Why NuScale Power Stock Rocketed 23.7% Higher in June
Small modular reactor developer NuScale Power has seen its stock soar over the past two months.
Political support for nuclear energy is merely one factor pushing the stock higher.
While enthusiasm for nuclear energy stocks remains high, only investors comfortable with a high-risk investment should remain interested in NuScale Power.
After soaring 93% in May, some may have speculated that NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR) stock would have powered down in June and given back some of its gains.
But they would have been greatly mistaken. Thanks to growing political support for nuclear power and the company in talks regarding potential deals with data center developers, investors felt motivated to buy small modular reactor (SMR) developer NuScale Power. According to data provided by S&P Global Market Intelligence, NuScale Power stock rose 23.7% in June.
Orders out of Washington seek more nuclear -- and investors were listening
Some of the enthusiasm behind NuScale Power's stock early in the month can be attributed to President Donald Trump's executive orders from May 23 meant to reinvigorate growth in the nuclear energy industry. Specifically, the orders intend to spur expeditious installation of "advanced nuclear technologies to support national security objectives, including powering artificial intelligence (AI) computing infrastructure and national security installations."
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of a second design for the company's SMR represented another catalyst for the stock's rise in late May. NuScale Power proclaims itself as the only SMR company with approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. With the approval in late May, two designs are now approved: a 50 megawatt power module and a 77 megawatt power module.
Bulls continued the buying activity early in the month upon learning of the company's apparent progress toward inking a deal with a top hyperscaler customer. In speaking with Axios Pro on June 5, NuScale Power's CEO John Hopkins stated that the company is in talks with several "Tier 1" hyperscalers that are interested in purchasing power from the company.
Hyperscaler companies are making massive investments to support data centers that are specifically suited for AI -- and many are partnering with SMR companies. Alphabet, for example, signed a deal with SMR developer Kairos, while SMR developer Oklo inked deals with several data center developers last year as well.
Is it too late to power your portfolio with NuScale Power stock?
It's clear that enthusiasm for NuScale Power has been extraordinarily strong lately. What's not so clear, however, is whether the company will be able to fulfill its promise of helping to facilitate the nation's nuclear energy renaissance. The company is sure to experience some volatility as it continues its plight, so only investors with ample tolerance for risk should consider a position at this point. For those interested in a more conservative approach, a nuclear energy-focused exchange-traded fund may be a better choice.
Should you invest $1,000 in NuScale Power right now?
Before you buy stock in NuScale Power, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and NuScale Power wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $699,558!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $976,677!*
Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is1,060% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to180%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
See the 10 stocks »
*Stock Advisor returns as of June 30, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
21 minutes ago
- CTV News
Amid a renewed return-to-office push, experts outline what your options are
Bank towers are pictured in the financial district in Toronto, Friday, Sept. 8, 2023. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Lahodynskyj As the number of in-office days is set to increase for many of Canada's hybrid workers, return-to-office mandates are setting the stage for tension between employees and employers. Remote and hybrid work spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic is giving way to arrangements more closely aligned with traditional office norms now that labour market conditions have swung in companies' favour. Some of Canada's largest financial services firms, including several of the big banks, have said they will shift to four in-office days a week beginning in the fall. Employment lawyers say they are hearing from clients who don't want to lose one or more of their at-home days, but that companies are taking a harder line compared with a few years ago when a lower unemployment rate meant the market favoured job-seekers rather than their bosses. 'Now, it seems with economic uncertainty, employers have bigger leverage to basically impose unilaterally that kind of stuff and tell people, 'If you don't like it, you might as well go,'' Philippe de Villers, the chair of Chartered Professionals in Human Resources Canada, said in an interview. If you're in that situation, it may feel like you must choose between getting with the program or getting a new job. Though that may be true in many cases, experts say there are some other options. The basic choice One option for employees who don't want to return to the office is to look for another job, said Sunira Chaudhri, founder and partner at Workly Law, in an interview. 