Excellent write-up, thank you for your work. There is already plenty of work for ASPI to execute on, and lots of upside in all their markets as you've addressed, but one additional thing caught my eye in the last few months of Paul's webinars: in one, he mentioned that ASP and QLE are the company's two enrichment methods that they've "disclosed", implying there could be additional undisclosed isotope enrichment technologies in development. Along these lines, the latest company slide deck now lists Helium-3 as a future product, the only isotope on their list for which the enrichment technology is listed as "undisclosed".
Yes that is interesting, but they haven't disclosed anymore details to me other than there is another tech but they want to focus on the two they have for the moment.
Thank you for such a detailed write-up. Did management ever indicate whether they would try to buyback shares to offset the shares that would be issued for stock-based compensation? I'm long ASPI, and I'd like to see management keep the share count from bloating.
All of their money should be reinvested into the business, share buybacks would be incompetent, and that might be an understatement they need to actually build a business. Share bloat should calm down for ASPI but we might see another raise in the future for QLE, who knows. They need quite a bit of capital for HALEU demand (maybe we see customers chip in for these plants). As they build up sustainable cash flow going into 2027 we might see share buybacks but it depends on the ROIC for capex and where the stock price is. Buybacks would be a horrible ROI right now compared to investing in their plants. Most of their valuation is pricing in future underlying business growth which would be hampered by capital being allocated towards buybacks leading to an actual decline in the stock price long term.
Thank you for your reply. I agree that share buybacks now would not be prudent. In the future when they have more revenue and contracts in place, I'd be open to them taking on a modest amount of debt or have customer prepayments fund projects to keep the share count from growing. I have heard interviews where Paul mentions having customers or partners use their balance sheets to fund growth. It would all be dependent on the Capex needs at the time and the share price, but I would hope that dilution would be minimal since I think that ASPI has multibagger potential.
I brought it up since I am reviewing the S-8 for 'Securities to be offered to employees in employee benefit plans' that they just filed today.
I think seeing 5% dilution y/y in SBC won’t be uncommon. Paul believes all employees should have a stake. He told this story to me that he would go to Morgan Stanley everyday and see a lunch cook or something and he’d always be extremely happy and was insanely efficient at his job and Paul asked him why and he said that if he could work hard and make his coworkers lives easier/happier he thought it would contribute to the stock going up and he got stock via SBC. Idk if that story is true but he believes everyone having a vested interest in the company is the best thing for the company in the long run.
I think we could see SBC and buybacks in a couple years but definitely not front of mind right now.
In the call yesterday, Dr Henrik Strydom himself said it is extremely quick to do that last step, taking as little as a day or two. Not exactly an answer to your question but it is some confirmation of the actual process straight from the source.
Top stuff Jacob. Your posts when taken together really are the best comprehensive coverage of the company. I sincerely hope that Fuzzy Muppet is still short and gets caught badly offside when this puppy goes ballistic.
Yeah, unfortunately investing.com's transcripts are 50% gibberish, as you can see from that page. I was on the Zoom call earlier and they were definitely recording it, but I had to take a call during the second half of it so missed all that. Hopefully they'll release it soon.
Hi Jacob, great write up once again. But maybe I’m missing something - is the technology really proven to be commercially viable?
“The Company expects to be able to achieve a 99.75% enrichment for Ytterbium-176 and offer highly enriched Ytterbium-176 for commercial sale during 2025.”
It sounds to me more like they’ve turned on the machine. Admittedly that is a significant derisking milestone, but as with any process there’s still a lot that can go wrong once you try doing it at scale.
Is the real proof not if they can hit nameplate capacity within and deliver on spec product to a customer who pays for it?
They said they will be able to produce a kg. When they say they haven't produced all the way to 99.75% this merely means they have the throughput that they want to enrich to 88% Yb-176 in one stage. This is a very long stage and takes the most time so they proved they can do this stage commercially and will be focusing on large batches of this before running more through at the 2nd stage which requires less enrichment (meaning the throughput can be much more so it makes more sense to build bigger batches of the first stage before sending it through for the 2nd stage). If you can do one stage you can do the 2nd stage.
They turned on the machine last September and they have it to where it will do the amount that they need. This is completely derisked imo.
