Loading research website
Pulsar Helium · Primary helium and industrial gases
This model forecasts helium and CO2 production, selling prices, operating costs, royalties, taxes, plant spending, and financing. It limits production using the available resource and well evidence, then accounts for the remaining funding gap and the new shares that may be issued.
Base-case value estimate
$0.19
Based on the conditions listed in “Sustained-feed-constrained Base development.”
Blended scenario result
$0.56
This combines the displayed scenarios using the model weights. The weights are judgment calls, not statistical guarantees.
This model forecasts helium and CO2 production, selling prices, operating costs, royalties, taxes, plant spending, and financing. It limits production using the available resource and well evidence, then accounts for the remaining funding gap and the new shares that may be issued.
What could Pulsar's Topaz project and related optional assets be worth after development costs, financing, and dilution?
Unlike a mature-company DCF, the largest uncertainties are physical project gates: recoverable resource, sustained well flow, plant utilization, installed cost, offtake, and financing. The forecast is therefore constrained by what the field and funding plan may actually support.
The value per share is a risk-adjusted project estimate, not proof that commercial production will occur. The result can change sharply when well performance, resource coverage, pricing, cost, or financing assumptions change.
A DCF estimates present value from future cash flows. This page may also use project probabilities, cap rates, net asset value, or sum-of-the-parts methods where they fit the asset better. The model type is shown above and explained here before the detailed tables.
Use these sections in order or jump directly to the part you need. The plain-language explanation comes first; the detailed assumptions, formulas, sources, and change log remain available underneath it.
Use the spreadsheet to inspect formulas or change assumptions. JSON and CSV versions are available for structured review and data reuse.
Model overview
Main question
What could Pulsar's Topaz project and related optional assets be worth after development costs, financing, and dilution?
Technical approach
Project DCF, funding waterfall and sum-of-the-parts valuation
Company or asset
Pulsar Helium
Estimate date
Aug 5, 2026
Years modeled
2026E–2040E, constrained by modeled resource and commercial life
Currency
CAD
Diluted shares used
228.8 million
Net debt / (cash) used
-$27.81 million
Research status
Pre-production; plant package reserved, definitive purchase agreement not publicly verified
Model author
Ephesus Research
Last updated
Aug 5, 2026
Linked sources
13 records
Version
2.0.0-preliminary
3 possible outcomes
The base case is the central set of assumptions, not a guaranteed result. Compare every named scenario to see how delays, weaker economics, stronger execution, financing, or other major changes affect the estimate. Any edge case is deliberately kept separate from the central forecast. The weights are model judgments and should change when the evidence changes.
| Scenario | Business valueEnterprise value | Value for shareholdersEquity value | Estimated value per share | Weight in blended result | What has to happen | Main risks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constrained development and financing stress | $0.00m | $39.54m | $0.10 | 25% |
|
|
| Sustained-feed-constrained Base development | $16.93m | $56.47m | $0.19 | 50% |
|
|
| High-deliverability and option-value case | $416m | $455m | $1.76 | 25% |
|
|
Inputs behind the result
Start with inputs marked low confidence. Those are the assumptions most likely to need more evidence and can be more important than the final headline number. Each row shows whether the value is a fact, company statement, analyst estimate, model assumption, or inference.
