Skip to main content

Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX: Strategic Comparison

Direct Answer

Baker Hughes Company reported $27.7B (FY2025), while SpaceX reported $18.7B (FY2025). Revenue describes scale, not an overall winner.

Editorial research by Swet Parvadiya. Figures keep each company's fiscal year; amounts reported in another currency are shown in US dollars at an approximate rate and marked with ~. Sources are listed below.

Share

Key Differences at a Glance

FieldBaker Hughes CompanySpaceX
Latest reported revenue$27.7B (FY2025)$18.7B (FY2025)
Founded19872002
Employees56,00022,621
Market Cap$56.9B$1.92T
HeadquartersUnited StatesUnited States
Revenue / Employee$495k / employee$826k / employee
Valuation Multiple2.1x P/S102.8x P/S

Strategic Positioning

Business model and competitive context from the cited profiles

Baker Hughes Company Strategic Vector

FY2025 Revenue Baseline

The strategy is to shift weight from short-cycle oilfield work toward equipment and lifecycle services with longer contracts.

Productivity: $495k / employee

SpaceX Strategic Vector

FY2025 Revenue Baseline

SpaceX's growth plan has four parts: add Starlink subscribers and raise enterprise, aviation, and mobile revenue; launch higher-capacity Starlink V3 satellites on Starship; expand national-security work through Starshield and launch contracts (over $6 billion in U.S. government awards in Q2 2026); and scale AI compute capacity, which grew from 400 megawatts a year earlier to 1.4 gigawatts at the end of Q2 2026.

Productivity: $826k / employee

Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX Market Share

Baker Hughes Company market share
Baker Hughes is one of the three large diversified oilfield service companies alongside SLB and Halliburton, and the smallest of them by revenue, with OFSE revenue of $14,324M in FY2025. It does not disclose market share. In gas technology it is one of a handful of suppliers of large gas turbines and refrigerant compressors for liquefaction trains, and FY2025 awards included NextDecade Rio Grande Train 5, Commonwealth LNG and selection by Glenfarne for Alaska LNG equipment subject to final investment decision.
SpaceX market share
SpaceX flies most of the world's orbital launches by count and operates the largest satellite constellation, with about 9,600 Starlink satellites in low Earth orbit as of March 31, 2026.

Quick Stats Comparison

MetricBaker Hughes CompanySpaceX
Revenue$27.7B (FY2025)$18.7B (FY2025)
Founded19872002
HeadquartersHouston, Texas, United StatesStarbase, Texas; major operations in Hawthorne, California
Market Cap$56.9B$1.92T
Employees56,00022,621
Revenue / Employee$495k / employee$826k / employee
Valuation Multiple2.1x P/S102.8x P/S

Baker Hughes Company Revenue vs SpaceX Revenue — Year by Year

YearBaker Hughes CompanySpaceXHigher reported revenue
2025$27.7B$18.7BBaker Hughes Company (approx. USD)
2024$27.8B$14.0BBaker Hughes Company (approx. USD)
2023$25.5B$10.4BBaker Hughes Company (approx. USD)
2022$21.2BN/AOnly one figure available
2021$20.5BN/AOnly one figure available

Business Model Breakdown

Overview: Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX

This in-depth comparison examines Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX across revenue, market value, business model, competitive positioning, and long-term growth strategy. Whether you are researching Baker Hughes Company on its own, evaluating SpaceX, or weighing the two companies side by side, the breakdown below highlights where each company leads and where the gap between Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX is widest.

On the headline numbers, Baker Hughes Company reports annual revenue of $27.7B against $18.7B for SpaceX, while their respective market capitalizations stand at $56.9B and $1.92T. Both Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX are headquartered in United States, so they compete in a shared home market and regulatory environment.

Baker Hughes Company: Baker Hughes does not own oil and gas; it supplies the equipment, services and software used to find, produce and process it, and increasingly the turbomachinery used to liquefy and move gas and to generate power. The company conducts business in more than 120 countries and employed about 56,000 people at the end of 2025, with more than 45,000 of them working outside the United States. Customers include national oil companies such as Saudi Aramco, ADNOC, Kuwait Oil Company and Petroleum Development Oman, majors including ExxonMobil, and LNG developers such as Cheniere and NextDecade. Headquarters are at 575 N. Dairy Ashford Road in Houston, with major engineering and manufacturing operations in Florence, Italy, inherited from GE Oil and Gas.

SpaceX: SpaceX, based at Starbase, Texas, designs and launches reusable rockets and spacecraft and runs Starlink, the largest satellite constellation in orbit. Falcon 9 first-stage reuse, proven in 2015, cut launch costs and gave SpaceX most of the world's commercial launch market. Crew Dragon has flown NASA astronauts since 2020. In 2026 the company combined with xAI, went public on Nasdaq, and now reports Space, Connectivity, and AI segments.

Business Models: How Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX Make Money

Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX pursue distinct approaches to generating revenue, and understanding how each company operates is the foundation of any fair comparison between Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX.

