As the market pushes further into the age of advanced nuclear energy, two names increasingly dominate the conversation: NuScale Power (SMR) and Oklo Inc. (OKLO) Both promise to revolutionize energy with novel reactor technologies — but despite their similar missions, the divide between their business cases and timelines has never been clearer.
Despite no revenue and high burn rates, both companies' stock prices continue to rise. In Oklo’s case, this is based on speculation around a favorable regulatory environment and its future potential. NuScale, however, seems to have a bit more substance behind the rally. Given Oklo’s timeline for meaningful development and launch, investors looking to capitalize on those prospects might be better off waiting for lower prices. With such a long horizon and volatile economic environment, the likelihood of a downturn between now and then is high, while the stock is priced for perfection.
Oklo, hyped for its futuristic reactor and nuclear fuel recycling promises, is now valued at over $11 billion — an astonishing rise considering it remains pre-revenue, without any licensed nuclear plant in operation, and with its first reactor not due online until late 2027 or early 2028 at the earliest. For comparison, NuScale's market cap hovers nearer to $14.3 billion, and the gap between their respective stages of commercial maturity is much wider than what the market is pricing in.
NuScale’s Momentum
NuScale sits farther along the commercialization curve. It already holds U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval for its small modular reactor (SMR) and is actively working toward the first plant deployment, expected now in 2030, despite initially predicting 2027 for its first deployment. Its regulatory and commercial head start provides a critical advantage, offering much clearer near-term revenue visibility.
While Oklo is initially predicting a sooner deployment for one of its reactors, the struggles NuScale has run into over the past decade show just how unpredictable these projects can truly be. If Oklo doesn’t run into any more regulatory hiccups, and proves it can deliver on its projects, Oklo could end up as the one with the lead. But if they run into similar execution challenges and cost overruns, they might end up pushing back their projections by several more years, like NuScale was forced to do.
While NuScale’s failed Idaho project was a massive hit to the company, it likely provided critical information and lessons learned for the next project, giving them another overall edge.
Oklo: Burning Cash With Uncertain Payback
Despite investor excitement, Oklo is burning through capital rapidly. The company's Q1 2025 financial results showed an operating loss of $17.9 million, more than doubling from the prior year. Cash burn continues at an aggressive pace and is likely to accelerate as the company moves from early designs to costly construction and licensing phases. Oklo isn’t expected to generate meaningful revenue until at least 2028 — and even that is contingent on regulatory and construction success, neither of which can be guaranteed.
NuScale, while also unprofitable, reported around $13.4 million in quarterly revenues from early contracts and technology licenses, and a cash balance exceeding $500 million after a recent share offering. Its losses have narrowed as it moves closer to commercial deployment, and its path to revenue from actual power generation is seemingly more certain than Oklo’s.
In fact, NuScale’s Q1 2025 revenue marked an 860% year-over-year increase, with the growth largely driven by engineering and licensing work for early-stage projects such as RoPower in Romania. Analysts now forecast approximately $58 million in total revenue for 2025, up from earlier expectations. While these early results are promising, they primarily reflect preparatory and consulting activities rather than revenue from operational nuclear power modules. Regardless, the revenue can help offset rising costs while de-risking the investment as a whole.
The company anticipates securing its first firm commercial customer order by the end of 2025, marking a significant milestone in its transition from development to deployment. However, full-scale commercial operations are not expected until 2030, when the first NuScale Power Module is slated to become operational. At that point, revenue is projected to ramp significantly, with some analysts forecasting profitability between 2030 and 2031. Until then, NuScale remains in a capital-intensive phase, focused on technology validation, customer acquisition, and regulatory progress.
Timeline and Technology: What Investors Overlook
Oklo’s bold vision — an advanced reactor that recycles nuclear waste and slashes long-term fuel costs — has real promise, but the technology is still in early demonstration phases and faces serious regulatory hurdles. The NRC previously rejected a key Oklo application, and while the company has momentum, the risk of further delays (especially given new and untested technology) remains high.
NuScale’s SMRs, on the other hand, employ a more traditional, well-tested light-water design. Having already cleared crucial regulatory hurdles, NuScale stands on much surer footing and could reach commercial operation sooner, meeting real-world energy needs before Oklo’s first megawatt even reaches the grid.
Is Oklo Stock a Buy?
Oklo has secured a major federal contract to deploy its Aurora microreactor at a U.S. Air Force base, boasts high institutional ownership, and is praised for its innovative fuel recycling strategy. For investors with an appetite for risk, Oklo still has a lot going for it. But investors should expect continued volatility as the stock sits near record highs.
While both companies are speculative and pre-revenue, NuScale has weathered headwinds including a canceled flagship project, lower analyst price targets, and higher cost uncertainties. Despite licensing delays, the stock still offers a compelling risk-reward profile with bullish forecasts and tangible progress toward commercialization.
On the date of publication, Caleb Naysmith did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. For more information please view the Barchart Disclosure Policy here.
