Quarter 1
Q2 2026 Earnings Call — August 4, 2026
Analyst Sheila Kaheglu (Jefferies): Good morning, guys, and thank you so much for the time. Maybe I'll just start off on the 2026 guidance range. It looks like it's all Astrobotic contribution, but the core business is doing really well. You know, record bookings up 2x essentially from where you've been. Can you maybe talk about the puts and takes of how we should think about the second half and how you're thinking about the pacing items to unlock any pull forward of the backlog recognition and where you see potential upside? Thank you.
Executive Phil (Title): Sheila, thanks for the question. Appreciate it very much. I'm going to let Phil handle that one. Good morning, Sheila. How are you? Look, from a guidance perspective, the best way to think about it, Astrobotics specifically, we've included a range of $40 to $50 million post-acquisition. So think $45 million at the midpoint there. So by definition, that means certainly our business, our core business is also contributing to the increase in our guidance. And just that reflects really the first half performance. Tremendous job by Matt Magana and the team across all of our businesses delivering on execution even slightly better than we expected here in the second quarter. And as a result, that's why we've got the confidence to raise guidance for the full year. From a visibility perspective, you can see our backlog build sequentially pretty significantly from the first quarter to the second quarter. That provides us tremendous visibility and confidence in delivering the second half ramp that you guys will all pencil out. And from an upside perspective, I would just say certainly there is that, but like all things Voyager, we've taken it pretty down the middle of the fairway each of the last few quarters. We'll continue to provide you guys transparency and updates to those things as we progress forward, but certainly there's upside potential there as well.
Analyst Miles Walton (Wolf Research): Thanks. Wondering if you could talk about the Astrobotic annualized revenue, 60, 70 million in fiscal 26, but 40, 50 in the back half of the year. Should we use that back half of the year as the run rate into 27? And then also, if you can fold into that the big award for the lunar payload of about 300 million, how should that fold into both the revenue as well as the third quarter bookings? Thanks.
Executive Phil (Title): Miles, thanks for that. I'm going to ask Phil to give you some additional specifics. But as you know, we just closed on the acquisition about two and a half weeks ago. So the 2027 outlook we're still working through, and that'll be dependent on the mission timing as well. But as you correctly pointed out, we had very significant CLPS wins with NASA just as we were closing that transaction. So we're super optimistic about the business and the growth prospects there. But in terms of the exact timing for next year and beyond, we're still working through the details of that. I think we'll have a lot more to say on that at Investor Day on December 3rd, because that'll not only give us a very clear outlook for 27 for Astrobotic, but of course for Voyager as a whole. So over to Phil.
Executive Phil (Title): Yeah, and Miles, maybe I'll just add some incremental color there. When we talked about on a full year basis, that $60, $70 million, obviously you guys can see that there is a second half ramp, particularly this year for Astrobotic. That's tied specifically with the Griffin mission that we're very excited for coming up later this year, early next year. And so a lot of the revenue is in that backlog coming into the year. And just a point of emphasis, too,
as a reminder to everybody, when you look at our ending backlog here in the second quarter, record backlog, there's absolutely zero dollars in there associated with Astrobotic.
So we'll provide more color as we kind of progress here through the quarter. Obviously anticipate backlog, not just at the end of the third quarter, but the end of the fourth quarter will be substantially higher than where it is even here today. As you noted, we got nearly a $300 million award, or two awards really, for NASA for Eclipse missions. As we work through those details, to Dylan's point earlier, and another shameless plug for December 3rd, please everybody circle that date. We look forward to seeing you all in Pittsburgh. We provide ample visibility to not just how those specific missions play themselves out over the course of 27 and years ahead, but more importantly, also our full year visibility into Voyager because we're excited about how the core business is actually accelerating here in the second half of the year. And we anticipate not just from a bookings perspective, you guys will be pretty impressed with the numbers we put up over the second half, giving us a lot of momentum as we head into 2027. Thank you.
Analyst John Godwin (Citi): Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Obviously, the Astrobotic deal is a very interesting deal. But, Dylan, I was hoping to just plug into your broader views on strategic M&A. I feel like you've always been unusually plugged into the landscape. So maybe you can just kind of talk about M&A from here, what you've learned with prior deals, as well as the business and vision you have over the next few years and how M&A plays into that.
Executive Dylan (Title): Very thoughtful question, John. I really appreciate the thought behind that. Yeah, we're very optimistic about what we see in the M&A landscape in our pipeline and specifically what's happening in the industry. I think increasingly companies understand that they need to be part of a larger platform to be successful long term, especially for larger infrastructure projects that are being bid out, whether it's on the DOW side or the NASA side. So I think here, John, as you're, I think, alluding to a bit, relationships really matter. And, you know, the trust and the reputation in the market, I think, goes a long way in terms of not only creating opportunities for M&A, but also convincing those M&A opportunities that your company's the right home for their technology and for their people. So I think I really am encouraged by what we see. Now, that being said, we're building to a specific strategy here. It's not an opportunistic one. It is a strategic one. So for example, within the lunar tech stack, we've talked in the past about how important it is to really have the integrated approach for lunar.
So, for example, not only the lander, but mobility on the moon, habitation, power, propulsion, all the different things that you need to live and work on the moon and survive the night, in quotes. Those are all important technologies that are part of our strategic technology stack that we're either investing in from an IRAG perspective or targeting from an M&A perspective. So we're super excited about that. Similarly, on propulsion, as you've seen over the last six to nine months with, in particular, the ExoTerra acquisition, but also the investments we're making into the Pueblo American Defense Complex as it relates to scaling our propulsion technology and the success we've had on Golden Dome, we're really completing that technology stack from an integrated propulsion standpoint, including energetics, and we're really getting multiplier effects, not only technologically, but with the customer seeing us increasingly solving larger mission critical solutions for them. ==And then this final point I'll make, you know, we had a big win.