'Employees are considering career changes en masse, and as you can expect, those that are facing a stricter return to work protocol that do not align with that are, more likely than not, looking to jump ship and find a more flexible arrangement if they're simply not on board.' Return to office trends are more common with enterprise-level companies like banks and accounting firms compared with small businesses or ones in industries more concerned about retaining talent, Jon Pinkus, employment lawyer and partner at Samfiru Tumarkin, said in an interview. BMO, RBC and Scotiabank have all stated that more workers will be required to be in the office four days a week beginning in the fall, citing operational improvements and opportunities for collaboration. If an employee doesn't wish to leave their current position, and doesn't require an accommodation based on their family status or medical needs, they may need to comply with return-to-office mandates set by their employer. Family status Exceptions may need to be made based on family circumstances. Family status is an issue that may require accommodation, and one where employers must be 'pretty careful,' Chaudhri said, as many employees with young children have framed their days around childcare responsibilities. She said childcare responsibilities may need to be accommodated if they cannot be met by going back into the office on a full-time basis. For example, she said it may be difficult for someone to pick up a child from daycare if they are required to be in downtown Toronto until 5 p.m. 'If it's just impossible or unreasonable for an employee to make those types of changes, an employee can seek an accommodation with respect to family status, and say, 'I actually have to be in my neighbourhood at 4:30 p.m.,' as an example,' Chaudhri said. Medical accommodations If a person's medical needs have changed since they were in the office on a more full-time basis before 2020, Chaudhri said employers may need to consider medical accommodations. 'Employers need to be pretty aware and cognizant of the fact that accommodations might need to be a real part of the conversation of moving people back to work most of the time,' she said. Pinkus said medical accommodations are one of the most common issues he is seeing among clients regarding return-to-office mandates. He said employees may need accommodations for issues that may make it difficult for an employee to drive or sit for long periods. Other issues could include things like access to medication that may not be practical to bring into an office or needing to be close to a hospital or doctor. 'You do have an obligation as an employer to accommodate someone up to the point of what's called undue hardship,' Pinkus said. Undue hardship refers to a significant difficulty or expense related to accommodating an employee's needs or requests, according to Toronto-based law firm Achkar Law. Legal action Pinkus said if an employee started working from home full time during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their employer didn't communicate whether the arrangement was temporary or permanent, but is now trying to get them back into the office four days a week, it could be considered a breach of contract. However, he said that if there was clear communication by the employer that remote working wouldn't last forever, it would be more difficult for an employee to launch any legal action. Pinkus said employees considering refusing to return to the office should be 'very careful' because if their employer did have the right to compel a return to the office, it could be considered abandonment of employment — meaning the worker is not entitled to severance pay. 'If you're wrong about it, the consequences are quite serious.' Under certain circumstances, Pinkus and Chaudhri say a constructive dismissal may factor in. According to Pinkus, constructive dismissal can occur if an employer changes the fundamental term of their employment without sufficient notice and without the employee's consent. 'There is precedent for the notion that an employer can't simply take someone from a telecommuting role and put them in a non-telecommuting role without their permission,' he said. If an employer has stuck with a remote or hybrid working arrangement for a long time, then Chaudhri said some employees might say 'this is my new normal,' and the return to office constitutes a 'meaningful change to my employment.' 'In some cases, employees may allege that their contract of employment has been breached and seek wrongful dismissal damages,' she said. Chaudhri added that companies have been very systematic about slowly increasing in office days over time, which she thinks is in large part to avoid 'the likelihood of success of a constructive dismissal claim.' She said it is up to the employee to prove they have been constructively dismissed, which can be difficult. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 6, 2025. Daniel Johnson, The Canadian Press