The amount of feedstock being processed is a lot less I believe for that next stage (Since it’s the product amount from the initial stage). If you do one stage up to 90% that essentially means you are doing only like 15% of the original feedstock as new feedstock in the 2nd stage.
Their selectivity would hypothetically be the exact same for both stages to get to 99.75% if they’re getting to 88%-90% in one go. So yes the SWUs don’t scale linearly since the % change is much less for the same selectivity.
It takes guts to make such high price targets but the math is all there in support, and you aren't even looking that far into the future. That confidence and asymmetry is often lacking and holds other investors back from achieving real profit. I might personally expand your assumptions to look 5 years out assuming a geometric revenue curve holds steady for ASPI and assuming majority HALEU TAM capture for QLE in 2030.
My big question is for you is to please explain in more detail your spreadsheet model numbers assumed for gross profit, opex, and resulting ebitda. Specifically what costs are you deducting at each point and why? Paul confirmed his opex is $12-15m per year to run the business and their margins are 70-85%. What else are you working with to calculate $0.60 EBITDA on $10.13 Revenue? Why don't you include a row for FCF?
ASPI still isn’t producing revenue and is trading at $300mm. So right now in the eyes of shorts it’s essentially a science experiment. They still don’t have any large purchase agreements/contracts just MOUs and a Term Sheet with TerraPower (and a couple million dollar contract for R&D). Once revenue and purchase agreements come on board, it’s hard to see what the short side is at with the current market cap. So those are your next two big catalysts if you invert and look at it from a short perspective.
Will be a great catalyst - your work is impressive - I call the number on the ASPI 10K and get an answering service. Bloomberg has ASPI number in Boca Raton listed as 561-709-3034. I call that and get a busy signal/ like it doesnt work. Jason Assad is listed as IR contact on the web site and I called today and the operator seemed surprised and then sent me to a voicemail that did not identify him - so I emailed him at Jassad@aspisotopes.com - the whole thing doesnt smell right and with a $300 mm market cap they should have their act more together. Please pass it along - normally I wouldn't touch this but am involved because you actually went down there and reported a pulse!
Also Chat GPT Competitors - I trust your analysis is well informed and does not include some of the Companies below, but I am just passing it along
Several organizations are involved in the production and supply of Ytterbium-176 (¹⁷⁶Yb), a stable isotope crucial for generating Lutetium-177 used in cancer treatments. Notable manufacturers and suppliers include:
ASP Isotopes Inc.: In October 2024, ASP Isotopes announced the successful enrichment of Ytterbium-176 using their proprietary Quantum Enrichment technology. They anticipate achieving 99.75% enrichment and plan to offer highly enriched Ytterbium-176 for commercial sale during 2025, with samples available in the first quarter of that year.
Eckert & Ziegler Radiopharma GmbH: In January 2022, they signed a joint venture and exclusive long-term supply agreements for Ytterbium-176 with Atom Mines LLC, a producer of enriched Ytterbium isotopes based in Austin, Texas.
U.S. Department of Energy Isotope Program (DOE IP): The DOE IP routinely produces Ytterbium-176 using modern electromagnetic isotope separation technology. A new batch became available in February 2024, with plans to further increase production capacity through the construction of the Stable Isotope Production and Research Center (SIPRC). https://www.isotopes.gov/Yb-176_New_Batch_available?utm_source=chatgpt.com
They sold for taxes due to stock vesting. As far as Renegeron goes, it’s to build a vertically integrated electronic gas business along with the cheap energy to drive down pure silicon costs.
Do you happen to have confirmation they sold for taxes? I figured it was due to timing and pre arranged sale. Some out there like to spread fud around the selling and I’d love to clear it up.
Incredibly assiduous level of detail here. Thank you.
Thank you Bill!
Excellent write-up, thank you for your work. There is already plenty of work for ASPI to execute on, and lots of upside in all their markets as you've addressed, but one additional thing caught my eye in the last few months of Paul's webinars: in one, he mentioned that ASP and QLE are the company's two enrichment methods that they've "disclosed", implying there could be additional undisclosed isotope enrichment technologies in development. Along these lines, the latest company slide deck now lists Helium-3 as a future product, the only isotope on their list for which the enrichment technology is listed as "undisclosed".