Baker Hughes Company business model: Baker Hughes sells engineered equipment and the services that keep it running. In Oilfield Services and Equipment it is paid for jobs and projects: directional drilling, drill bits, completions, pressure pumping, artificial lift, oilfield chemicals and subsea production systems, billed well by well or under multi-year frame agreements with national oil companies and majors. That business generated $14,324M of revenue and $2,618M of segment EBITDA in FY2025. In Industrial and Energy Technology it sells gas turbines, centrifugal compressors, pumps, valves and modular LNG trains, then earns long-dated service revenue on the installed base. Gas Technology Equipment produced $6,619M and Gas Technology Services $3,028M in FY2025, and the two carried $11.6B and $16.1B of contracted backlog respectively at year end. Software and sensing, sold as Cordant and Bently Nevada, attach to that hardware. The equipment orders are lumpy and tied to final investment decisions on LNG and gas infrastructure; the service agreements are the steadier half.

SpaceX business model: SpaceX earns money in three segments. Space sells launches on Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, plus Dragon cargo and crew missions for NASA, the U.S. government, and commercial customers ($962 million in Q2 2026). Connectivity sells Starlink subscriptions and terminals to consumers, plus enterprise, aviation, maritime, mobile, and Starshield government services ($4.3 billion in Q2 2026, the only segment with an operating profit). AI sells compute and cloud services from its data-center capacity ($2.6 billion in Q2 2026). Because SpaceX launches its own satellites, launch capacity directly feeds the recurring Starlink business.

Competitive Advantage: Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX

The durability of a company's moat often decides long-term winners. Here is how the competitive advantages of Baker Hughes Company stack up against those of SpaceX.

Baker Hughes Company competitive advantage: The defensible part of Baker Hughes is the installed base of turbomachinery and the service contracts attached to it. Once its gas turbines and refrigerant compressors are inside a liquefaction train or a gas processing plant, the operator buys spare parts, overhauls and remote monitoring from Baker Hughes for the life of the asset, which is why Gas Technology Services alone held $16.1B of remaining performance obligations at the end of FY2025 against $3,028M of annual revenue. SLB and Halliburton do not manufacture this equipment, and turbomachinery makers do not run wells, so the combination of subsurface services and surface equipment is unusual. On the oilfield side the advantage is proprietary tooling with a long field record, including the AutoTrak and Lucida rotary steerable systems used to drill longer wells in a single run, backed by $600 million of research and development spend and more than 1,400 patents granted in 2025.

SpaceX competitive advantage: SpaceX's advantage is reusability combined with vertical integration. It builds its own engines, avionics, rockets, and satellites, and reflies Falcon 9 boosters many times, which lowers its marginal launch cost below rivals that still expend most hardware. Being its own largest launch customer lets it deploy Starlink at a cadence no other operator has matched, and Starlink revenue then funds Starship.

Growth Strategy: Where Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX Are Headed

Future prospects matter as much as current results. The growth strategies below explain how Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX each plan to expand from here.

Baker Hughes Company growth strategy: The strategy is to shift weight from short-cycle oilfield work toward equipment and lifecycle services with longer contracts. Management describes the 2026 to 2028 period as Horizon Two and frames the aim as a more industrialised energy solutions company with a production-oriented mix and more durable cash flow. In practice that has meant buying scale in industrial equipment, with Continental Disc in August 2025 for about $540 million and Chart Industries in July 2026 for $13.6 billion, while selling businesses that do not fit, including Precision Sensors and Instrumentation to Crane Company and surface pressure control into a joint venture with a Cactus, Inc. subsidiary, both closed January 1, 2026. Climate Technology Solutions, covering carbon capture, hydrogen, clean power, geothermal and emissions abatement, is the vehicle for new energy orders and produced $647M of revenue in FY2025. Digital is sold as Cordant asset management software, with FY2025 awards from Yara, CNPC Kunlun Digital and Braskem.

SpaceX growth strategy: SpaceX's growth plan has four parts: add Starlink subscribers and raise enterprise, aviation, and mobile revenue; launch higher-capacity Starlink V3 satellites on Starship; expand national-security work through Starshield and launch contracts (over $6 billion in U.S. government awards in Q2 2026); and scale AI compute capacity, which grew from 400 megawatts a year earlier to 1.4 gigawatts at the end of Q2 2026.

Financial Picture: Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX

A closer look at the financial trajectory of Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX rounds out the comparison.

Baker Hughes Company: FY2025 revenue was $27,733M, down 0.3% from $27,829M, with attributable net income of $2,588M against $2,979M a year earlier, a 13% decline driven largely by the prior-year release of tax valuation allowances and by $215M of restructuring. Profitability still improved on the measure management targets: adjusted EBITDA reached a record $4,825M, a 17.4% margin against 16.5% in FY2024. The mix did the work, with IET segment EBITDA up 21% to $2,482M while OFSE fell 9% to $2,618M. Cash conversion was the other bright spot, with $3,810M from operations and record free cash flow of $2,732M after $1,078M of net capital spending. The balance sheet ended the year with $3,715M of cash against $5,398M of long-term debt and $689M of current debt, and equity of $19,010M on total assets of $40,881M. Dividends of $910M and $384M of buybacks were paid out during the year, with the quarterly dividend at $0.23 per share. Research and development was $600M and selling, general and administrative expense $2,387M.

