license flat rejected by NRC in 2023 2022 and was a denial without prejudice with the invitation to resubmit > they tried to pump on a pre assessment a few weeks ago and I hope you go look at the NRC transcript for this. They basically haven’t made any progress at all. This is a flat out lie, there were no significant gaps (category A) found. “The NRC’s observations affirmed Oklo’s readiness to move forward, with no significant gaps identified that would hinder acceptance of the application. Observations were also provided that will help Oklo finalize the application to support an efficient and effective review process.” https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2517/ML25178A002.pdf > I’ve never seen a CEO on CNBC so much talking about everything but what his own company is doing and not giving a single real piece of information of its progress. What? Sharing an update every month or so on new partnerships or government contracts awarded is a bad thing? >They’re saying they’ll be up and running Q4 2027. Thats never going to happen and the p/r is nearly 300x their projected earnings for 2027. That was their projection before the recent EOs took place, which mandate further streamlining (18 months review windows) and enable the DoD to circumvent NRC approval for defense purposes, could be likely be sooner. > It’s nothing more than a meme stock trading on momentum. Reality will kick in and it will get crushed. You’ve dedicated your time on Reddit to talking crap about Oklo and you’ve been nothing but wrong so far, keep it up.
There is no justification for this price. This is a PR Firm disguised as a nuclear stock. Timelines are impossible, license flat rejected by NRC in 2023, they tried to pump on a pre assessment a few weeks ago and I hope you go look at the NRC transcript for this. They basically haven’t made any progress at all. I’ve never seen a CEO on CNBC so much talking about everything but what his own company is doing and not giving a single real piece of information of its progress. They’re saying they’ll be up and running Q4 2027. Thats never going to happen and the p/r is nearly 300x their projected earnings for 2027. It’s nothing more than a meme stock trading on momentum. Reality will kick in and it will get crushed.
Crazy this thread is almost a year old and oklo still hasn’t even reapplied for a license. The NRC pre assessment transcript basically says there has been absolutely no progress from OKLO’s initial licensing failure. The company is a hype machine and the CeO on tv every day not telling us how Oklo has progressed and instead talking very broadly confirms to me this country is a fraud.
SMR. NuScale power, NRC has approved their design for small modular nuclear reactors
Personally I sold most of mine. Not that I don’t believe in it but I needed to take profits. I hope to talk to NRC soon and try to get some info/opinions. . The Nuke stocks are DEFINITELY something to keep on the radar!
Three mile right? Yeah, maybe… NRC is slow af though. I work in nuclear so I know first hand
Oklo Inc. (NYSE: OKLO), an advanced nuclear technology company, has announced the successful completion of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) pre-application readiness assessment for Phase 1 of the combined license application (COLA) for Oklo’s first commercial Aurora powerhouse at Idaho National Laboratory (INL).
Really solid write-up love how you approached this from both macro and micro angles. Totally agree on SMR’s regulatory edge being a double-edged sword. The NRC license gives it a legit moat, but the execution risk and past delays are hard to ignore. Also think you nailed the “delicate” part in nuclear, every piece of news (good or bad) gets outsized reactions because the industry still runs more on narrative than revenue. For me, the Romania deal was interesting, but I’m watching how the DOE plays its funding cards in the next few quarters. If SMRs get real domestic traction or tax incentives through ESG reclassification, the risk/reward could shift fast. Curious how are you weighing uranium prices in your thesis? Spot has been strong, but would love to know if you think supply constraints or demand spikes are baked into your view long term.
Oklo is still volatile. They haven't even received a license from the NRC and their stock is running on hype. Notice how just the mere news on tariffs on Friday basically dropped it 5 dollars at the lowest? Everyone knows its overvalued so any slightly bad geopolitical news triggers sell off. Same thing happened with Iran Israel conflict. If NNE and SMR are already licensed but OKLO isn't profitable until at least 2028 or very late 2027. They need a lot of time to build their reactors and very unlikely they finish everything on time.