Elon’s 100X AI Stock Review: Is Behind the Markets Worth It?

“Elon has been quietly paying this obscure firm since 2012… Now his biggest venture to date could send shares soaring starting on DECEMBER 8th.” That is the promise on the door of Dylan Jovine’s latest Behind The Markets presentation, and it is a well-built one. The headline stock is never named in the letter, but the mechanism is spelled out more clearly than in almost any Musk-centric pitch we have reviewed: a chip-architecture licensor that collects a royalty on every Tesla, every satellite, and possibly the entire orbital AI data center buildout. What caught our attention is how much of this presentation is anchored to verifiable public events, from a January 30, 2026 federal filing to the December 8 SpaceX lockup expiry, and how consistently Jovine hedges his central claim. This is the same December 8th device his Space Millionaires campaign uses, and it is worth reading the two together. We did the reading for you, quotes and all, so you can judge the pitch before paying a dollar.

Images to be added when available.

The Presenter

Dylan Jovine is the founder of Behind The Markets, and his credibility block in this presentation is one of the more detailed we have seen from him. He opens with his Wall Street origin: “By 24, I’d become one of the youngest people in America to launch a registered broker-dealer… With offices at 100 Wall Street, a ten-minute walk from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.” That is a checkable biographical claim, and it frames the pitch the way he always does, as an insider choosing his readers over the sell side.

His signature market call is dated on the page, which most presenters never do: “The market has no place else to go but down. It’s not a question of ‘if’ it’s a question of ‘when.’” The byline reads “Dylan Jovine, June 9, 2006,” which puts his 2008 financial crisis warning more than a year ahead of the collapse, exactly as claimed. We have verified this framing in his prior presentations, and dating the quote on the page is a small but real act of confidence.

The track record in this letter is presented with time anchors and prices, not vague bragging. He says he called “Rocket Lab at under $4 a share” for “a staggering 3,850%,” “Palantir at just $7” up “as high as 2,712%,” “Micron at $54” up “as high as 1,903%,” and “IonQ at just $8 a share” up “as high as 944%.” He also lists closed positions with dates: “Intelsat at $3.30 a share in January 2018… 339.4% gain in four months,” plus “AMD for a 228% gain… FormFactor for 180.5%… And ASML for 141%,” each stamped “Closed July 2026” or “Closed June 2026.” Every chart carries “Past performance does not guarantee future results,” and the “as high as” framing is honest labeling even though it measures peaks rather than what an average reader actually banked.

The access claims are unusual for the genre and worth quoting directly. Jovine writes: “I’ve sat at private dinners with Donald Trump Jr., a stone’s throw from Mar-a-Lago… I’ve met with Brett Guthrie, who chairs the committee that controls every piece of energy legislation in America.” Then he defuses the objection himself: “I don’t show you this to brag. I show you because access is information.” Whatever you make of the namedropping, the underlying claim, that he tracks energy policy because it decides which AI infrastructure projects get built, is directly relevant to this thesis.

We covered Jovine’s fuller background and his candid track-record disclosure style in our Space Millionaires review, including the SEC insider-trading inquiry he sat down for with nothing but his brokerage records. That openness is a consistent trait, and it carries into this presentation.

The Big Idea

The thesis is the orbital AI data center, and the letter builds it in five layers. First, the demand wall: “The four biggest names in tech, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Meta, are pouring a combined $725 billion into AI infrastructure in 2026 alone,” alongside “16 gigawatts of new data center capacity opening this year” in the United States. That spending figure is attributed inside the pitch, and the scale matches what hyperscalers have publicly guided to.

Second, the bottleneck: “And the grid is out.” The presentation quotes Morgan Stanley’s projection that “the U.S. will be short 49 gigawatts of electricity for data centers by 2028,” adds that “Google now waits up to 12 years to get a new data center hooked up to the grid,” and notes local resistance: “Denver, Oklahoma City and Tulsa have all paused new data centers… Maine’s legislature voted to ban them outright.” This is the part of the pitch we can confirm independently. Multi-year interconnection queues and municipal moratoria on data center construction are documented industry-wide, and the gigawatt shortfall projections are widely reported.