I think it was understated, frankly, and people don't fully understand it on the agentic AI initiative for an undisclosed customer.== That initiative has been led internally by our co-founder, Matt Kuta, who is rapidly becoming, I think, the industry leader and expert in agentic AI as it applies to defense and national security. And so I expect a lot of very interesting growth opportunities there. And as we know, that's a very rapidly growing and evolving market as well. So very optimistic about what we see. The M&A pipeline is extremely robust, and we're going to continue to be disciplined with our capital allocation. But at the same time, we're seeing a lot of opportunities for accretive M&A, not only financially accretive, but technologically and strategically accretive to our overall vision and plan. So I hope that answers that. I'm happy to take any follow-ups, John.
Analyst John Godwin (Citi): No, I think that was fantastic. Really appreciate it. Thank you.
Analyst Seth Seifman (JP Morgan): Thanks very much and good morning. I wanted to follow up on that. You mentioned Golden Dome. It seems like roughly three quarters of the awards this quarter were Golden Dome related. Can you talk in a little bit more detail about what you've won there and what the opportunities are for you going forward and should we expect to see this continuing to be a significant portion of the bookings?
Executive Phil (Title): Yes, thank you, Seth. I'm going to have Phil give the detail on how that $84 million of Golden Dome awards break down in the quarter. But just generally, a couple points. As we've said previously on previous calls and also at our Investor Day last November, our technology, because it has been demonstrated on the highest technical standards on, for example, Next Generation Interceptor, we're seeing a very high level of adoption for the technology. Couple that with some of the geopolitical circumstances, including what's happening, of course, in Iran and elsewhere, depleting inventories. We're seeing extremely significant demand for Golden Dome-related activities. So obviously, this $84 million print on backlog for Q2 is where we are today, but anticipate that additional traction will be demonstrated as we go forward the back half of the year with respect to Golden Dome. And frankly, it's a tiger by the tail in the sense that we have so many opportunities on the Golden Dome platform to implement our technology that we're super excited about what that prospect is going to bring forward. But Phil will give you the specifics on how the $84 million breaks down.
Executive Phil (Title): Yeah, good morning, Seth. Hope all's well. Yeah, from a Golden Dome perspective, again, $84 million in total awards this quarter. Just to put a little bit more details to that, we're looking at more than five awards, five different customers, five different platforms, five different awards. And I would highlight about 60% of that $84 million tied specifically to space-based interceptor programs. That's programs in plural. That's an important note. I think back, Dylan, a year since we've gone public, and I want to say for the first three, four calls that we've had, we focused a lot of times on Next Generation Interceptor. It's still a major program of ours and an incredible base to our revenue, continues to be and expected to be this year. But this will be the first call we've gotten like three, four questions into this, and we haven't talked about NGI yet.
That's an important note, and that's because even in this quarter, and sequentially, obviously we increased from the first quarter up to $53 million of revenue, we actually had the same amount of contribution from space-based interceptor programs here in Q2 from a revenue perspective as we did from NGI. I think that's a really important milestone for not just analysts and investors alike to recall as we kind of came out as a public company, we talked about national defense or national security and defense providing significant ample opportunities extended far beyond just next generation interceptor. As I look out over the balance of the year, I anticipate space-based interceptor revenue will continue to be along the same par of NGI over the back half, with a significant upside to that as we continue to progress from a technical development perspective.
Executive Dylan (Title): Yeah, and Seth, just final point, I think Phil articulated it extremely well, but again, SBIs were not even on our radar screen six months ago. We didn't even talk about that as part of our investor day in November because Golden Dome, of course, architecture hadn't been specified, but it also technologically wasn't something that was yet specced. So the fact that that architecture has now been configured. SPIs are now a thing. It's technically extremely difficult, and our technologies inspect in on multiple SPI programs, I think, bodes extremely well for how our technologies are being developed in Golden Dome generally, and is not only consistent, but I would say exceeds the expectations that we had for how much traction we would get within the Golden Dome ecosystem and not only in terms of the quanta, but how quickly the adoption is happening. So extremely bullish on what we see on Golden Dome.
Analyst Seth Seifman (JP Morgan): Excellent. That's very helpful. Thanks. If I could follow up on just a totally different topic, but on the lunar opportunity you've talked about, which obviously is considerable. When you think about how that matures and the opportunity that's there, to what extent is the runway for your growth governed by the Artemis program and the pace at which that moves forward and stays on schedule?
Executive Dylan (Title): Well, it's a thoughtful question. I would say a couple things. The fact that the CLPS missions have been awarded, and we were awarded two of those, I think bodes very well. Of course, Artemis has a difficult component to it, which is the human landing component, right? And I think that is dependent on things that are not within our constraints. So, for example, spacesuits, surface landers, you know, human-rated hardware.
Executive Phil (Title): I’ve got a factored pipeline that's probability win, probability fund, good factored pipeline of over $5 billion. Now, obviously, strategic systems, we're talking propulsion, missile defense, Golden Dome, space-based interceptors, all significant components of that, but still much larger than they were even just a year ago, to Dylan's point earlier. That sits at about $3.5 billion. When I think about lunar, obviously with the Astrobotic acquisition, this is complementary already to the lunar strategy that we have been developing and part of the product and capabilities we've been innovating and developing on our own organically. I think of Lunar and Space Mission Management, and that's a rich pipeline, over a billion dollars of opportunity. So we're excited as we look out. The great news is we're not tied to any one specific program and or award as we execute, and the team's been doing exactly that. So exciting times as we look ahead. And just final points, Seth. I know we're kind of running on this topic, but it's an important one. We'll have more to say about this on Investor Day, December 3rd in Pittsburgh.