| Input | Value used | Case | Evidence type | Where it came from | Information date | Confidence | Why it matters or what remains uncertain |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference share price | 1.42 CAD/share | All | Fact | Pulsar stock-information page | Aug 5, 2026 | High | Delayed reference price used only for market-capitalization, dilution and market-implied diagnostics. It is not a price forecast. |
| Current fully diluted shares | 228.810478 millions | All | Fact | Pulsar stock-information page | Jul 20, 2026 | High | Includes basic shares, options, PSUs, RSUs and warrants. Future project financing dilution is modeled separately. |
| Pro forma net liquidity after reservation payment | 27.809 USD millions | All | Analyst Estimate | July offering and plant-reservation bridge | Aug 5, 2026 | Medium | Reconciles pre-offering liquidity, estimated net proceeds and the modeled reservation payment. It is not a substitute for the next filed balance sheet. |
| Current resource classification | Contingent and prospective resources; no reserves assigned classification | All | Fact | Independent Topaz CPR | Aug 5, 2026 | High | The model applies explicit risk, recovery and development probabilities and does not relabel resources as reserves. |
| Base risked recoverable helium | 164.89 MMcf | Base | Analyst Estimate | Risked CPR resource bridge | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Applies modeled resource risking, an expansion factor and processing recovery. This is not a reserve estimate. |
| Reserved helium plant nameplate | 940 liquid litres/hour | All | Fact | Plant reservation agreement announcement | Jun 30, 2026 | High | Nameplate capacity is not treated as production. Effective utilization is capped by modeled sustained well feed and commercial utilization. |
| Base producing-well equivalents | 8 well equivalents | Base | Model Assumption | Six-well program plus existing-well development plan | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | A well equivalent is an analytical construct. Sustained commercial productivity and completion design remain unproven. |
| Base sustained raw-gas rate per well | 0.75 MMcf/day | Base | Model Assumption | Jetstream flow-test evidence and sensitivity range | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Above the long-duration natural-flow observation but below the compressed peak. It requires future sustained-production evidence. |
| Base effective modeled plant utilization | 60.5 % | Base | Inference | Field-supported plant-feed bridge | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | The lower of the 70% commercial target and the utilization supported by eight modeled well equivalents at the selected rate, grade, uptime and recovery. |
| Base starting helium netback | 22 USD/liquid litre | Base | Model Assumption | USGS market reference and analyst netback assumption | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | No signed Topaz helium offtake is assumed. The input must absorb product specification, liquefaction, logistics, customer terms and selling deductions. |
| Base CO2 netback | 40 USD/tonne | Base | Model Assumption | Announced CO2 recovery capacity and analyst netback | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | No binding CO2 offtake or transport arrangement is assumed. Base CO2 is an operating offset, not the principal valuation driver. |
| Base all-in installed plant cost | 122.2 USD millions | Base | Analyst Estimate | US$78.7 million equipment package plus modeled installation scope | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Adds shipping, EPC and site work, commissioning, spares, gathering, land and technical work, pre-production G&A and contingency to the indicative package price. |
| Base total remaining pre-production uses | 146.3 USD millions | Base | Analyst Estimate | Integrated plant, field, infrastructure and corporate sources-and-uses model | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Includes plant, wells, gathering, infrastructure, permitting, technical work and pre-production corporate costs. |
| Base external equity funding gap | 51.3 USD millions | Base | Analyst Estimate | Integrated financing waterfall | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | After modeled cash, US$55.0 million of debt and a 10% strategic-partner funding contribution. Debt and partner funding are not committed in the model. |
| Base illustrative project-financing dilution | 64.2 new shares, millions | Base | Analyst Estimate | Equity-gap and issue-price bridge | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Assumes the equity gap is issued at approximately C$1.136 per share, a 20% discount to the C$1.42 reference price. |
| Base development-production resource coverage | 13.9 % | Base | Inference | Risked resource divided by modeled DCF production | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | A diagnostic showing that the strategic development case depends on materially more recoverable helium than the current risked resource bridge. |
| Modeled Minnesota gross-proceeds tax schedule | 7% for first three extraction years; 9% thereafter conservative policy assumption | All | Model Assumption | Proposed SF 2374 language, cross-checked to current statute | Aug 5, 2026 | Low | Retained as a conservative sensitivity and not represented as enacted law. Gas-specific application and interaction with other taxes require legal confirmation. |
Change the assumptions
Each grid changes two assumptions at the same time. Find the row and column matching your view, then read the value where they meet. A wide range of outcomes means the estimate is highly sensitive to those inputs.
Read across or down to choose two assumptions. The value where the row and column meet is the model result under that combination.