Yes that is interesting, but they haven't disclosed anymore details to me other than there is another tech but they want to focus on the two they have for the moment.
Amazing post
Thank you for such a detailed write-up. Did management ever indicate whether they would try to buyback shares to offset the shares that would be issued for stock-based compensation? I'm long ASPI, and I'd like to see management keep the share count from bloating.
Thanks for the appreciation Andrew!
All of their money should be reinvested into the business, share buybacks would be incompetent, and that might be an understatement they need to actually build a business. Share bloat should calm down for ASPI but we might see another raise in the future for QLE, who knows. They need quite a bit of capital for HALEU demand (maybe we see customers chip in for these plants). As they build up sustainable cash flow going into 2027 we might see share buybacks but it depends on the ROIC for capex and where the stock price is. Buybacks would be a horrible ROI right now compared to investing in their plants. Most of their valuation is pricing in future underlying business growth which would be hampered by capital being allocated towards buybacks leading to an actual decline in the stock price long term.
Thank you for your reply. I agree that share buybacks now would not be prudent. In the future when they have more revenue and contracts in place, I'd be open to them taking on a modest amount of debt or have customer prepayments fund projects to keep the share count from growing. I have heard interviews where Paul mentions having customers or partners use their balance sheets to fund growth. It would all be dependent on the Capex needs at the time and the share price, but I would hope that dilution would be minimal since I think that ASPI has multibagger potential.
I brought it up since I am reviewing the S-8 for 'Securities to be offered to employees in employee benefit plans' that they just filed today.
I think seeing 5% dilution y/y in SBC won’t be uncommon. Paul believes all employees should have a stake. He told this story to me that he would go to Morgan Stanley everyday and see a lunch cook or something and he’d always be extremely happy and was insanely efficient at his job and Paul asked him why and he said that if he could work hard and make his coworkers lives easier/happier he thought it would contribute to the stock going up and he got stock via SBC. Idk if that story is true but he believes everyone having a vested interest in the company is the best thing for the company in the long run.
I think we could see SBC and buybacks in a couple years but definitely not front of mind right now.
In the call yesterday, Dr Henrik Strydom himself said it is extremely quick to do that last step, taking as little as a day or two. Not exactly an answer to your question but it is some confirmation of the actual process straight from the source.
Top stuff Jacob. Your posts when taken together really are the best comprehensive coverage of the company. I sincerely hope that Fuzzy Muppet is still short and gets caught badly offside when this puppy goes ballistic.
Thanks David!
Another great piece! Much appreciated!
Thanks very much for this, Jacob. Do you know where we can view the recording of today's Zoom?
Try the Quartr app. They have the audio and a pretty good transcript.
I don't know about a recording but investing.com has the transcript: https://www.investing.com/news/transcripts/earnings-call-transcript-asp-isotopes-q1-2024-highlights-strategic-growth-93CH-3960804
Yeah, unfortunately investing.com's transcripts are 50% gibberish, as you can see from that page. I was on the Zoom call earlier and they were definitely recording it, but I had to take a call during the second half of it so missed all that. Hopefully they'll release it soon.
Yeah it’s a pain but you can mostly piece it together. I’ll let you know where I hear about a recording.
Hi Jacob, great write up once again. But maybe I’m missing something - is the technology really proven to be commercially viable?
“The Company expects to be able to achieve a 99.75% enrichment for Ytterbium-176 and offer highly enriched Ytterbium-176 for commercial sale during 2025.”
It sounds to me more like they’ve turned on the machine. Admittedly that is a significant derisking milestone, but as with any process there’s still a lot that can go wrong once you try doing it at scale.
Is the real proof not if they can hit nameplate capacity within and deliver on spec product to a customer who pays for it?
They said they will be able to produce a kg. When they say they haven't produced all the way to 99.75% this merely means they have the throughput that they want to enrich to 88% Yb-176 in one stage. This is a very long stage and takes the most time so they proved they can do this stage commercially and will be focusing on large batches of this before running more through at the 2nd stage which requires less enrichment (meaning the throughput can be much more so it makes more sense to build bigger batches of the first stage before sending it through for the 2nd stage). If you can do one stage you can do the 2nd stage.