But there are other parts of our technology stack that are very relevant to the moon that we see huge long-term growth opportunities for. And two I'll mention, both of which Astrobotic has been working on. But the two I think that are absolutely essential that we can play a key role in are comms and power. And if you look at building permanent infrastructure on the moon, living and working on the moon, everything is downstream of power, as we know, and to a lesser extent, everything is downstream of comms. And so those are two areas that we're really focused on. We'll have more to say about that, as I mentioned, at Investor Day. But that's another thing I'd like to just surface as key parts of our strategy that I think are going to have very significant financial implications to our strategic plan going forward. Thank you very much.
Analyst Christine Luweg (Morgan Stanley): Hey, good morning everyone. You've discussed how the Starlab program is being re-phased to align with NASA's updated CLD plan. Now there appears to be a lot of information from NASA's approach and fluidity around the program and the timing for this. Can you provide more color on what specifically changed in the plan, how these changes impacted your program schedule and outlook, and what gives you the confidence that the current development and funding timeline is what's going to go forward?
Executive Dylan (Title): Thanks for the question, Christine. I think our confidence, frankly, since the last call has increased pretty dramatically on Starlab. As you know, the issue NASA did in RFI that they got some feedback from the market on, which included sort of a, I'll call it a government-owned core module. The general consensus from the industry was that that was not the right approach, and to NASA's credit, they reversed course on that particular approach, and the draft RFE that they issued here recently was much more consistent with the original CLD Phase I approach. Now, there are still some mechanisms within that draft RFP that I think the industry is going to provide feedback on, requirements primarily, because you want the requirements to be robust because it's human-rated hardware, of course, but you don't want them to be so robust that nobody can build it on time and on budget. So I think there are going to be elements of the requirements that in the final RFP will be either changed or relaxed a bit. But in general, Christine, we're feeling really good about where we're positioned.
Even if the RFP came out, you know, as sort of issued in the draft, I think we'd be very well positioned. And I think we're hopeful that additional changes from the draft to the final RFP will only enhance our competitive position. Because keep in mind, our single launch to orbit solution are, you know, operational day one approach as opposed to on-orbit assembly. The full scale of Starlab with its larger design is highly differentiated compared to some of the other solutions out there. So we feel good about that. I think you also talked about timing. You know, obviously we would prefer that a decision be made sooner rather than later, of course. Really the time pressure for the industry and frankly for the country and for Western Allies is making sure this gets built before the ISS has to come down. And there's, of course, a planned deorbit of the ISS. But we also want to make sure that, you know, the station's aging and, of course, it's got issues on it from time to time. We want to make sure that we have a commercial solution in plenty of time before the ISS no longer has functionality.
So, yeah, I think, you know, timing is a bit delayed just because they went through the RFI and the draft RFP process. But we still anticipate a final RFP here shortly. And submissions, I would say, you know, sometime mid to late fall and then a selection early next year. That's our current belief on timing. With that, I'll ask Phil if he's got anything else to contribute.
Executive Phil (Title): Phil, if I could add, and good morning, Christine. Appreciate the question. Yeah. So, just from a competitive advantage perspective. I just want to make sure not just our analysts but our investors are well aware of the strategic advantage we have with the actual construct of the Starlab joint venture. The way we've actually formulated the cost structure to that program and to that business effectively allows us to flex our spend and adapt to delays like this with NASA. A lot of credit to the hard work that Marshall Smith, who leads Starlab and the team at Starlab, they've continued to make really meaningful progress. They continue to advance, obviously, the technological development, commercial customer engagement. And to that note, I just remind everybody to highlight this in my prepared remarks. Now we're well over 500 million, actually, quickly approaching the $600 million mark of signed commercial reservations for Starlab. These are the things that are in our control and the things that our team has been focused on every day since we initiated this program. And so, again, we're really happy with the progress that we've made.
We're happy and continue to work closely with NASA during this RFI process, and we'll continue to adapt to it as things evolve. And just a final point, Christine, I'll make. Thank and compliment Administrator Isaac Ben, because I think they have done a fantastic job of testing different ideas in the market, soliciting feedback from industry, and then I wouldn't say pivoting, but I would say incorporating that feedback from industry into what they reissue and approaches that they're taking. And so I think that's fantastic. That's exactly what you would hope for from your customer is that they float ideas, they take feedback, and then they adjust based upon your feedback. So I think we have a great partner in NASA, and we're excited about the future with them on this program.
Analyst Guathamcana (Cohen): Yeah, good morning. I was wondering if you could give us an update on the American Defense Complex. What it's doing right now, how far along the build-out and staffing is, and if you could also talk a little bit about whether you've seen any traction on SRMs with the captive black powder asset that you guys own, and if you could talk about how you're positioned in that market. Thank you.
Executive Phil (Title): Good morning, Phil. I'll take this one and then Dylan might add some additional color. But we were excited not just to break ground earlier this year, but to get off with a flying start. We've made a considerable amount of investment on-prem already. I'd say most notably here, think about the benefits we're already reaping. So some of the technological advancements that we have made, even though we're not done constructing the facility, but it has allowed us to do a significant amount of innovation prototyping and testing on site, which has actually been the catalyst leading to a lot of these space-based interceptor award wins. And so we've talked about this year being an investing year. There's still a significant amount of investment to go at that site as well as the development out at Space Beach or specifically Long Beach, California. And so we're continuing to look forward to making those investments. But more importantly, we're already seeing returns on that invested capital, which is exciting to us.
Executive Dylan (Title): Yeah, and I would say also that the CapEx deployment is on schedule. Again, being led by Matt Kuta, our co-founder and president, who's doing a great job. He's got an entire team dedicated to that, and I know he's very closely managing that. They're doing a great job. I think you also asked about SRMs and black powder traction. We like what we see there, certainly, and I think we'll have more to say on that in Q3. But, yes, the short answer is we are very optimistic that that growth factor will is what we thought it was. And we'll have more to say on that in the very near future.