Third, the Elon solution: “Because Elon figured this out years before anyone else. The answer to this problem is NOT on Earth… Build it up there.” The letter quotes Musk twice on the thesis: “The cheapest place to put AI will be in space within 36 months or less” and “Space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale.” The concrete artifact is AI1, with “solar wings [that] stretch 230 feet from tip to tip. That’s longer than the wingspan of a Boeing 747.” The physics claims are plausible and worth restating: “a solar panel in space generates roughly eight times the energy of the same panel on the ground” and “Space is 250 degrees below zero, and it never warms up.” Free cooling, free power, no grid queue.

Fourth, the scale request: “SpaceX asks the FCC for permission to launch one million satellites,” versus “about 10,000 satellites in orbit” today. Jovine spells out the ratio himself: “He wants to launch 100X more satellites than he currently owns.”

Fifth, and this is the genuinely distinctive part, the investment angle: “There is one AI company that Elon needs for his massive satellite fleet… He has the rockets. He has the launch sites. He has the AI… There’s just one thing he can’t build himself. The chip that runs them.” The supplier thesis is explained with unusual clarity: “Elon doesn’t own that chip. He licenses it. That means, every time a Tesla rolls off the line… Every time SpaceX launches an AI1 satellite… This company gets paid.” The royalty-per-unit model is real and well documented across the chip industry, and the pitch leans on it heavily: “the biggest land grab in American history,” with the unnamed licensor collecting on every unit of it.

The why-now is borrowed straight from SpaceX’s own materials, quoted as a Musk epigraph on the very first screen: “We have identified the largest actionable total addressable market in human history.” The letter puts a number on it, “That’s more than 8 times bigger than everything Elon has ever built… combined,” after tallying PayPal ($1.5 billion), Tesla (about $1.4 trillion), and SpaceX (about $2 trillion) into “roughly $3.5 trillion” against the claimed “$28.5 trillion” addressable market.

The Key Claims

The headline claim is encoded in the campaign’s name, and the letter is careful about how it phrases it: “And here’s why I call it Elon’s 100X AI Stock… My research indicates that Elon’s bill to this firm could soon get a LOT bigger. 100X bigger.” Notice what this is. It is a revenue-growth inference, 10,000 satellites scaling to a requested one million, each paying royalties on the supplier’s chip design, and not a stated price target on the stock. That is structurally more defensible than most 100X pitches, which promise the share price, not the invoice, will grow a hundredfold.

The millionaire-minting claim is repeated but hedged: the venture “could mint an entire new class of millionaires… Starting on December 8th.” The only concrete dollar outcome offered in the entire letter is modest by genre standards: “Even a 400% move from here would turn $5,000 into $25,000. But only until December 8th.”

That date carries the urgency, and to Jovine’s credit the mechanics are explained honestly: “Because that’s the day SpaceX’s main lockup expires for good… SpaceX listed in June. The biggest IPO ever. But most of the shares never traded… Their shares only come loose in stages… On December 8th, the lockup runs out. The last block of roughly 800 million insider shares comes loose, all at once. That’s more than $100 billion at the IPO price.” We walked through these mechanics in our Day 180: The SpaceX Lockup, Explained piece when we covered Jovine’s lunar campaign.

The bullish spin is the most debatable move in the letter. A lockup expiration is conventionally read as a supply event, a day insiders can finally sell, and that reading usually argues for downward pressure. Jovine reframes it as a liquidity event: “when insiders finally get their money, it rarely sits still. It goes looking for the next big idea, usually one they already know from the inside. In my opinion, a big chunk of it lands in Elon’s 100X AI Stock.” He even casts the insiders as the informed buyer class: “The 4,400 people who became millionaires on IPO day… They know what Elon is building next. And they know whose chip it runs on.” The letter never engages the conventional counter-reading, but it does consistently hedge with “I believe,” “could,” and “in my opinion,” which is more qualification than this genre usually offers.

The institutional validation for the hidden stock is stacked high: “One of the largest fund managers in America holds $675 million worth of this stock. A legendary growth investor holds $349 million. A billionaire tech investor holds $343 million, and he keeps buying more. And Ray Dalio’s Bridgewater, the biggest hedge fund on Earth, owns a stake too.” And a structural scarcity note that will matter in the next section: “One giant shareholder still controls the vast majority of the stock. Only a sliver trades in public.”

