Testing Space Data Valuation Multiples Against Regulatory Headwinds
When Space Data Meets the Deal Wave
In the last two years, the center of gravity in space M&A has shifted decisively toward data-rich Earth observation (EO) and satellite communications (SATCOM) platforms, even as broader aerospace valuations have come off their 2021 peak. Semiannual reviews of space and satellite transactions document a steady cadence of deals in 2024–2025, with buyers paying mid-single-digit revenue multiples and low-to-mid double-digit EBITDA multiples for assets that sit close to the space data value chain. That pattern holds across both strategic and financial acquirers—from satellite operators and defense primes to private equity platforms looking to roll up specialized geospatial and SATCOM capabilities.
Recent semiannual reports on space and satellite deals highlight transactions in satellite communications, geospatial intelligence, and ground infrastructure with disclosed enterprise value to revenue multiples in the roughly 1.0×–4.5× range and EBITDA multiples extending into the low- to high-teens. In one 2025 satellite services deal, a buyer agreed to pay approximately 1.1× forward revenue and roughly 9.6× EBITDA, while a separate geospatial intelligence transaction in late 2024 carried an estimated upper-teens EBITDA multiple, underscoring how investors differentiate between contract-backed services and higher-growth analytics platforms. Set against public aerospace benchmarks—where median EV/revenue and EV/EBITDA multiples eased to approximately 2.3× and 13.4× respectively by late 2024—those data-oriented deals still look healthy rather than distressed.
At the same time, policymakers have started to lock in a new rulebook for satellite-derived data that goes well beyond traditional spectrum licensing and export controls. Multilateral bodies and regional regulators are pushing tighter expectations around privacy, data ownership, and the use of AI on high-resolution EO and communications data, raising questions about how far operators can go in monetizing granular location and behavioral insights. The emerging European Union Space Act proposal, OECD work on EO data, and guidance from the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) on responsible AI together point toward more formal constraints on how space-derived data sets are collected, shared, and repurposed.
That tension sets up the core analytical question for space commerce: do today’s valuation multiples for Earth observation and satellite communications businesses already reflect the cost and complexity of this tightening data governance regime, or are investors effectively underwriting a more permissive status quo than regulators will allow? Broken down into a three-step approach to that question, the answer may lie in first reading the deal tape for space data assets, then benchmarking observed multiples against aerospace and satellite norms, and finally overlaying the evolving privacy and governance landscape to test which business models look most exposed.