Analyst Guathamcana (Cohen): That's helpful. And just a quick follow-up, because you did mention the huge pipeline of opportunities you're pursuing. I'm curious, do you have a sense for what the book to bill might look like in the second half of the year, just based on what you have out there already?
Executive Phil (Title): I certainly do, Guatham. So I will highlight that with the significantly large $300 million award that we received from NASA for those CLPS missions with Astrobotic, those certainly have come in actually post-acquisition, so there'll be an exceptional third quarter performance. That said, when I think of fourth quarter, would things start to normalize again? Positive book-to-bill, again, despite us having well over a one book-to-bill ratio in the first half where we're typically south of one. So I would guide towards Q4 being quite similar to the combination of the first half. So about 1.2, 1.3 book to bill in Q4 with a truly exceptional third quarter in between.
Analyst Michael Leshock (KeyBank Capital Markets): Hey, good morning. I just wanted to clarify the magnitude of NGI. I think you previously said the 2026 revenue contribution would be relatively flattish versus the 50 million in 25. Has that changed at all? And then secondly, you know, what milestones need to happen to hit LRIP in 2027? Is that, you know, all based on the customer or capacity expansions or any other milestones to be looking for on NGI just to hit that initial production cadence? Thank you.
Executive Phil (Title): Hey, Mike. Good morning. It's Phil here on this side. Appreciate the question. Yeah, no, NGI, no change in the program from our perspective. Again, the team there just continues to execute on behalf of the customer as they have been for, frankly speaking, quite a number of years now. So if I recall correctly up top of my head, last year, full year, NGI revenue was just about $47 million. That flat comment that I've carried forward still holds true. We should be in the range of $45 to $50 million this year. Again, all tied really specifically to specific customer timing on that front. We have passed our critical design review from the propulsion side of the house. Last year, if you guys recall, that was June. That was a pretty significant milestone for us as we continue to march out for the balance of the year. And we are certainly still awaiting for the LRIP contract, which we anticipate could still come before the end of the year. We'll obviously provide an update as soon as we can. But obviously, just
as a reminder, we anticipate that's a pretty significant contribution, not just to 2027 and 2028, but then as we move from low rate production to high rate production, we view Lockheed Martin's Next Generation Interceptor at approximately a billion dollars worth of value to us to be generated over the next five plus years.
Analyst David Strauss (Wells Fargo): Hey, good morning. This is Ben Tomic on for David. I was just wondering, could you guys talk about how you're feeling about the certainty of Starship's capacity to launch Starlab and if there's any risk to the timeline there?
Executive Dylan (Title): Hey, Ben, how are you? I don't think I've had a chance to meet you before. Nice to hear from you. We're not concerned about that. Keep in mind what we need Starship to do is orbital insertion, which Starship's really already demonstrated. So a lot of the refinements that Elon and team are working on right now have to do with reentry, heat shield, refueling, human rated hardware, et cetera, et cetera. So from our perspective, what we need them to do, which is safe delivery to orbit, they've already demonstrated. So short answer is no, we're not concerned with their ability to launch us.
Analyst Andre Madrid (U.S. Bancorp): Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. I think you mentioned it a little bit before, but can we maybe just go into some more detail about the pace of revenue recognition on Moonbase 2 and the Two Cliffs Lunar Landers Awards as, you know, those progress towards eventual delivery?
Executive Phil (Title): Hey, Andre, good morning. Great question. It was asked earlier. I'll stick to the script here. As we get closer to our investor day, we're going to have a significant more information to share and in part that's because look we just acquired the business frankly speaking just a couple weeks ago just received both awards from NASA and as we start to work through the contracting dynamics associated with it and you can appreciate it's far probably more far more complex than than we'd all appreciate we anticipate we will certainly as always provide the level of transparency we always have. But I ask you to just be patient with us. Anticipate that obviously it will be a significant contribution to us in future periods. Not counting on any significant contribution from it here in 2026. I think that's an important piece to note. The team there is obviously really focused on the Griffin mission first. And then obviously we'll tackle these both contractually and then from an execution perspective once we get into 2027.
Analyst Andre Madrid (U.S. Bancorp): Got it, got it. And I guess on my follow-up, something a little bit different, you know, obviously given your experience in providing, you know, advanced propulsion subsystems on programs like NGI, I mean, looking at these recent framework agreements, I mean, does this present really any opportunity for Voyager to support as a sub? Specifically on propulsion Golden Dome activities?
Executive Phil (Title): Yeah, no, I'm more specific to, I guess, the recent framework agreements. If any of the work that you do is maybe tangential and could support that at all, do you view it as an opportunity or not really?
Executive Dylan (Title): We view it as an opportunity. No, I think it's a very astute question. We see it the same way. Obviously, we've got a lot of other growth opportunities here and things that we're excited about, but yes, we do see that as an opportunity, full stop.
Analyst Stephen Warhoftake (Wedbush Securities): Hey, morning team. Congrats on the quarter. Thanks for taking the call. Dylan, I want to talk a little bit more about this agentic contract that you got in the pipeline. I more so want to talk about the opportunity that you really see to expand in this space because it really seems like a unique contract and it seems a little bit different than what you are going after with the defense and space industry. So can you break down the opportunity that you're seeing within the agentic field and then I will follow up. Thank you.
Quarter 2
Q1 2026 Earnings Call — May 5, 2026
Analyst Name (Firm): Sheila Kaheglu (Jefferies) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Good morning, guys. Good morning, Dylan, Bill, and Adi. Maybe, Dylan, just to start, the backlog increased despite the seasonal downward trend typically. You know, what were key wins in the quarter, especially related to Golden Dome, and what do they mean to your capability stack, if you could elaborate?