CTV News
21 minutes ago
- CTV News
Ex-fighter jet pilot Stephen Fuhr is on a mission to change how we arm the military
Secretary of State (Defence Procurement) Stephen Fuhr speaks to journalists as he arrives for a meeting of the federal cabinet on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Wednesday, May 14, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang OTTAWA — Not that long ago, former air force fighter pilot Stephen Fuhr was just one among many voices in Canada complaining about the way the federal government makes big defence purchasing decisions. At no point, he said, did it occur to him that he would wind up in his current position - as the prime minister's point person for fixing Canada's sclerotic military procurement system. 'I find it very ironic that I was one of many that complained ... why does it take so long?' said Fuhr, 59, in an interview with The Canadian Press. Fuhr knows first hand how the state of Canada's military procurement system feels to people on the ground - how byzantine government rules make vital equipment purchases move at molasses speed, leaving soldiers and pilots without the tools they need to fight a modern conflict. The once-prominent critic of former prime minister Stephen Harper government's management of defence - notably the original F-35 stealth fighter procurement process - is stepping up to change how the system works. Prime Minister Mark Carney named Fuhr secretary of state for defence procurement on May 13, giving him a new, narrowly focused junior role in cabinet. The Carney government's focus on reforming defence procurement is happening as new threats emerge on the world stage - and as Canada and other NATO allies come under heavy pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to ramp up defence spending by a staggering amount. Canada is also looking for ways to bolster its domestic defence industry and partner more with Europe as it pivots away from a more isolationist and protectionist United States. For the first time in a long time, the military is a core government priority. 'I feel good about it,' Fuhr said. 'Canadians are supportive of us being more involved in defence spending. There's a big opportunity for our industries and businesses in defence and being able to pull our weight on the world stage with our defence relationships.' It's also a moment of uncertainty - for Carney's government, for Canada and the world. Fuhr's background in the air force trained him to prepare for the unexpected. On Sept. 11, 2001, when terrorists hijacked airliners and crashed them into major U.S. buildings, Fuhr was in Inuvik, where he was flying a CF-18 on force-projection exercises. He spent the security crisis patrolling the Arctic skies as events unfolded south of the border, then was sent to CFB Comox on Vancouver Island, where he was kept on alert until Canada relaxed its air defence posture. 'It was pretty surreal,' he said. 'In the moment, we don't know if there's more. We just know these airplanes are coming and they have to land somewhere.' He was in the Royal Canadian Air Force for two decades and at one point was in charge of overseeing all of Canada's CF-18 Hornets. Formerly a conservative-inclined voter, he made the jump into federal politics with the Liberals a decade ago after becoming frustrated with the contentious F-35 purchase. Fuhr warned that the cost of the deal was doomed to explode and that the process had gone awry. He was right: the budget for the F-35 purchase has since ballooned and Ottawa is conducting a review of the project in response to the Trump administration's trade chaos. Still, Fuhr shrugs off the idea that he would chime in with his opinions about the F-35 at the cabinet table. 'My strong opinions are 10 years old, and a lot has changed in 10 years,' the Kelowna MP said. But he could end up helping to decide how the next big-ticket items roll out. Carney made numerous defence commitments in the spring election. One of them was a promise to establish a new defence procurement agency to speed up equipment purchases for the military, and that agency falls under Fuhr's mandate. The party's election platform pledged legislative changes to 'expand risk-based approaches' to purchasing approvals, 'centralize expertise from across government' and 'streamline the way we buy equipment for the military.' Canada's military has suffered from peacetime budget woes under governments of various stripes since the Cold War ended. Major items of military equipment are nearing the end of their usable lifespan and new purchases are moving slowly through a risk-averse and slow-moving bureaucracy. For the past half century, military purchasing decisions tended to involve multiple government departments. Carney's plan for this new agency would create one main point of contact, as in wartime. 