Simplified Base operating profile; negative project value is floored at zero and this table does not replace the detailed annual DCF.
| Change Starting helium netback (USD/litre) ↓ and Project discount rate → | 10 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 20 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 |
| 18 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 |
| 22 | 0.27 | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.14 |
| 26 | 0.39 | 0.35 | 0.29 | 0.24 | 0.22 |
| 30 | 0.52 | 0.46 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.29 |
| 34 | 0.65 | 0.57 | 0.48 | 0.41 | 0.37 |
| 38 | 0.77 | 0.69 | 0.58 | 0.5 | 0.45 |
Read across or down to choose two assumptions. The value where the row and column meet is the model result under that combination.
Uses Base uptime, helium concentration, processing recovery and 940 L/hour nameplate. It does not prove any well can sustain the selected rate.
| Change Producing-well equivalents ↓ and Sustained raw-gas rate (MMcf/day per well) → | 30% | 50% | 75% | 1 | 1.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 0.12 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.52 |
| 6 | 0.18 | 0.3 | 0.45 | 0.61 | 0.79 |
| 8 | 0.24 | 0.4 | 0.61 | 0.81 | 1 |
| 10 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.76 | 1 | 1 |
| 12 | 0.36 | 0.61 | 0.91 | 1 | 1 |
Read across or down to choose two assumptions. The value where the row and column meet is the model result under that combination.
Additional debt is shown only as an equity-gap substitute. It does not add project value and may be unavailable without reserves, contracts, collateral or stronger debt-service evidence.
| Change Future issue price (CAD/share) ↓ and Additional debt replacing equity (USD millions) → | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80% | 91.13 | 73.36 | 55.58 | 37.81 | 20.04 |
| 1 | 72.9 | 58.69 | 44.47 | 30.25 | 16.03 |
| 1.2 | 60.75 | 48.9 | 37.06 | 25.21 | 13.36 |
| 1.4 | 52.07 | 41.92 | 31.76 | 21.61 | 11.45 |
| 1.6 | 45.57 | 36.68 | 27.79 | 18.9 | 10.02 |
| 1.8 | 40.5 | 32.6 | 24.7 | 16.8 | 8.9 |
These are not footnotes to ignore. They identify missing evidence, simplified calculations, or events that could make the displayed value incomplete or too high.
Evidence
A source may confirm a reported fact or management plan without proving that the forecast will occur. Open a source card to see what it supports and what remains uncertain.
Pulsar Helium · Jul 7, 2026 · Canada / United Kingdom / United States
Relevant finding
Supports the post-financing liquidity bridge and planned six-well program, while requiring separate modeling of the remaining plant, field, infrastructure and contingency funding need.
Review notes
Primary filed source for the 25.393 million-share offering, offer price, estimated net proceeds, proposed use of proceeds, plant scope, drilling program and pro forma working capital. Forward-looking uses and cost estimates are not commitments.
Relevant pages: Offering terms, capitalization, use of proceeds, plant procurement, development work and risk-factor sections.
Pulsar Helium · Jul 13, 2026 · Canada / United Kingdom
Relevant finding
Supports inclusion of the offering cash and shares in the pro forma capitalization, with a visible status caveat.
Review notes
Company announcement for gross proceeds and issued shares. It continued to describe final TSXV approval as a condition; no later approval announcement was located in the model review.
Relevant pages: Closing terms, share issuance, admissions and approval conditions.
Pulsar Helium · Jul 20, 2026 · Canada
Relevant finding
Corrects the prior model denominator by adding the full PSU balance and anchors the current fully diluted share count at 228.810 million.
Review notes
Company-reported capitalization cross-check showing 214.197 million basic shares, 10.000 million options, 2.584 million PSUs, 1.050 million RSUs, 0.979 million warrants and 228.810 million fully diluted shares.
Relevant pages: Issued securities and delayed market-data section.
Pulsar Helium · Jan 28, 2026 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Anchors the model's resource-constrained case and shows that the strategic development case requires substantial appraisal, conversion, recovery and scale-up evidence.
Review notes
Primary technical source for gross and net contingent and prospective helium and CO2 resource ranges, effective October 1, 2024. The disclosed quantities are resources, not reserves.
