Investment Thesis Analysis: Planet Labs (PL) vs. Rocket Lab (RKLB) vs. LUNR

This analysis is based on a Reddit discussion [1] where an investor questioned switching from Planet Labs (PL) to Rocket Lab (RKLB) or LUNR over perceived PL stagnation. Contrary to the investor’s perception, internal market data [0] confirms PL outperformed both alternatives in the past 6 months: PL gained 120%, RKLB 81%, and LUNR declined 2%. The discussion featured diverse perspectives:

• Bullish PL arguments cited near profitability, a moat in satellite data, upcoming Tanager satellite launches for methane monitoring compliance, and a robust contract backlog.
• Bullish RKLB views highlighted its historical growth (1187% over 3 years [0]) and leadership under CEO Peter Beck.
• Neutral commentary on LUNR noted its longer-term potential, upcoming IM-3 mission, and improvements following past launch/landing challenges.
  Bearish warnings emphasized avoiding portfolio switches without a clear investment thesis to prevent missing gains and incurring higher tax bills, while neutral advice suggested diversifying across all three stocks.

1. Perception vs. Reality
   : The investor’s perception of PL stagnation was contradicted by its superior 6-month market performance [0], underscoring the importance of verifying subjective views with objective data before making investment decisions.
2. Time Horizon Variability
   : PL and RKLB have near-term catalysts (Tanager launches for PL; Neutron launcher development for RKLB), while LUNR is positioned as a longer-term play, creating distinct risk-reward profiles for each stock.
3. Costs of Hasty Switches
   : Switching investments without a clear thesis carries tangible risks, including tax implications from realized gains and potential missed gains from the original position [1].

• Switching from PL without a clear thesis risks missing ongoing gains from its near-term catalysts (methane monitoring expansion, profitability) and incurring higher tax liabilities [1].
• LUNR faces lingering execution risks from past launch/landing challenges, despite planned improvements for the IM-3 mission [1].
• RKLB’s future growth partially depends on the successful development and deployment of its Neutron launcher, introducing uncertainty [0].

• PL’s Tanager satellite launches for methane compliance address a fast-growing environmental market, supported by its existing contract backlog [1].
• RKLB’s established growth trajectory (1187% 3-year gain [0]) and leadership in space systems/launch services present ongoing expansion opportunities.
• LUNR’s long-term potential in lunar missions and potential NASA contracts offers exposure to the emerging lunar economy [1].
• Diversifying across all three stocks can mitigate single-stock risk while maintaining exposure to different segments of the space industry [1].

• PL outperformed RKLB and LUNR with a 120% 6-month gain, contradicting the investor’s perceived stagnation [0].
• PL has near-term catalysts including profitability, Tanager satellite launches, and a strong contract backlog; RKLB boasts historical growth and upcoming Neutron launcher development; LUNR is a longer-term play with the IM-3 mission [1][0].
• Switching investments without a clear thesis risks tax implications and missed gains; diversification across the three stocks is a suggested risk-mitigation approach [1].