'We're trapped outside the technology cycle, which is a really difficult place to be, and we have to get it done faster. It has to be more organized. It has to be easier for industry,' Fuhr said. Canada, in other words, is pushing for a military comeback. Fuhr is fresh off of a comeback of his own. He became a Liberal MP in 2015, when he rallied support from unlikely corners like the local Green Party, whose candidate stepped down to endorse Fuhr. A former chair of the House of Commons defence committee, he's been around the political block. But he was defeated in 2019 by Conservative Tracy Gray. He didn't run in 2021 but returned to the ballot in April, and this time he defeated Gray. This isn't the first time the government has tried to reform procurement. It's also not the first time there's been a cabinet-level position tied to procurement. The Harper government tapped Julian Fantino as associate minister of defence to overhaul procurement, and Justin Trudeau's Liberals promised multiple defence procurement reforms in the 2015 and 2019 elections. Neither government moved the needle much - and both failed to spend enough to address the Canadian Armed Forces equipment gap. Fuhr insisted it's different this time. 'If it was ever going to happen, it's going to happen now,' he said. He said Canada has to make a major 'lift' to meet its alliance defence commitments and Carney 'wants to get it done.' When asked what he brings to the role, Fuhr pointed not to his time in the air but to his work on the ground with the military and his family's aerospace business, SkyTrac Systems, which they eventually sold. 'I know what it's like for industry to try and get involved in defence procurement because I lived that life for a while,' he said. 'I bring a well-rounded skill set, not just I flew airplanes.' Fuhr might be out of the military but he can't stay out of the skies. Right up until he decided to run for office again, he was testing and certifying pilots on instrument ratings, ensuring they can fly by instruments alone. The retired air force major in his spare time flies a Vans RV8, an kit-built two-seater aircraft he purchased several years ago. The small, low-wing recreational craft is painted to look like a fighter jet - he even has a shark mouth painted on the nose of the plane. He may not have much time to get up in the air this summer. He'll be in and out of meetings with officials drafting up blueprints for the new procurement agency, sorting out its size and scope. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025. Kyle Duggan, The Canadian Press
National Post
25 minutes ago
- National Post
Chris Selley: We aren't slaves to AI, unless we want to be
Article content Immediate disbarment seems much more appropriate to me for any lawyer caught faking precedent — AI-generated or otherwise — but ChatGPT tells me that's unreasonable. Someday, though, presumably, this is going to lead to a truly disastrous outcome. That goes for every profession, not just the law. Article content I have a suspicion — or maybe it's more of a hope — that in 25 years we'll look back on the AI craze and chuckle at our own gullibility. It's not that it's useless; Google's AI-generated search results are a hell of a lot more useful than its actual search engine, if only because Google seems intent on making its actual search engine non-functional. AI can provide interesting information and answers — but then, and this is critical, you have to actually check that they're accurate. Article content That's assuming, of course, that we still know how to think for ourselves in 25 years. The stories you hear out of the education world about students relying on AI for their work — and struggling in vain to perform without it — are downright dystopian. Article content Article content Tales abound of students using AI to generate entire essays, and I often detect a tone of hopelessness among teachers and professors lamenting it. At the high-school level, I've heard stories of parents going to the wall to protect their kids who've been caught plagiarizing — and of teachers basically giving up the fight, because unlike traditional plagiarism, it can be difficult to prove conclusively that something is AI-generated. ChatGPT doesn't always give the same answers to the same questions, which sounds to me more like a bug than a feature … unless you're looking to plagiarize an essay, of course. Article content (I'm amused to see that Grammarly, the website that allowed an entire generation to opt out of learning how to write an English sentence, now provides a service that will flag AI-generated text. Pick a lane, fellas!) Article content The frustrating thing is, it's not remotely difficult to detect AI-generated text qualitatively once you're familiar with it. It is absolute trash, always, and immediately recognizable to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention: unrelentingly bland, often repetitive, punctuated by weird verbs and jarring turns of phrase. Teachers in particular, who will (hopefully!) know how a student actually writes, will take notice when that student submits something completely out of character. Article content 'Beyond a reasonable doubt' shouldn't be the standard for implementing academic sanctions. But if flagging AI plagiarism is too much too ask, there is a very easy solution: In-person, handwritten exams. Schools and individual teachers and professors are increasingly resorting to that — and finding that many of their students have no idea how to write, both structurally and in terms of penmanship. Article content
