Danish Pension Fund Blacklists SpaceX IPO Over Governance

Danish Pension Fund Blacklists SpaceX Ahead of IPO Over Governance and Valuation Concerns

Danish pension fund AkademikerPension placed SpaceX on its portfolio exclusion list on May 29, 2026, ahead of the company's highly anticipated initial public offering. The fund — which manages approximately $25 billion in assets for academic professionals — cited two firm objections: a governance structure it described as "extremely deficient," and a market valuation it believes cannot be rationally justified. The decision goes beyond simply declining to participate in the IPO; AkademikerPension confirmed it will also avoid any indexed equity products that include SpaceX shares, making this a blanket portfolio exclusion.

The move marks the latest in a series of outspoken divestment decisions by the Copenhagen-based fund, and it arrives as SpaceX prepares for what could be one of the largest public offerings in US financial history. Market indications cited by the fund point to a target valuation of at least $1.8 trillion. AkademikerPension's own calculations, however, suggest the company's value cannot reasonably exceed $1 trillion — implying the stock is overvalued by at least 80% at current projections.

A Governance Structure Called 'Catastrophic'

At the heart of AkademikerPension's exclusion decision is what its Chief Investment Officer Anders Schelde called a deeply problematic concentration of power. According to SpaceX's S-1 filing, Elon Musk holds roughly 85% of the company's voting power through a dual-class share structure in which Class B shares carry ten votes each, compared with one vote per Class A share being offered to the public. Musk simultaneously serves as CEO, chief technology officer, and chair of the board.

AkademikerPension stated plainly: "The extreme concentration of power effectively prevents the board from exercising meaningful oversight and makes it impossible to remove Musk against his will."

Schelde was even more direct in his public characterization of the situation. "The primary reason for avoiding SpaceX is its exceptionally poor performance on governance matters," he said. Elsewhere, he described it in starker terms: "If this were solely about responsible investment, SpaceX would have been excluded in the blink of an eye because of its catastrophic governance structure."

The fund also drew an explicit comparison to Tesla, where Musk's governance practices have long drawn criticism from institutional investors. "In our view, Tesla already has the worst governance structure among the world's largest listed companies — and SpaceX is even worse," Schelde said.

Adding to those concerns, SpaceX will claim controlled-company status after listing, which exempts it from Nasdaq rules that would otherwise require a majority of independent directors on its board. Governance analysts at Morningstar have flagged this alongside the dual-class share structure and Musk's overlapping executive roles across Tesla, xAI, Neuralink, X, and The Boring Company as material risks for prospective public investors.

A Valuation That Doesn't Add Up, the Fund Says

Beyond governance, AkademikerPension raised a second, equally pointed objection: price. Market indications suggest SpaceX is targeting a valuation of at least $1.8 trillion. At that figure, the company would trade at roughly 96 times its 2025 revenue of $18.7 billion. The fund stated it was difficult to justify any market valuation above $1 trillion for the business.

The financial picture is further complicated by SpaceX's reported net loss. According to figures cited by The Next Web, SpaceX lost $4.94 billion last year after absorbing xAI. That combination — a near-100x revenue multiple on a loss-making business, with a governance structure that gives public shareholders virtually no recourse — forms the core of AkademikerPension's case for exclusion.

Despite those concerns, SpaceX is pressing ahead. Formal IPO marketing is expected to begin as soon as June 4, with pricing potentially taking place as early as June 11. Goldman Sachs Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase are leading the offering alongside 18 other banks. The deal is expected to raise approximately $75 billion. In an unusual structural choice, SpaceX has allocated 30% of the offering to retail investors — a significantly higher retail share than is typical for a deal of this scale.

AkademikerPension Is Not Alone: US Pension Giants Raise the Same Alarm

AkademikerPension's concerns are not an outlier position. The fund itself noted that several of the largest US pension funds have raised similar objections to SpaceX's corporate governance structure. That observation is borne out by recent public record.

New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, New York City Comptroller Mark Levine, and CalPERS CEO Marcie Frost — together overseeing combined assets exceeding $1 trillion — sent a joint letter to SpaceX describing its governance framework as "the most management-favorable governance structure ever brought to the US public markets at this scale." CalPERS alone manages approximately $525 billion, making it the largest US public pension fund.

The chorus of institutional concern reflects a deepening tension in the market between the sheer scale of investor appetite for a SpaceX listing and the structural terms on which that listing is being offered. Prospective shareholders in the Class A offering will have one vote each, while Musk's Class B shares carry ten — a ratio that, combined with his roughly 85% voting stake, means public investors will have no practical ability to influence board composition, executive decisions, or strategic direction.

Part of a Broader Pattern of Divestment

For AkademikerPension, the SpaceX exclusion is the latest in a run of high-profile exits tied explicitly to governance and geopolitical risk assessments. Earlier in 2026, the fund sold its remaining 200 shares in Tesla, citing Musk's role in what it described as destroying the brand and its value, along with concerns about worker treatment and board independence. In January 2026, it divested approximately $100 million in US Treasuries, citing concerns about US government finances during a period of heightened diplomatic tensions over Greenland.

Schelde commented at the time of the Treasury sale: "The US is basically not a good credit and long-term the US government finances are not sustainable."

That track record positions AkademikerPension as one of the more outspoken European institutional investors on ESG and governance risk — willing to act on those positions even when the assets in question are among the most prominent in global markets.

What Independent Analysts Are Saying

Governance experts outside AkademikerPension have independently reached similar conclusions about the structural risks for SpaceX IPO investors.

Lindsey Stewart, proxy voting expert and director of institutional insights at Morningstar, wrote: "If we take what we know of Tesla as the most prominent public company example of Musk's corporate governance ethos, three things are clear: Musk places a high value on having significant control over the companies he runs, he's willing to defy conventional corporate governance norms to acquire and maintain that control, and the other directors on the board have been at best reluctant to challenge him on behalf of independent shareholders."

Kristin Hull, Chief Executive Officer of NIA Impact Capital, put it more directly: "SpaceX mirrors what we have at Tesla, but it arguably exceeds Tesla's concentration of power."

SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment when contacted via email, according to Reuters.

What Comes Next

With formal IPO marketing expected to begin in early June and pricing potentially arriving by June 11, the window for institutional investors to stake out their positions is narrowing. AkademikerPension has made its decision unambiguously clear: it will not participate in the offering and will actively screen SpaceX out of any index-linked products it holds.

Whether other institutional investors follow suit — or whether the combination of retail investor enthusiasm and the involvement of five of Wall Street's largest banks is enough to power the deal through at or near its $1.8 trillion target — remains to be seen. What is already clear is that the governance concerns raised by AkademikerPension are not unique to one Danish fund. They are shared, on the record, by some of the largest pension systems in the United States.

For retail investors who will account for an unusually large 30% of the offering, the message from institutional governance watchers is consistent: the structure of this deal provides public shareholders with minimal oversight mechanisms and no practical check on management. Whether that risk is priced in at a 96x revenue multiple is a question each investor will have to answer for themselves.

For more tech news, visit our news section.

Why This Matters Beyond Finance

Corporate governance isn't just an abstract concern for pension managers — it has real downstream effects on how companies treat their workers, manage risk, and make decisions that affect millions of people. For anyone tracking the intersection of institutional accountability and long-term systemic health, the SpaceX IPO debate is a live case study in what happens when financial scale and governance norms collide. Staying informed about these structural dynamics is part of making smarter decisions in every domain, including your own professional and financial life. Join the Moccet waitlist to stay ahead of the curve.