Wall Street Rewards Growth Stories, Until It Doesn’t

If you judged the additive manufacturing industry purely by looking at the stock market, you would conclude that its pioneers have somehow lost their way. The companies that invented industrial 3D printing, built global distribution networks, developed hundreds of printable materials, trained generations of engineers and installed thousands of machines across the world are today valued surprisingly modestly by investors. Meanwhile, several younger companies, many of which have never reported consistent profits, have, at various points over the past few years, commanded valuations running into billions of dollars. It seems completely backwards.

Take Stratasys, one of the companies that helped define polymer 3D printing. In 2025, it generated US$551 million in revenue. Even in a difficult market, it maintained a gross margin of almost 47%, yet still reported a net loss of US$104 million.

3D Systems generated US$387 million in revenue during 2025. Although it reported a small accounting profit because of the sale of part of its business, its core operations still lost US$96 million.

These are not startups experimenting with new ideas. They are companies that have spent more than three decades developing technology, supporting customers and building one of the world’s most advanced manufacturing industries.

Now compare them with the industry’s newer stars. During the investment frenzy of 2020 and 2021, Desktop Metal became one of the hottest names in additive manufacturing. Investors valued the company at more than US$2.5 billion, despite annual revenues that were only a small fraction of that figure and losses that continued to mount. The story was irresistible. Metal 3D printing would transform manufacturing, and Desktop Metal would lead that revolution. Reality turned out to be rather different.

As investors became more interested in sustainable businesses than ambitious forecasts, Desktop Metal’s valuation collapsed. The company that had once been one of Wall Street’s favourites eventually disappeared as an independent industry leader, becoming another example of how quickly investor sentiment can change.

Markforged experienced a remarkably similar journey. Shortly after becoming a public company, it was valued at well over US$2 billion. Fast forward a few years and the picture looks very different. In 2025, Markforged generated approximately US$70 million in revenue, yet in 2026 it was acquired by Stratasys for just US$42.5 million.

Then there is Carbon, one of Silicon Valley’s favourite manufacturing startups. Backed by some of the world’s best-known venture capital firms, Carbon reached a private valuation of approximately US$2.4 billion. Its Digital Light Synthesis technology was genuinely innovative, and partnerships with companies such as Adidas generated enormous publicity. Yet even today, the company has never demonstrated the level of profitability that such a valuation implied.

Formlabs tells a similar story. By 2021, the desktop resin printer manufacturer had achieved a private valuation of roughly US$2 billion after multiple funding rounds. Formlabs has undoubtedly built an excellent business and remains one of the industry’s success stories. But its valuation, like many others during that period, reflected expectations of future growth rather than proven long-term profitability.

What explains this extraordinary contrast? The answer is surprisingly simple. Wall Street does not always reward good companies. It rewards compelling stories. For years, the story surrounding additive manufacturing was irresistible. Factories would become digital. Warehouses would disappear. Spare parts would be printed wherever they were needed. Traditional manufacturing would be replaced by fleets of industrial 3D printers. It was a vision that captured the imagination of investors around the world.

Unfortunately, manufacturing does not move at the pace of investor presentations. Real factories buy machines only after months of testing. Production engineers demand reliability before innovation. Maintenance teams expect spare parts to be available immediately. Finance departments want to see a clear return on investment before approving a purchase. Building a successful manufacturing business is a slow process.

The pioneers of additive manufacturing have spent decades learning these lessons. They invested in application engineering, customer training, service organisations, material development and global support networks. None of these activities generate exciting headlines, but they are exactly what customers need to succeed.

Ironically, these strengths are often overlooked by investors searching for the next revolutionary technology. I have seen the same mindset within our own industry Whenever a new technology appears, conversations immediately revolve around faster print speeds, artificial intelligence, larger build volumes or the latest buzzword. Very few people ask the simpler question. Does this help the customer manufacture better parts? Customers rarely buy technology because it is new. They buy solutions because they solve real problems.

The stock market often behaves differently. It rewards the possibility of future success far more enthusiastically than the steady execution of proven businesses. Investors are willing to overlook years of losses if they believe extraordinary growth lies just around the corner. Sometimes they are right. Many times they are not.

The additive manufacturing industry has now experienced both extremes. First came excessive optimism, when almost every startup was described as the future of manufacturing. Today we may be witnessing the opposite, where companies with decades of experience and hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue receive surprisingly little recognition from investors. I believe the truth probably lies somewhere in between.

The future of additive manufacturing will not be determined by the companies that once enjoyed the highest valuations. It will be shaped by those that consistently help customers reduce costs, improve quality and manufacture products that were previously impossible to produce. History has shown that markets eventually return to fundamentals.

When the excitement fades, customers still need reliable machines. They still need knowledgeable application engineers. They still need service technicians who answer the phone. They still need suppliers that will still be around ten years from now.

Technology creates excitement. Stories create valuations. But only customers create enduring companies.