Yeah. Well, thank you, Sheila. Great question. I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the question. Q1 really was a seminal milestone quarter for us on Golden Dome. You know, as we said in the IPO Roadshow, our technology is very relevant to multiple missile programs. And so what we said in the Roadshow was that we could expect, in addition to Next Generation Interceptor, that we would be added to these additional missile programs. And frankly, that timing has actually been accelerated beyond what I would have expected. So we've had a lot of success here in Q1 and the early part of 2026. So as I mentioned in my remarks, we've been added to Standard Missile by Raytheon. That's a huge win for the company. There's also an announcement that's just out in the last 15 minutes about our relationship with Andral on space-based interceptors as well. So that wasn't in my previous remarks because it literally just was issued about 15 minutes ago. So think of this as two different categories: being added to programs where our technology is relevant to upgrade to next-generation technology.
And then the second part is actually being an on-ramp for additional volumes because, of course, there's a big ramp-up that the government is looking to achieve on these programs with existing technology. So we're being added as a second source, and we're being added as an upgrade to next-generation technology. So both of those are playing out. And, again, if I look at our backlog that's showing up in Q1 backlog, to your point, it reversed the trend of actually burning backlog off in Q1. We were able to actually increase backlog in Q1. And then, of course, our pipeline continues to grow, Sheila, really, really, really significantly. So we're extremely optimistic that this is a validation of our technology, and additional programs awards are forthcoming as well. Hopefully that answers your question. Happy to take any follow-up.
Analyst Name (Firm): Sheila Kaheglu (Jefferies) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Yeah, super helpful. Maybe as a follow-up, thinking about how you raised the low end of the guidance for 26, what came in, which one of the following is increasing it? Was it NGI? Was it the NGO relationship? And maybe if you could talk about milestones over the next three quarters we should be looking for.
Sounds good. I'm going to give that to Phil for the detail. Good morning, Sheila. How are you? Great question. Just
as a reminder, we raised the guidance here this quarter, but this is following us raising the low end of other guidance last quarter.
And that was obviously following us initiating guidance for 2026 back in November. We've seen the last six months has been a continued strengthening of that customer signal demand. Our pipeline remains extremely strong, over $5 billion. And the confidence raised in the bottom end is the conversion of that pipeline into backlog that we know we will deliver beginning here in Q2 and all the way through the back end of the year this year. Obviously, we still have quite a ways to go, so we'll reserve touching the midpoint or effectively the top end of the range for future quarters, but increasing confidence in us delivering as we planned here in 2026.
Analyst Name (Firm): Ron Epstein (Bank of America) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Hey, good morning. This is Alex Preston on for Ron. First, I just wanted to follow up on the Anzoril Award. I actually noticed that a bit before you mentioned it, Dylan, so you stole my thunder there. But just curious if you can maybe talk broadly about the contributions you'll make on that team or what the partnership means for the business in general. Just some more color would be great if you could.
Yeah. Yeah, thanks for the question, Alex. So it's obviously a very significant award. It pertains to the space-based interceptors. We have to be vague as to exactly what role we're playing in the team. That's really driven by the customer. But I think you're aware of our suite of technologies, advanced technologies, and the ones that are relevant to space-based interceptors and call it Golden Dome in particular. And what I can say is we have multiple technologies on the SBI program. Furthermore, Alex, what I can also say is there are additional news forthcoming on SBI, so stay tuned on that. But we're extremely pleased with how central our technology is to the architectures being put forward on Golden Dome and space-based interceptors in particular. And as I said in my response to Sheila, we had anticipated that our technology would be relevant for Golden Dome. Frankly, I'm quite surprised at how quickly that technology is gaining traction within this architecture. And we're extremely bullish on what we see there. So hopefully that answers your question, Alex. I'm happy to take any follow-up.
Analyst Name (Firm): Alex Preston (Bank of America) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Yeah, I appreciate the color. And then if I could shift to Starlab and CLD, right? A lot of moving parts, obviously. Sounds like NASA's got maybe funding challenges, but they put out this RFI for a core module path forward. I guess, broadly, maybe how are you thinking about the updates here on Starlab's timeline, perhaps, your view on the competitive landscape, if there maybe aren't two free flyers, as was once thought? Sort of broad thoughts there would be also really helpful.
Yeah. Well, first of all, we're still very, very optimistic about Starlab and the program because, again, either direction NASA takes, whether it's core module with commercial modules attached or it's commercial free flyers, we think we have the technology and, in particular, the market traction to service both those models. So we responded to the RFI. As you mentioned, NASA put out the RFI. We responded to that. We're awaiting NASA's response on that, which is likely to be an RFP. But keep in mind, we're already at 130% of commercial demand capacity spoken for on Starlab. And that commercial demand could translate to a different solution if NASA goes a different path. So we're actually quite bullish. And as you probably are aware, we won the PAM-7 private astronaut mission from NASA. That's really a validation of our mission management business. So we're actually quite optimistic that no matter what path NASA takes, our capabilities will be relevant. We did pass another four milestones in the quarter on Starlab itself and got some additional cash payments in.
And I don't know if we mentioned on the last quarter or not, but we had this high-fidelity mock-up in Building 9 at Johnson Space Center. We're getting a lot of people through there. It's quite impressive just seeing the volume of that Starlab design. So I would encourage you, Alex, or anybody on the call, if they happen to be in Houston, we can arrange a tour. But I think just, yeah, to put a finer point on it, we're very optimistic that we're well positioned on CLD no matter what path NASA chooses to take.
Analyst Name (Firm): Alex Preston (Bank of America) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Great. Thank you very much for taking the questions. Appreciate it.
Analyst Name (Firm): Miles Walton (Wolf Research) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Yeah, thanks. Good morning. I was hoping to maybe clarify first on the standard missile contract during the IPA Roadshow. That was, I think, the largest single opportunity in the pipeline, around 300 million plus. Is the part of the win that you've gotten this quarter in there? Is that the entirety? Is it something new? Maybe you just put it in context what you were looking for versus what you get.