They turned on the machine last September and they have it to where it will do the amount that they need. This is completely derisked imo.
Thanks, can you explain why enriching from 88% to 99.75% is so much easier than enriching from 13% to 88%?
The amount of feedstock being processed is a lot less I believe for that next stage (Since it’s the product amount from the initial stage). If you do one stage up to 90% that essentially means you are doing only like 15% of the original feedstock as new feedstock in the 2nd stage.
Of course, but lower volume that doesn’t necessarily make it easier? I would think it would get incrementally harder to enrich as you approach 100%.
By your logic, going from 99.75% to 100% is even easier because you’re processing even less material.
I’m struggling to wrap my head around the maths.
I don’t think it’s any easier or harder from a technical standpoint. Sorry if I confused you there.
Probably from a technical standpoint , but you need a lot more SWUs as the enrichment gets higher. It follows a logarithmic function.
Where did you get that they have only enriched to 88%?
Their selectivity would hypothetically be the exact same for both stages to get to 99.75% if they’re getting to 88%-90% in one go. So yes the SWUs don’t scale linearly since the % change is much less for the same selectivity.
It takes guts to make such high price targets but the math is all there in support, and you aren't even looking that far into the future. That confidence and asymmetry is often lacking and holds other investors back from achieving real profit. I might personally expand your assumptions to look 5 years out assuming a geometric revenue curve holds steady for ASPI and assuming majority HALEU TAM capture for QLE in 2030.
My big question is for you is to please explain in more detail your spreadsheet model numbers assumed for gross profit, opex, and resulting ebitda. Specifically what costs are you deducting at each point and why? Paul confirmed his opex is $12-15m per year to run the business and their margins are 70-85%. What else are you working with to calculate $0.60 EBITDA on $10.13 Revenue? Why don't you include a row for FCF?
Jacob - what are the guys who are short thinking?
Oh - I should add - your research is thorough and easy to follow - thank you - I am still curious as to why the haters hate (still)
ASPI still isn’t producing revenue and is trading at $300mm. So right now in the eyes of shorts it’s essentially a science experiment. They still don’t have any large purchase agreements/contracts just MOUs and a Term Sheet with TerraPower (and a couple million dollar contract for R&D). Once revenue and purchase agreements come on board, it’s hard to see what the short side is at with the current market cap. So those are your next two big catalysts if you invert and look at it from a short perspective.
Will be a great catalyst - your work is impressive - I call the number on the ASPI 10K and get an answering service. Bloomberg has ASPI number in Boca Raton listed as 561-709-3034. I call that and get a busy signal/ like it doesnt work. Jason Assad is listed as IR contact on the web site and I called today and the operator seemed surprised and then sent me to a voicemail that did not identify him - so I emailed him at Jassad@aspisotopes.com - the whole thing doesnt smell right and with a $300 mm market cap they should have their act more together. Please pass it along - normally I wouldn't touch this but am involved because you actually went down there and reported a pulse!
I’d guess they’re pretty happy since the stock has steadily trickled down. LOL
Why is that in their interest - are they awarding options soon?
Chat GPT Swat Analysis
SWOT Analysis: ASP Isotopes Inc.
Category
Details
Strengths
- Proprietary Quantum Enrichment Technology → Promises scalable, high-purity isotope enrichment
- First-Mover in Diversifying Supply Chain → One of the few non-Russian suppliers entering the enriched Yb-176 market
- Targeting High-Growth Market → Tapping into the expanding radiopharmaceutical market (e.g., Lu-177 therapies)
- Recent Facility Completion (2024) → Ahead-of-schedule commissioning shows strong project execution
Weaknesses
- Early-Stage Commercialization → No proven track record for large-scale deliveries yet
- High R&D and Infrastructure Costs → Facility buildout and scaling could weigh on short-term profitability
- Reliance on Reactor Access → Needs partnerships for neutron activation (to produce Lu-177), unless vertically integrated
Opportunities
- Lu-177 Demand Surge → Driven by global rise in prostate and neuroendocrine cancer therapies
- Geopolitical Tailwinds → Western governments incentivizing alternatives to Russian suppliers
- Broader Isotope Portfolio → Potential to expand into other high-demand isotopes (e.g., Mo-99, Ac-225)
- Strategic Partnerships → Collaborations with pharma companies and healthcare providers can accelerate growth
Threats
- Intensifying Competition → New entrants like Kinectrics and traditional giants like Rosatom still dominate
- Technical Scale-Up Risks → Enrichment at commercial scale is challenging; delays or inefficiencies could erode trust
- Regulatory Hurdles → Export/import restrictions, FDA/IAEA oversight, and isotope transport logistics
- Market Volatility → Reliant on the success of Lu-177 therapies; any disruption (e.g., new competing drugs) affects demand
🌟 Strategic Considerations
Short Term: Prove consistency in isotope quality and delivery timelines. Build customer trust through pilot batches and certifications.