The compliance picture is genuinely tighter than the genre norm. Testimonials carry proper disclosure (“Testimonials reflect individual experiences and are not indicative of future results. Individual results will vary”), every track-record chart carries the past-performance disclaimer, and the full standard disclaimer runs at the end of the letter. The gap between that language and the “could mint an entire new class of millionaires” body copy is the genre’s standard gap, but it is narrower here than in most presentations because the pitch consistently says “could” rather than “will.”

The Free Ticker

There is no free ticker in this presentation, and that is worth saying plainly. Every real company named in the letter, Rocket Lab, Palantir, Micron, IonQ, AMD, ASML, FormFactor, Piedmont Lithium, ON Semiconductor, Planet Labs, AST SpaceMobile, NVIDIA, Tesla, and the rest, is named as proof of concept, sector context, or track record. The headline stock is unnamed and gated behind Report #1: “Elon’s 100X AI Stock: The Chip Elon Can’t Fly Without,” which contains “the company, the ticker, and exactly how to get positioned before December 8th.”

The fingerprint, though, is unusually specific, and we want to walk you through it because it shows how much research Jovine’s team puts behind the veil. The candidate is a chip-IP licensor on a royalty-per-unit model whose designs have run Elon’s cars “since 2012,” whose architecture also sits inside Starlink dishes, inter-satellite laser links, and the AI1 orbital satellite, and which is separately licensed by NVIDIA, Amazon, Google, Apple, Meta, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Oracle, Microsoft, Blue Origin, NASA, Rocket Lab, Lockheed Martin, Airbus, and Planet Labs. The acquisition history matches a blocked deal: “NVIDIA tried to buy it outright… Jeff Bezos’ Amazon filed an objection with the U.S. government. Samsung filed one too. And Elon Musk personally raised the alarm… In the end, regulators killed the deal… Due to reasons of ‘national security concerns.’” The ownership structure matches too: one giant shareholder holding the vast majority, “only a sliver” trading publicly.

That fingerprint is consistent with Arm Holdings (NASDAQ: ARM), the chip-architecture licensor whose Nvidia acquisition attempt was blocked in 2022 amid Amazon and Samsung objections, and whose majority shareholder controls roughly 90% of the stock. We want to be clear about status: this match is UNCONFIRMED. Jovine never names the company, so the 2012 Tesla relationship, the fund positions, and the royalty figures cannot be checked against the letter itself before purchase. We present the fingerprint as our own read of the clues, and we flag it honestly rather than listing an unverified ticker as a free pick. If the match holds, the thesis is coherent: SpaceX’s one-million-satellite request is a real filed number, and a licensor collecting per-unit royalties on that fleet would see its SpaceX bill scale with the constellation, though not necessarily one-for-one with the satellite count.

The three bonus reports each hide additional stocks, and those remain unidentified: a tiny satellite-spectrum firm facing a fixed-price acquisition by “a trillion-dollar tech giant,” an AI-interconnect supplier that just received a $2 billion NVIDIA investment, and the largest U.S. electric utility, a wind, solar, and nuclear operator whose profile resembles NextEra Energy. All flagged unconfirmed, all gated behind the subscription.

What You Get

The product is Behind The Markets, the flagship monthly research service: “Every month, I go looking for the stories that move money before they hit the front page… Then I hand my readers one specific, researched way to act on each one: the name, the ticker, and the price I’d pay.”

The price is the house style for this publisher: $49 for a full year, discounted from a $399 “regular” price, which the letter calls “nearly 88% off,” and anchors against the claim that “Wall Street hedge funds routinely pay upwards of $50,000 per year for access to this type of analysis.” The per-day math is “about 13 cents a day.” The $49 is recurring and likely auto-renews annually, though the letter does not state the renewal terms explicitly, so calendar the renewal date if you subscribe.

The guarantee is generous and stated without weasel words: “Simply reach out within six months to my customer support team. You’ll get every penny back. You even get to keep all the special reports.” Six months, full refund, keep everything. The letter also cites an institutional trust marker we verified in the sibling campaign: “Behind The Markets is an accredited business with the Better Business Bureau, rated A+.”