Yeah, Miles, it's all good news here. I'll give you the particulars, but this is all incremental to what we reported. I think really important to highlight two, Miles, is one, this is just the initial contract we've received here from Raytheon for SM3. This is a pre-production award, and so significant upside to the backlog that we've added here strategically. More importantly, as we look beyond 2026 and expect that program to then continue, it absolutely aligns well with what we had talked about around the IPO, where there wasn't just a next-generation interceptor program that had a billion dollars' worth of leg to it from a production standpoint. We still expect that, if you would, to come to fruition later this year as we enter into 2027 from a low-rate to high-rate production perspective. Raytheon SM3, early stages, we'll continue to report out as we make progress on that specific program. I think more exciting news as we've validated our disruptive technologies in the space.
Analyst Name (Firm): Miles Walton (Wolf Research) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Okay. And Phil, I'll have you, the sales cadence for the rest of the year obviously has to accelerate quite substantially. Could you talk about the first quarter headwinds you had that those alleviate in the second quarter? Maybe just the magnitude of acceleration you're expecting here in the near term versus the tail end of the year.
I appreciate the question, Miles. A bit to unpack there. So let's remind everybody, $35 million of revenue this first quarter, slightly up year over year.
As a reminder, we did have some pretty substantial programs rolling off.
For example, the Space Dock 2 contract that we've been flagging and highlighting as a year-over-year headwind, latter part of last year, contributed about $5 million of revenue last year, first quarter. And so that's just about wrapped up completely. So about a $5 million, I think, 13 percentage point headwind into the quarter for us this year. We also had a fantastic software design radio contract with Airbus. That was a big growth driver for us last year and in 2024, frankly speaking. That program is also wrapping up here early 2026, so another headwind. As I think about looking ahead, the new record backlog that we've established, the momentum we're building from a bookings perspective, we anticipate revenues to ramp sequentially and accelerate growth sequentially. Going from $35 million of revenue should increase sequentially by 37%. So think high 40s, if you would. There'll be about, you know, mid-single-digit growth year over year. And then just based on the backlog, the customer timeline that we've received, the delivery of longer-lead material items, we know we have in our backlog a substantial amount of second-half revenue to deliver. And so that's how we're planning it, about 33% of our full-year revenue at the midpoint in the first half and about 67% of the revenue in the second half of the year, with great visibility given our backlog.
Analyst Name (Firm): Miles Walton (Wolf Research) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Okay. And, Myles, just to emphasize the points that Phil made there, it's not only line of sight for what we have in the backlog and what we're reporting on in Q1, but all of these incremental awards that we're talking about are all going to be additive to that confidence that we have, including, for example, that PAM-7 mission that I mentioned earlier. None of that is in backlog. First of all, that was a Q2 award. Secondly, being the conservative company we are, we're not going to count that as backlog until we actually get a signed contract and a down payment towards a mission slot. So that's all upside to backlog as well. So I just want to emphasize that point. And maybe just to put a finer point on the momentum story, and I'm just reflecting back to my answer to Sheila at the opening of the call.
One thing to highlight here, and I know it's early in the second quarter, but we continue to see the bookings momentum continue for us here early Q2. We've already booked quite a substantial amount of the second quarter. And I know, Miles, you and I have had that discussion around the – we typically burn backlog in the first half of the year and build it in the second half of the year. I wouldn't say it's unusual. It's a realization, if you will, of the strong demand signal that we're getting here, that we had a 1.3 book-to-bill ratio in Q1. Expect our book-to-bill ratio will exceed one again in the second quarter, and we should well exceed even the $45 million of bookings that we had in Q1. So momentum continues to build. line of sight, even the bookings we have here in early April. These are also revenue-generating programs here for the calendar year 2026. A substantial portion of these will be delivered until the second half of the year, again, supporting that second half ramp. So, again, appreciate the question. I just want to make sure we highlighted the continued momentum that we've seen early Q2 as well. Thanks so much.
Analyst Name (Firm): Miles Walton (Wolf Research) Executive Name (Title): Rocco (for Seth)
Thanks, Miles.
The next question comes from the line of Seth Seifman with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Hi, good morning. This is Rocco on for Seth. Hey, Rob. I was wondering what were the main factors that kind of weighed on Q1 gross margins and how should we expect the margin to progress through the year? Will it just be kind of a quick step up in Q2 or more of a ramp throughout the year?
Executive Name (Title): Rob (CFO)
Yeah, maybe I'll take that question, Rob. From a gross profit margin perspective, if you recall, we anticipated this year will be a gross profit margin in the mid-teens, so I think 14, 15% on a full year basis. That reflects year over year an incremental investment ahead of growth, scale growth, as we move into higher rate production contracts later this year and into next year. So we're already anticipating a challenging first half of the year. You see negative gross profit reflects exactly that, some program mix as well. As we look out second quarter, anticipate gross profit to be positive. Think low, mid-single digits in Q2. And then a significant acceleration thanks to leverage. I just reflected on the revenue profile. I think 33% first half, 67% of our full-year revenue guidance split that way. From a gross profit sequential perspective, you should see us step up into the mid to high teens in Q3 and then back into the mid-20s in Q4 as we significantly leverage our cost structure.
Analyst Name (Firm): Rob (CFO) Executive Name (Title): Rob (CFO)
Great, thank you. And then what drove the decision to combine the defense and space businesses into one segment, and is there an opportunity for the combination to drive any synergies in the business?
Yeah, I'll start with that, Rob, and I'll ask Phil to chime in. I think a couple things. One is there's increasing convergence between our national security and defense business and our space business. Of course, it's been said before that space is the ultimate high ground, so there's a lot of national security implications for that. And there was also a lot of overlap in the technologies that were being deployed. We had a single executive, Matt Magana, running those businesses as well. So that also allowed us to merge the growth teams and a lot of other things that were relevant to actually running the business. So those were the main drivers. I'll ask Phil to chime in as well.
Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Yeah,
as a reminder for everyone, we IPO'd last June with three external segments, Defense, National Security, Space Solutions, and Starlab.
And going forward, we've got the two segments now. To Dylan's point, internally, we had already integrated the Defense and National Security and Space Solutions segment under the leadership of Matt Magana. Equally as importantly, as we progressed post-IPO last year, made three strategic acquisitions, EMSI, ExoTerra, and then ESPYs late in the fourth quarter. And so, as we've already well on our way to integrating these businesses fully, the way we go to market, the way we go and highlight and bring our technologies, our disruptive space tech and defense tech technologies to the customer, it's bringing a portfolio solution cell to the customer. Next Generation Interceptor is a great example. Classic, if you would, propulsion technology that we've been long developing alongside with Lockheed Martin for years. Combine that with traditional space or effectively dual-use space technology and navigation controls. And so that's a great example of how we're bringing a more portfolio set, getting a greater wall chair with our customer. And the segmentation helps us clarify and clearly convey those results the way that we manage the business internally to the external community. So it should help from that perspective as well.
Analyst Name (Firm): Rob (CFO) Executive Name (Title): Rob (CFO)
Great. Thank you, guys.
Analyst Name (Firm): John Goodwin (Citigroup) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Dylan, you had a great dialogue in the beginning about AI investments, reducing go-to-market time, you know, preparing for rising production rates with the strong booking commentary and outlook you guys have here. I just wanted to revisit that topic, understand it a little bit better and understand how you guys are kind of preparing a scale.
Yeah, thank you for the question. Very thoughtful question. So we're thinking about AI in a couple of different ways. And this has got very senior level executive sponsorship. Matt Kuda, our overall company president, is driving a lot of this. We also made a key hire and I credit Paul Tilghman, our CTO, for this, a key hire out of DARPA Labs, who was involved very much in agentic AI. So we're thinking of AI beyond just personal productivity, which is the way I think a lot of people are thinking about it. And we're really thinking of it as more of a technical tool that allows us to not only enhance our ability to create technical solutions for our customers, but to, as I said in my remarks, reduce cycle time. Because when you're a technology and innovation company, which Voyager is, it's all about being first to market with advanced technology. And so that's really the way we're thinking about it, and that's really where we're seeing the primary benefits. So think of, you know, everything from a custom ASIC design to other things that might go in a program. Instead of that being a multi-year approach, it could be a multi-month approach.
And it's not only getting a better outcome, but it's reducing that cycle time and bringing the innovation to bear sooner. So that's really the key way we're thinking about it. Early indications are this is going to have a significant impact on our business. It's still too early to say exactly what meaningfully will change from a margin profile and things like that. But I would tell you, as you would expect, being a technology and innovation company, we are on the leading edge of innovation in this area as well. And I really like what I see initially here. And I think we'll have a lot more to say about this probably on our next earnings call.
Analyst Name (Firm): John Goodwin (Citigroup) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Great. That's great color. And if I could just sort of ask a nit, this is probably more for Phil. You guys raised the low end of the revenue guidance, but not the high end. I know it's very early in the year, very small percentage of revenue, you know, in one queue versus the full year. That may be it. But I'm just kind of curious.
Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Scope to kind of revisit the high end or execute to the high end throughout the year. I mean, the bookings commentary was great. I think there might be a little bit of a potential for that, but Phil, any thoughts?
Yeah, John, appreciate the question. Love it when the conservative CFO gets put in the corner. So I'm smiling here on this end though. Again, just reminding everybody. So we've now consistently raised, yes, the bottom end. It's because it is early in the year. We're wrapping up the first quarter. As I mentioned earlier, great momentum heading into Q2. We'll provide an update on what we think about what the top end could be once we get through the second quarter of this year. We've got that crystallized visibility into the second half of the year. You know, I do highlight, and I mentioned it earlier, there's a second half revenue, about 67% of the full year guide with a substantial amount of that in the fourth quarter. You know, our customer schedules tend to move around. You know, no fault of theirs, but things get delayed and get pushed, et cetera. And so, you know, again, perhaps more on the conservative side here before we start to think about moving the top end up. We'll keep it where we lay it out today and provide an update in August. Look forward to that update, obviously. Things continue to progress well, as they have here through the, you know, strong start to the year. I'm optimistic that there could be some upside, but we'll stay a bit short from guiding that way until we have that crystallized visibility. But thanks for the question, John.
Analyst Name (Firm): Gwantum Khanna (TD Cowan) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Hi, this is Anton Ron for Gotham. So assuming Starlab does win CLB Phase 2, when do you expect Starlab to start generating revenue? Can we start to see revenue from things like on-ground astronaut training as soon as 2027, or is this really only meaningful in 2028? And, you know, maybe how much revenue can you generate from on-ground work? Appreciate the question.
Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Yes, our expectation is that we could start seeing some revenue recognition as early as 2027 and certainly in 2028 from a training perspective. I think most importantly for everybody to kind of keep an eye on, and I highlighted this the last quarter, keep an eye out from a balance sheet perspective, the deferred revenue that we start to recognize, or not recognize exclusively, but realize. We expect advanced bookings could start as early as, like they did here in 2026. Certainly expect that to accelerate as we move into 2027 and beyond. I think that would be the strongest indicator. As Dylan mentioned, we already have over 130% of our commercial capacity spoken for. But as we move through the year, out the back end of the year into next year, we start to see that convert into cash reservations. Nothing better than that from a CFO's perspective. And then we'll start to turn that and flip that into revenue, like I said, the year after in 27 and 28. Thanks.
Analyst Name (Firm): Michael Leshock (KeyBank Capital Markets) Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Hey, good morning. I wanted to ask on Golden Dome, is the early Golden Dome revenue more R&D prototype-like or is it more production-like with more established gross margins? Just appreciate any additional color you can provide on the margin profile for Golden Dome-related work.
