Joby Aviation appears more affordable on a per-dollar-of-revenue basis, trading at a price-to-sales ratio of 168.5x compared to AST SpaceMobile's 472.8x valuation multiple. However, the two companies operate in vastly different industries with distinct timelines to profitability, making the choice between them dependent on an investor's risk tolerance and belief in which technology will reach commercial viability first.

What Are Joby Aviation and AST SpaceMobile Actually Building?

Joby Aviation is developing all-electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, or eVTOL aircraft, designed to operate as urban air-taxi services in major cities including Dubai, London, and New York City. The company manufactures its own aircraft and plans to operate the service directly, controlling the entire passenger experience from booking to landing. In fiscal year 2025, Joby generated approximately $53.4 million in revenue, a dramatic jump from just $136,000 in 2024, though the company posted a net loss of $929.8 million as it invests heavily in flight testing and certification.

AST SpaceMobile, by contrast, is building a space-based cellular broadband network designed to work directly with standard, unmodified smartphones. The company has partnered with over 50 mobile network operators serving nearly 3 billion combined subscribers across the United States, Europe, and Japan. AST SpaceMobile's 2025 revenue reached $70.9 million, up from $4.4 million the prior year, but the company reported a net loss of $341.9 million.

How Do Their Financial Positions Compare?

Both companies are burning significant cash as they build expensive infrastructure, but their balance sheets tell different stories. Joby Aviation maintains zero debt relative to its equity, giving it a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.0x, while AST SpaceMobile carries a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.2x. On liquidity, Joby's current ratio stands at 24.1x, meaning it has $24.10 in current assets for every dollar of current liabilities, compared to AST SpaceMobile's 16.4x ratio. Both companies are burning cash rapidly: Joby's negative free cash flow reached $563.8 million in 2025, while AST SpaceMobile's negative free cash flow was approximately $1.1 billion.

The key difference is that Joby has no debt obligations, providing more runway to reach profitability without the pressure of servicing loans. AST SpaceMobile's higher debt load adds financial risk, though its partnerships with major telecom operators provide a clearer path to immediate revenue growth once satellites are deployed.

What Regulatory and Execution Risks Does Each Company Face?

Joby Aviation must navigate strict certification processes with aviation authorities, where delays could postpone commercial launch indefinitely. Safety is paramount in aviation; any incident involving a prototype aircraft could damage public perception of the entire emerging eVTOL industry. Additionally, Joby relies on third-party suppliers worldwide for critical components, leaving it vulnerable to supply chain disruptions that could delay high-volume manufacturing.

AST SpaceMobile faces different but equally significant regulatory hurdles. The company must secure federal approvals and navigate uncertainties surrounding satellite licensing and frequency usage. It also operates in a crowded field against formidable competitors like Amazon, which is developing its own satellite internet constellation. Execution risks remain high as AST SpaceMobile attempts to deploy a complex satellite network while managing a history of substantial net losses since inception.

Steps to Evaluate High-Risk Technology Stocks Like These

• Revenue Growth Trajectory: Compare year-over-year revenue increases to assess whether the company is moving toward commercialization. Joby's revenue grew from $136,000 to $53.4 million, while AST SpaceMobile's grew from $4.4 million to $70.9 million, both showing acceleration but from different baselines.
• Balance Sheet Strength: Examine debt levels, current ratios, and free cash flow burn rates to determine how long the company can operate before needing additional funding or achieving profitability. Joby's zero debt is a significant advantage over AST SpaceMobile's 1.2x debt-to-equity ratio.
• Partnership Quality and Scale: Assess whether the company has secured partnerships with established players that validate its technology and provide distribution channels. AST SpaceMobile's 50+ mobile network operator partnerships offer immediate access to billions of potential customers, while Joby's partnerships with Toyota and Delta Air Lines signal industry confidence.
• Regulatory Timeline and Certainty: Investigate whether regulatory approval is likely and when it might occur. Joby's FAA certification process is ongoing but not guaranteed, while AST SpaceMobile's satellite licensing timeline remains uncertain.
• Valuation Relative to Peers: Compare price-to-sales ratios and forward price-to-earnings multiples to sector benchmarks. Joby's 168.5x price-to-sales ratio is lower than AST SpaceMobile's 472.8x, though both exceed the 32.2x sector benchmark for technology stocks.

Which Company Has a Clearer Path to Revenue?

AST SpaceMobile appears to have a shorter timeline to meaningful commercial revenue. The company has already signed agreements with dozens of mobile network operators, providing immediate access to a potentially massive customer base once satellites are deployed. As additional satellites launch, commercial revenue is expected to grow substantially. However, the company trades at a significantly higher valuation relative to current revenue, meaning investors are pricing in substantial future growth.

Joby Aviation could deliver enormous returns if its air-taxi service succeeds, but investors may need to wait years for that to happen. FAA certification is in the works, but it is not guaranteed, and building a new transportation system will require substantial additional capital and extended development timelines. The company's partnerships with major corporations like Toyota and Delta Air Lines demonstrate confidence in the technology, but commercialization remains years away.

Neither company is a sure bet in 2026. Both are developing transformative technologies in nascent industries where massive potential for scale meets significant technical and regulatory hurdles. The choice between them depends on whether an investor believes satellite-based cellular connectivity or urban air mobility will reach commercial viability first, and how much risk they are willing to accept in pursuit of potentially outsized returns.