To The Moon

$Rocket Lab USA, Inc.(RKLB)$ Bullish $Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ Bullish $AST SpaceMobile, Inc.(ASTS)$ Bullish 25Dec25 🇺🇸🎄| 26Dec25 🇳🇿 The move being misunderstood is not the sell-off. The move being misunderstood is the absence of selling.

$RKLB printed a new 52-week high at $79.83 on 24Dec and then appeared to go flat into Christmas Eve on low volume. That flatness is being read as exhaustion. That interpretation is wrong.

Tops do not form in silence.

Tops form with expanding volume, structural failure, and forced liquidation.

None of that happened here.

What followed 79.83 was participant withdrawal after a sharp repricing, not distribution. Flow evaporated, price compressed, and volatility contracted. That distinction is critical and it is the entire trade.

🧠 Volatility structure, not emotion, is driving this tape

Rocket Lab has a repeatable volatility rhythm across cycles.

In the prior uptrend, two volatility holes formed before a temporary peak near 73.97 on 15Oct, followed by a sharp retracement to 37.57 on 21Nov.

In the subsequent downtrend, two volatility holes again appeared, this time marking the base before the explosive rally to the recent high.

In the current bullish cycle, only one volatility hole has formed.

That hole was met with absorption, not ejection.

No second volatility hole.

No sell-side escalation.

No framework breakdown.

Absent a second volatility gap accompanied by expanding downside volume, historical precedent argues strongly against cycle completion here.

📈 Higher-timeframe confirmation is already in place

On the monthly chart, Rocket Lab printed a bullish engulfing candle and secured acceptance above the 1.618 log Fibonacci extension. That level is not cosmetic. It separates trend continuation from terminal extension.

This consolidation is occurring above that threshold, not beneath it.

Daily structure shows tightening ranges and declining volume, a classic volatility reset following a vertical repricing. Momentum has moderated without violating the base. That is recalibration, not depletion.

🏗️ Institutional positioning confirms this is not retail froth

This advance is being sponsored by balance sheets, not headlines.

Exchange Traded Concepts LLC acquired 151,734 shares.

Orion Portfolio Solutions LLC acquired 28,195 shares.

Osaic Holdings Inc. added 57,125 shares.

That is deliberate exposure expansion during strength, consistent with a valuation reset rather than a momentum chase.

Layered on top of that is the $816M Space Development Agency contract awarded on 19Dec for 18 satellites. That is multi-year, defence-grade revenue that materially shifts the durability of the cash-flow narrative.

📊 Analyst targets are chasing the tape, not leading it

Street commentary has started to catch up.

Stephen Guilfoyle, a 30-year Wall Street veteran, raised his target from 65 to 81, explicitly reframing Rocket Lab as an integrated space company rather than a launch specialist.

Needham lifted its target to 90 from 63 following the SDA award, reiterating Buy.

Simply Wall St highlights the valuation tension clearly, price-to-book near 32× versus peer averages around 3.8×, yet still derives fair value near 98 under its intrinsic model. That disconnect is exactly where reratings live.

Barron’s flagged Rocket Lab as a December standout with further runway. Schwab reiterated coverage. Visibility is expanding, not fading.

🚀 Neutron is being mispriced because time is being mispriced

I want to be grounded here.

Neutron is not an immediate earnings lever. It is a long-duration optionality engine.

Based on public disclosures and third-party reporting, cumulative Neutron development spend through end-2025 is tracking around US$360M. That is a milestone, not the final cheque.

At expected pricing of US$50–55M per launch and conservative early gross margins of 30–40%, each flight contributes roughly US$15–20M in gross profit before optimisation. Payback requires approximately 18–24 commercial launches on a contribution margin basis.

Cadence, not price, determines the timeline.

Initial launches in 2026 prioritise certification, reuse, and reliability. Profitability comes later. Markets consistently misprice this interval, and that mispricing is the source of volatility and opportunity.

Neutron’s pad arrival is targeted for Q1 2026, with debut shortly after. The uncomfortable years between peak spend and visible payoff are not a flaw in the thesis. They are the thesis.

🛰️ Electron is no longer a question mark, it is infrastructure

Electron has now flown 79 missions.

2025 closed with 21 missions and a 100% success rate, including the 21Dec launch deploying iQPS SAR-15 from New Zealand. Repeat customers dominate the manifest.

iQPS and Synspective continue to return.

NASA uses Electron when precision matters.

U.S. defence and intelligence agencies select it for time-sensitive missions.

HASTE has already flown four times, opening high-margin hypersonic test work.

This is embedded capability, not experimental hardware.

🌏 Japan’s H3 failure quietly strengthens Rocket Lab’s hand

Japan’s H3 eighth flight failed on 22Dec, destroying the QZS-5 navigation payload and marking another reliability setback.

When national programmes stumble, operators do not wait. They migrate toward proven cadence and execution. Rocket Lab’s existing relationships with Japanese SAR operators like iQPS become more valuable when reliability, not nationalism, governs decisions.

🎯 What this price action actually says

The market has repriced Rocket Lab’s launch credibility.

It has not yet fully priced the integrated space architect with reusable economics embedded.

As long as structure holds above the 1.618 extension and pullbacks remain volume-light, this is best read as volatility contraction within a rerating, not the end of one.

This story was never going to be linear.

It was never supposed to be comfortable.

That tension is exactly where durable positions are built.

🏁 Conclusion

If this were a top, price would be screaming.

Instead, it is whispering.

That whisper is the market pausing after a violent repricing, not abandoning the narrative. Until a second volatility hole forms with structural failure and sell-side dominance, the weight of evidence favours continuation over completion.

This is not about being bullish or bearish.

It is about reading structure correctly.

And right now, structure is still intact.

📢 Don’t miss out! Like, Repost and Follow me for exclusive setups, cutting-edge trends, and insights that move markets 🚀📈 I’m obsessed with hunting down the next big movers and sharing strategies that crush it. Let’s outsmart the market and stack those gains together! 🍀

Trade like a boss! Happy trading ahead, Cheers, BC 📈🚀🍀🍀🍀

@Tiger_comments @TigerObserver @TigerWire @TigerStars @TigerPicks @Daily_Discussion