SpaceX: SpaceX revenue grew from $10.387 billion in 2023 to $14.015 billion in 2024 and $18.674 billion in 2025, but heavy Starship, Starlink, and AI spending produced a $4.937 billion FY2025 net loss. In Q2 2026, its first quarter reported as a public company, revenue was $7.8 billion (up 92%), adjusted EBITDA was $3.5 billion, net loss was $541 million, and backlog was $47.5 billion. The IPO raised $85.7 billion and a $25 billion bond sale added more liquidity. In late September 2026 the stock traded near $145, for a market capitalization around $1.9 trillion.

Company-Specific SWOT Notes

Baker Hughes Company

Strength

Remaining performance obligations ended FY2025 at a record $35.9B, with $32.4B at IET split between $11.6B of Gas Technology Equipment and $16.1B of Gas Technology Services.

Strength

FY2025 produced $3,810M of cash from operations and record free cash flow of $2,732M after $1,078M of net capital spending, helped by working capital efficiency and customer down payments.

Weakness

Oilfield Services and Equipment revenue was $14,324M in FY2025 against $15,628M in FY2024, a decline of $1,304M that the company attributed to reduced oilfield activity and lower rig counts.

Opportunity

For the second consecutive year, non-LNG equipment orders were about 85% of total IET orders, which reached a record $14,871M in FY2025.

Threat

IET revenue converts from orders booked years earlier, so the segment is exposed to delays in final investment decisions on LNG, gas infrastructure and power projects, which can slip for permitting, financing or offtake reasons.

SpaceX

Strength

Operational Falcon 9 booster reuse and in-house manufacturing give SpaceX the lowest marginal launch cost among major providers.

Strength

Connectivity revenue reached $4.3B in Q2 2026, up 66%, and was the only segment with an operating profit.

Weakness

FY2025 net loss was $4.937B, and Q2 2026 capex was about $18.4B, mostly for AI compute.

Weakness

A significant portion of launch revenue remains tied to NASA and DOD contracts, exposing the company to federal budget cycles and regulatory shifts.

Opportunity

A working Starship could launch much larger Starlink V3 satellites and expand mobile partnerships with carriers.

Threat

FAA licensing, orbital-debris scrutiny, Amazon Kuiper and Chinese constellations, and dependence on Elon Musk.

Factual Scorecard

CategoryResultWhy
Same-period Revenue ScaleBaker Hughes Company$27.7B (FY2025) versus $18.7B (FY2025); the higher figure is identified after approximate USD conversion.
Founded EarlierBaker Hughes CompanyBaker Hughes Company was founded in 1987; SpaceX was founded in 2002.
Verdict

Comparison Takeaway: Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX

Baker Hughes Company reported $27.7B (FY2025), while SpaceX reported $18.7B (FY2025). Revenue describes scale, not an overall winner. Compare the same reporting period and the metric relevant to the question—revenue, profitability, growth, product fit, or market value—rather than treating them as one composite score.

Methodology and sourcing reviewed by Swet Parvadiya. No date is shown unless this comparison has its own editorial review date.

Frequently Asked Questions: Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX

Which company was founded first, Baker Hughes Company or SpaceX?

Baker Hughes Company was founded in 1987; SpaceX was founded in 2002.

What revenue did Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX report?

Baker Hughes Company reported $27.7B (FY2025), while SpaceX reported $18.7B (FY2025). These figures describe reported scale; they do not by themselves determine an overall winner.

How do Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX make money?

Baker Hughes Company: Baker Hughes sells engineered equipment and the services that keep it running. SpaceX: SpaceX earns money in three segments.

Which is better, Baker Hughes Company or SpaceX?

There is no evidence-based single winner. Compare Baker Hughes Company and SpaceX on the same fiscal period and the metric relevant to the question, such as revenue, profitability, growth, product fit, or market value.

Sources & References

Cite This Page

Automatically generated citations for researchers.

APA Format

CorpDigest. (2026). Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX Comparison. from https://corpdigest.com/compare/baker-hughes-vs-spacex

MLA Format

CorpDigest. "Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX Comparison." CorpDigest, 2026, https://corpdigest.com/compare/baker-hughes-vs-spacex.

Chicago Format

CorpDigest. "Baker Hughes Company vs SpaceX Comparison." CorpDigest. 2026. https://corpdigest.com/compare/baker-hughes-vs-spacex.

Content is for informational purposes only. Not financial advice. Data sourced from SEC filings, annual reports, and public records. See our full disclaimer and methodology.