AkademikerPension, a Danish pension fund managing about $25 billion in assets, has decided to place SpaceX on its investment blacklist. The fund said the company’s targeted $1.8 trillion valuation is excessively high and that its governance structure is unacceptable for a long-term institutional investor.
Valuation concerns drive the rejection
According to Bloomberg, chief investment officer Anders Schelde said in an email that SpaceX appears “significantly overvalued.” Based on the fund’s internal analysis, a reasonable valuation for the company would not credibly exceed $1 trillion, far below the level implied by current market expectations. From the fund’s perspective, investors are being asked to accept an unusually low risk premium for a business that still carries substantial uncertainty.
Schelde argued that the proposed pricing seems to be driven less by economic fundamentals and more by the narrative surrounding Elon Musk. In other words, the fund sees the valuation as relying heavily on founder-driven market enthusiasm rather than on a level of financial reality that can justify the premium.
Governance seen as a major red flag
Governance concerns were just as important as valuation in the fund’s decision. Based on interpretations of the IPO filing, Musk is expected to control roughly 80% of the voting power at SpaceX while simultaneously serving as CEO, CTO, and chairman. AkademikerPension described that setup as a deeply problematic concentration of power.
The fund made clear that even if the valuation were lower, it would still avoid investing in SpaceX because of governance issues. That position highlights how some institutional investors are treating board structure, voting control, and accountability as core investment criteria rather than secondary considerations.
Concerns echoed by major US pension institutions
AkademikerPension is not alone. On May 14, New York City Comptroller Mark Levine, CalPERS CEO Marcie Frost, and New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli jointly sent a letter to Musk expressing serious concern over what they described as SpaceX’s “extreme governance structure.” Those institutions oversee assets measured in the trillions of dollars, giving their criticism substantial weight in the market.
A different tone on OpenAI
Interestingly, the Danish fund has taken a much more open stance toward OpenAI. Schelde said OpenAI could enter the fund’s passive equity portfolio after an IPO if it is included in relevant market indexes. Whether it would be added to actively managed portfolios would depend on valuation and risk assessment at the time.
The contrast shows that for major asset managers, the appeal of a high-profile technology company is not enough on its own. Price discipline, balanced control, and governance safeguards remain critical. For SpaceX, the debate now goes beyond hype: it centers on whether investors can justify both the valuation and the risks tied to concentrated founder control.