The bonus stack includes five items:

• Report #1: Elon’s 100X AI Stock: The Chip Elon Can’t Fly Without. The main pitch document, with “the company, the ticker, and exactly how to get positioned before December 8th.”
• Report #2: The $11.6 Billion Satellite War. A spectrum-license arbitrage: a tiny firm holding “exclusive right to a global band of satellite frequencies” being acquired by a trillion-dollar giant at a fixed per-share price, letting readers capture the spread. The letter discloses the risk honestly: “no takeover is 100% certain until regulators give their final green light. That small uncertainty is the exact reason this discount exists at all.”
• Report #3: NVIDIA’s New Chip Partner. An AI-connectivity supplier that “moves data between AI chips at the speed of light,” recipient of a $2 billion NVIDIA investment, with precedent charts (CoreWeave +357% in three months, Nebius “almost 1,900%,” SoundHound +73% in one day).
• Report #4: America’s AI Power King: The One Stock Powering the Entire AI Boom. The largest U.S. electric utility angle, with a “147X bigger” dividend comparison against NVIDIA.
• The Behind The Markets Quick-Start Guide. For first-time investors, a sensible inclusion given the price point.

No per-trade upsells appear in the letter, which keeps the true cost at $49 plus renewal.

Our Take

There is a lot to like here, and we want to be specific about it. First, the sourcing discipline is real. The letter quotes Morgan Stanley, Business Insider, Yahoo Finance, Barron’s, Reuters, and CNBC by name, and every load-bearing number, the $28.5 trillion market, the one-million-satellite request, the 800 million lockup shares, is attributed to a filing or a public statement rather than invented. Compare that with the average Musk-centric pitch, which rarely cites anyone.

Second, the central claim is better built than its name suggests. “100X” is usually a share-price promise, which is unfalsifiable hype. Here it is arithmetic about a royalty bill: roughly 10,000 satellites today, a filed request for one million, therefore a potentially 100 times larger invoice to the chip licensor. You can agree or disagree with the inference, but it is a stated, checkable logic chain, not a vibe. And Jovine’s strongest objection handling is genuinely good: asked why Musk does not just build his own chips, the answer is structural, “Because leaving this company means rewriting every line of software in every Tesla and every satellite he owns… And it means giving up the only chip that can run AI in orbit without cooking itself.” That is the real switching-cost argument, and it is the right one.

Third, the hedging is consistent. “My research indicates,” “I believe,” “in my opinion,” appear throughout, the only dollar outcome is a 400% scenario rather than a millionaire promise, and the disclaimers are all present. We do not want to overpraise; the hedge is repeated so often it wears off, and the letter never once mentions that December 8th cuts both ways, that a lockup expiry is conventionally a sell event for insiders holding newly liquid shares. Read our take as: the bull case is made honestly, the bear case is left entirely to you.

That said, three things deserve your skepticism before you pay. The unnamed-stock structure means none of the central claims about the company, the 2012 payments, the blocked acquisition, the fund positions, can be verified before purchase, so you are buying the research to learn the ticker. The thin public float, “only a sliver trades in public,” is presented as scarcity romance; in practice it means volatility and poor liquidity if you ever need out in a hurry. And the December 8th deadline is a marketing device attached to a real date, but the causal chain from lockup expiry to a specific chip stock rallying is speculative, and Jovine says as much if you read his hedges literally.

Who is this for? If you enjoyed the Space Millionaires pitch and want the stronger-reasoned sibling, this is it: the supplier-royalty logic here is more concrete than the lunar-network thesis there, and the 100X claim ties to a filed, quantifiable request rather than an aspiration. At $49 with a six-month, keep-everything refund, the downside is a calendar reminder and ten minutes on the phone. Our opinion: this is one of the better-built presentations in the Musk genre, worth a look if the orbital-AI thesis interests you, and the money-back window means you can read Report #1, check the fingerprint yourself, and decide with the actual company name in hand. That is more than most promos ever give you.

Where to Learn More

• For Jovine’s sibling campaign on the same December 8th lockup event, see our Space Millionaires review, covering the $14 “Moon’s Phone Company” thesis and the lunar-communications angle.
• For the lockup mechanics both campaigns lean on, we break them down in Day 180: The SpaceX Lockup, Explained.
• For the same publisher’s ISS-replacement pitch in the same HTML sales-letter format, see our Superdeal review, which also covers the $49 house-style offer stack.
• Have a promo you want us to vet? Submit it here.
• Ready to watch the Elon’s 100X AI Stock presentation for yourself? Click here to learn more.

NewsletterVetter is an independent publication. We receive compensation from some of the services we review through affiliate links. Nothing on this site is investment advice. Always do your own research.