This article first appeared on GuruFocus.

Release Date: August 12, 2026

For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.

Positive Points

NRC formally accepted the construction permit application for the Kronos MMR at the University of Illinois, with a clear path to construction start in 2H 2027.

Completed acquisition of STS, a profitable nuclear logistics company, enhancing vertical integration and de-risking fuel cycle operations.

Strong balance sheet with approximately $580 million in liquidity, among the strongest in the advanced nuclear sector.

Expanding commercial pipeline, including a feasibility study for up to 1 GW with BaRupon and advanced discussions with a strategic data center partner for multi-gigawatt deployments.

Fuel flexibility: Kronos can use commercially available LEU+ fuel today, with the ability to switch to HALEU without redesign, reducing near-term fuel supply risk.

Negative Points

Net loss widened to $10.1 million in Q3 2026 from $7.6 million in the prior year quarter, driven by higher operating expenses.

Operating expenses increased significantly as the company scales engineering, regulatory, and fuel cycle workstreams, with no near-term revenue from reactor sales.

STS contributed only $200,000 in revenue for the period from May 22 to June 30, indicating limited immediate financial impact from the acquisition.

The company faces execution risks in advancing multiple M&A and partnership opportunities, with no guaranteed closing or revenue contribution.

Regulatory timelines, while on track, are subject to potential delays, and the company acknowledges that fast-tracking licensing for military or other projects is minimal.

Q & A Highlights

Q: Can you provide insight into the structure of the framework agreement with the strategic collaborator for a multi-gigawatt data center pipeline, what it could unlock commercially, and what attracted the customer to Nano?A: CEO James Walker explained that the framework is designed to avoid the deficiencies of typical PPA agreements, which often lack customer investment. The partner, a global infrastructure investment and development firm, would receive equity grants and warrants in Nano and have the ability to invest tens of millions, potentially up to $100 million, upon achieving development and reactor purchase milestones. This co-investment model de-risks both sides and could allow Nano to also take an equity position in the nuclear data center projects, creating a synergistic partnership with multiple revenue streams. CFO Jason Garcha added that the partner’s experience in building, owning, and operating large-scale infrastructure projects globally makes them a credible validator of Nano’s technology and could accelerate commercialization.

Q: Are there any long-lead items that need to be ordered now to start construction at the University of Illinois in the second half of 2027?A: CEO James Walker clarified that initial construction focuses on non-nuclear components like the subterranean concrete “citadel” structure, ground excavation, and concrete pouring, which do not require reactor components. While vendor negotiations for reactor parts are underway, the initial construction phase isn’t waiting on them. Furthermore, non-nuclear systems like the thermal energy storage (solar salt) and the adjacent power conversion plant use standard, off-the-shelf components that don’t even need to wait for NRC approval, allowing for significant progress to be made immediately.

Q: Have you allocated a specific budget for acquisitions in 2026, or will you be more opportunistic?A: CEO James Walker stated there is no ceiling on acquisition spending, but the company is very capital-conscious and focuses on small-scale acquisitions that bring in-house capabilities to facilitate reactor rollout, rather than large, expensive deals. He noted the initial payment for STS was only around $7 million. The only potential exception is a fuel facility, where the equity position would be earned through investment in completing the facility rather than an upfront acquisition cost. CFO Jason Garcha added that any larger outlays would be spread over several years and potentially reduced through government programs.

Q: Can you expand on the relationship with Ameresco and whether their DoD projects could expedite the licensing pathway for nuclear power?A: CEO James Walker explained that initial conversations with Ameresco were focused on EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) work for coordinating reactor deployments. While Ameresco has enhanced use leases with the Navy, the DoD still needs to go through feasibility studies and defer to the NRC for new reactor systems, so their projects wouldn’t significantly expedite the licensing process. However, they benefit from seeing the UIUC project progress through NRC review, which provides reassurance. Chairman Jay Yu added that they are in active talks with Ameresco, who has a robust nuclear group, and are exploring various synergistic strategies.

Q: Can you provide an update on the proposed $230 million investment in Deoxitech?A: Chairman Jay Yu stated that the proposal is currently under review and they hope to have an update in the coming months, but declined to comment further at this time. He reiterated that the investment would be a significant achievement for their vertical integration strategy, but it remains under review.

Q: Can you talk about your hiring plans over the next year and whether the employee growth rate will continue?A: CEO James Walker acknowledged the company has transitioned from a small to a medium-sized company, requiring a reorganization. The technical team still needs significant expansion to carry a reactor project from design to operation, and a big upscaling in technical staff is expected in the coming months and years. He emphasized the importance of being sensible in hiring to avoid overemployment and ensure proper reporting lines, but acknowledged the pressure to upscale as quickly as possible to support the mission.

Q: Can you provide an update on conversations with commercial enrichment providers and Triso fabricators, and what fuel availability looks like for your commercialization timelines?A: CEO James Walker highlighted that Nano’s ability to use commercially available LEU+ fuel is a major advantage. They are in conversations with enrichment companies like Urenco for mass rollout needs. On the fabrication side, they are speaking with emerging players like B2XT, Standard Nuclear (with Framatome), and TrisoX (X Energy subsidiary) to negotiate long-term contracts. The capacity to fabricate fuel for the first-of-a-kind reactor already exists, so timelines are not at risk. For the long term, they may consider bringing some fuel manufacturing elements in-house or establishing joint ventures to de-risk mass production.

Q: How important is the higher temperature output of HTGRs versus metallic fueled fast reactors for industrial applications?A: CEO James Walker provided a technical defense of HTGRs, noting that while past HTGRs had low capacity factors, Nano’s design uses a solar salt thermal energy storage loop to handle fluctuating demand. He argued that fast reactors have never been commercially deployed and require highly enriched fuel (HALEU) or plutonium blends, which are not commercially available or legally feasible. He also noted that fast reactors are more efficient at larger scales, limiting their flexibility and modularity compared to HTGRs, making the case for HTGRs stronger for small, portable, and industrial applications.

Q: Is there a geographic distinction in your business model where you might be more likely to provide services versus retain ownership internationally?A: CEO James Walker noted that interest from countries like South Korea is driven by a need for industrial heat to de-risk heavy industry. While some international customers may prefer to own the reactor systems to avoid long-term payments, the majority still prefer to pay a contractual price for power and have the responsibility of operation sit with Nano. Even heavy industries that are willing to invest capital ultimately want the operational responsibility to remain with the technology provider.

Q: Can you provide color on how to think about STS’s revenue heading into 2027 and whether you plan to scale the business?A: CEO James Walker explained that STS is both a de-risking operation for reactor deployments and a significant growth business. The nuclear fuel cycle requires specialized transportation at every step, and with few players in the space, STS is well-positioned to grow substantially. They are looking at acquisitions at the front end of the fuel cycle to complement STS’s back-end expertise, creating a more holistic business that can generate significant revenue this decade, even before reactors are deployed.

For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.