Executive Name (Title): Phil (CFO)
Hey, Mike, it's Phil. I'll take that from a gross profit margin perspective, but certainly have Dylan weigh in as well. So we highlight it as a pre-production contract. So it's certainly not research and development. This is a revenue generating contract that we're going to, that we've received here and expect to deliver on. It is a firm fixed price contract. So I know that wasn't your question, but from a margin perspective, we're looking at 20 plus percent margins. So these are healthy margins, early stage, clearly. And as we move into the higher production, no different than the NGI, we expect that margin profile to only improve or increase as we move into that phase.
Analyst Name (Firm): Christine Lued (Morgan Stanley) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Hey, good morning, everyone. Dylan, you mentioned earlier for NASA CLD that depending on the approach NASA wants to take, that, you know, Voyager is prepared with Starlab. I was wondering, is a third option possible? I mean, if NASA still seems to be uncertain about the path they want to take, considering the maturity of your investments in Starlab and your ability to raise private capital to support the investments, could you still go forward with Starlab as a private enterprise, even if the NASA CLD doesn't materialize in what you had initially thought?
Yeah, I think the short answer is yes, Christine, we could. But I don't anticipate that being the case. I mean, NASA, of course, is the largest user in commercial LEO, I'm sorry, in LEO today. And, you know, as we all know, the International Space Station is aging. And, you know, even if it's extended to 2032, it's hard to imagine it being extended much past that. So even if we were to go it alone, so to speak, and actually build Starlab, I would still anticipate that major space agencies around the world would be an important part of that. But if
your question is could we capitalize this independent of NASA, I don't think that's going to end up having to be the case. Like I say, I think we're very well positioned for CLD phase two. But it's not out of the realm of possibility that we could independently finance this. The other thing I would say, I just want to reinforce for everyone on the call, you know, space is an incredibly important part of our key strategy. We have this 3L strategy that we've been referring to. That refers to LEO, which is, of course, low Earth orbit. That's where Starlab plays and a lot of our other technologies play. But we also have a key lunar initiative. So that's the second L, the third L being Lagrangian, which just is a proxy for deep space technology. But as it relates to lunar, we have a key initiative there. We call it Project Prevail. There was a lot to work with in the Ignite presentation that Jared made that we're very excited about vis-a-vis lunar, including lunar habitation. And that really brings into focus our key strategic investment in max space, which is on expandable, inflatable technology. So we really like what we see in that 3L strategy from a growth prospect standpoint, far above and beyond just Starlab and just LEO. So I really want to reinforce that for everyone. We're very, very bullish on what we see on the space economy.
Analyst Name (Firm): Christine Lued (Morgan Stanley) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Great. Super helpful. And Dylan, just, you know, doubling down on the CLD and just understanding it a little bit better. So what are the milestones we should be watching for the Phase 2 announcement? I mean, is the program still on hold or is that still expected to be early summer for the down select? And then also, you know, just understanding, you know, the size of this potential contract. Can you just level set us again regarding the investments in Star Labs so far and what you need to do and fund if, you know, you have to go in this alone or as a standalone entity?
Yeah, well, the second part of your question really depends on what the final design and parameters are, so it's hard to answer that second question without answering the first question, which is what the award is. What we know is that the RFI was submitted, and I think industry has all participated in that RFI, and it's our understanding, based upon what NASA has said, that they will then take that RFI and they will create an RFP around that. In terms of the timing, it's uncertain. We would anticipate sometime early summer, so, you know, June, July. But there's nothing official, so far as we know, from NASA, you know, with a firm deadline on that. So, yeah, TBD on timing, Christine. But I think what I would say is I'm confident that we have the right commercial model, the right team, and the right technology to address NASA's needs. And so no matter what comes out in the form of the RFP, I think we're going to be extremely well positioned. That's really what I want to leave you with.
Analyst Name (Firm): Christine Lued (Morgan Stanley) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Super helpful, Dylan. And, you know, congrats again on your announcement with Andrew this morning. As a follow-up to that announcement, I want to understand, is this an exclusive partnership or are you able to partner with other players for other space-based interceptor approaches?
We are on multiple award-winning teams is what I can say, Christine. More to come, but we are on multiple SBI-winning teams.
Analyst Name (Firm): Stephen Warhoftig (Wedbush) Executive Name (Title): Dylan (CEO)
Hey, good morning, guys. Thank you for taking the question and congrats on a good quarter. I kind of want to take a big picture look at the entire defense space, considering the fiscal year 27 defense budget is expected to expand to about $1.5 trillion. And this includes about $75 billion of munitions procurements and $17 billion specifically for Golden Dome. So I wanted to kind of touch on how Voyager's positioning to gain some of this incremental deal flow if this budget were to pass. And then also about $350 billion of that $1.5 trillion is sitting in reconciliation rather than the discretionary base. And I just wanted to figure out exactly where your programs fall in the defense budget for reconciliation for discretionary.
Yeah, really smart question. I'll ask Phil to chime in on it, but let me just give you the headline. Obviously, $1.5 trillion defense budget would be an absolute windfall, not only for our industry, but for Voyager in particular. Everything that we've talked about today sort of assumes a steady state budget. So if we were to have dramatically increased spending in the DOW, that would all be potential upside to our growth profile and our organic CAGR. So that's one point I'd like to make. Second point I'd like to make is if you look at the incremental spending contemplated, whether it's in reconciliation or not, just take the Space Force, for example. The vast majority of that incremental spending is really in advanced technology and products that directly play into where we're positioned in the market. So yes, they're ramping up production level on existing programs, but the vast majority of the incremental spend is really directed towards advanced technology. And so that's why we're extremely bullish at having the right technology at the right time, solving the right customer challenges. So again, we like what we see with whatever budget number you want to put in there, whether it's 1.2 or 1.5. And I would say our programs are protected and we've got line of sight because everything in our backlog is funded backlog, just to remind.