Medium Term: Secure reactor partnerships or vertical integration for Lu-177 production to add more value.
Long Term: Leverage enrichment tech for a diversified isotope offering across healthcare, quantum, and energy sectors.
Also Chat GPT Competitors - I trust your analysis is well informed and does not include some of the Companies below, but I am just passing it along
Several organizations are involved in the production and supply of Ytterbium-176 (¹⁷⁶Yb), a stable isotope crucial for generating Lutetium-177 used in cancer treatments. Notable manufacturers and suppliers include:
ASP Isotopes Inc.: In October 2024, ASP Isotopes announced the successful enrichment of Ytterbium-176 using their proprietary Quantum Enrichment technology. They anticipate achieving 99.75% enrichment and plan to offer highly enriched Ytterbium-176 for commercial sale during 2025, with samples available in the first quarter of that year.
https://ir.aspisotopes.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/41/asp-isotopes-inc-enriches-ytterbium-176-during?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Kinectrics: This global provider of nuclear lifecycle services began shipments of highly enriched Ytterbium-176 in May 2024, aiming to strengthen the radiopharmaceutical supply chain and reduce reliance on Russian materials.Kinectrics. https://www.kinectrics.com/media-center/news-releases/global-supply-chain-for-lu-177-based-cancer-treatments-strengthened-by-kinectrics-start-of-yb-176-production-reducing-reliance-on-russia?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Eckert & Ziegler Radiopharma GmbH: In January 2022, they signed a joint venture and exclusive long-term supply agreements for Ytterbium-176 with Atom Mines LLC, a producer of enriched Ytterbium isotopes based in Austin, Texas.
https://www.appliedradiationoncology.com/articles/agreement-signed-for-ytterbium-176?utm_source=chatgpt.com
U.S. Department of Energy Isotope Program (DOE IP): The DOE IP routinely produces Ytterbium-176 using modern electromagnetic isotope separation technology. A new batch became available in February 2024, with plans to further increase production capacity through the construction of the Stable Isotope Production and Research Center (SIPRC). https://www.isotopes.gov/Yb-176_New_Batch_available?utm_source=chatgpt.com
AMT Isotopes: Specializing in the global supply of high-purity Ytterbium isotopes, including Ytterbium-176, AMT Isotopes supports advanced industries and scientific research. https://www.isotope-amt.com/isotope/ytterbium-yb/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
American Elements: Offers Ytterbium-176 Oxide, among other isotopes, for various applications, including biological and biomedical labeling, as well as target materials. https://www.americanelements.com/ytterbium-176-oxide-isotope?utm_source=chatgpt.com
BuyIsotope.com (Neonest AB): Provides Ytterbium-176 isotope in metal powder and oxide forms for applications such as Lutetium-177 radionuclide production and nuclear physics research. https://www.buyisotope.com/ytterbium-176-isotope.php?utm_source=chatgpt.com
These organizations play significant roles in the production and supply of
Ytterbium-176, supporting its critical applications in medical and scientific fields.
Great piece. Any clue on what they want from Renergen and why Mann and ainscow have been selling?
They sold for taxes due to stock vesting. As far as Renegeron goes, it’s to build a vertically integrated electronic gas business along with the cheap energy to drive down pure silicon costs.
Do you happen to have confirmation they sold for taxes? I figured it was due to timing and pre arranged sale. Some out there like to spread fud around the selling and I’d love to clear it up.
It was confirmed to all be for taxes
Thank you! It made sense given timing I just didn’t see it say that in the filing. Appreciate the reply!