WSJ | Inside the Race to Build America’s First Nuclear Reactor in a Generation
WSJ’s piece is broadly bullish for the OKLO thesis because it portrays Oklo as one of the companies actually moving from advanced-reactor development into construction. The article centers on Oklo’s Idaho National Laboratory project and says success there is a crucial step toward Oklo’s first major commercial project supplying power to Meta’s data centers. Oklo ultimately plans to build more than a dozen reactors at an Ohio campus with up to 1.2 GW of capacity.
The bigger story is that the U.S. nuclear industry has entered “build mode.” AI and data-center electricity demand is bringing enormous amounts of private capital and major technology companies into nuclear. Venture funding for fission companies rose from $103 million in 2020 to $2.9 billion in 2025, while Oklo says it has raised about $3.2 billion through stock sales since going public.
Meta is particularly important for Oklo. Meta is pursuing both Oklo and TerraPower for nuclear power, while Google is working with Kairos and Amazon with X-energy. Meta’s former clean-tech chief said the company’s involvement is intended to help advanced nuclear developers reach cost competitiveness sooner. This validates the idea that hyperscalers are willing to help create the market for dedicated nuclear power rather than simply waiting for utilities to build it.
The article is also very clear about the risks. No company outside China or Russia has yet completed a commercial SMR, U.S. nuclear construction has historically suffered from massive cost overruns and delays, and there are roughly 22 active U.S. reactor projects competing for capital, customers and talent. One early Oklo investor believes only a single-digit number of advanced-reactor companies will ultimately survive.
For Oklo specifically, the most important issue is execution. TerraPower’s CEO points out that even its smaller reactor required roughly 1,000 engineers to obtain a construction license, emphasizing that SMRs aren’t automatically easy to design or build. Oklo therefore has to prove that Aurora can actually be constructed, licensed, fueled and operated economically before investors can confidently extrapolate the enormous future pipeline.
The valuation section is the main caution for OKLO shareholders. Oklo’s market cap peaked above $30 billion and was around $8.2 billion when the article was written, despite the company having no profits and only beginning to build power-generation assets. Guggenheim estimates Oklo could have 1.1 GW of assets by 2032, but expects free cash flow to remain further out as Oklo continues investing in new assets.
Overall, I’d consider this a very positive article for the long-term OKLO story. WSJ is essentially validating that Oklo is one of the serious contenders in the race to commercialize advanced nuclear, with a real construction project, major hyperscaler demand, enormous access to capital and strong political support. But it also reinforces that the next major re-rating probably depends on physical execution at Idaho. If Oklo successfully demonstrates Aurora, the argument shifts from “this company could eventually build 18+ GW” to “this company has demonstrated that it can actually build and operate its reactor technology.” That distinction is enormous for OKLO.