Relevant pages: Resource tables, classifications, assumptions, contingencies and risk discussion.
Pulsar Helium · Jun 30, 2026 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Provides the core plant-capacity anchor but does not establish a fixed all-in installed cost or completed purchase contract.
Review notes
Supports the 940 litre-per-hour helium nameplate, 300 tonne-per-day CO2 capacity, US$78.7 million indicative equipment-package price and reservation-payment schedule. Final scope, definitive documentation, financing, approvals, delivery and commissioning remained conditions.
Relevant pages: Equipment capacity, price, payment milestones, exclusions and contemplated definitive agreement.
Pulsar Helium · Jul 7, 2026 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Anchors the model timeline while retaining explicit delay and execution-risk adjustments.
Review notes
Company source for the planned six-well program and Q4 2027 first-production target. The schedule, costs, permits, financing and commissioning remain forward-looking.
Relevant pages: Development plan, plant pathway, drilling program, timetable and use of proceeds.
Pulsar Helium · Sep 2, 2025 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Supports the Bull per-well rate only as an upside test anchor; the model does not treat the compressed peak as a multi-year plateau.
Review notes
Reports an approximately 501 Mcf/day natural maximum and a 1.3 MMcf/day compressed peak at Jetstream #1, plus an initial restricted Jetstream #2 flow. Peak and short-duration test rates are not long-term production forecasts.
Relevant pages: Flow-test setup, natural and compressed rates, pressure behavior and drilling plan.
Pulsar Helium · Sep 19, 2025 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Anchors the lower sustained-rate cases and the field-supported utilization constraint; it does not prove commercial decline behavior.
Review notes
Reports 7%–8% helium, approximately 75%–80% CO2 and roughly 150–300 Mcf/day natural flow for 12–18 hours on smaller chokes. Jetstream #2 remained mechanically restricted and required remediation.
Relevant pages: Gas composition, choke-dependent flow, test duration and Jetstream #2 blockage discussion.
Pulsar Helium · Jun 15, 2026 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Improves the mineral-rights and royalty bridge but does not establish reserves or sustained commercial rates across the field.
Review notes
Supports seven drilled wells, approximately 690 net fee-simple royalty-free acres, approximately 4,941 net leasehold acres, the majority 3% royalty burden and the company's then-current two-to-four production-well planning range.
Relevant pages: Land ownership, royalties, well count, pressure correlation and production-well planning.
Pulsar Helium · May 29, 2026 · Canada
Relevant finding
Provides the pre-financing balance-sheet anchor and confirms that material external capital remains necessary for development.
Review notes
Balance-sheet and expenditure source preceding the July financing. The July offering and subsequent payments are incorporated separately in the pro forma liquidity bridge.
Relevant pages: Selected financial information, liquidity, exploration spending, subsequent events and going-concern disclosures.
Dec 31, 2025 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
Prevents the model from presenting proposed gas-tax language as enacted law.
Review notes
Current published gross-proceeds statute cross-check. The published text does not expressly contain the proposed 7%/9% gas schedule used as a conservative model assumption.
Relevant pages: Current statutory rate and scope.
May 19, 2025 · Minnesota, United States
Relevant finding
The workbook retains the schedule only as a conservative policy sensitivity pending enacted-law or formal agency confirmation.
Review notes
Source of the proposed 7% gross-proceeds rate for the first extraction year and following two years and 9% thereafter. A bill text is not proof of enactment.
Relevant pages: Gas-production tax provisions and proposed effective language.
Jan 31, 2026 · United States / global
Relevant finding
Provides a reasonableness reference while leaving realized liquid-helium pricing, transport, customer terms and processing deductions as explicit assumptions.
Review notes
External gaseous and Grade-A helium benchmark and market-context source. It is not a Topaz liquid-helium offtake quote or project netback.
Relevant pages: Price, production, reserves, imports, uses and market commentary.
Revision history
Material updates are recorded so readers can see which assumption or conclusion changed, why it changed, and how the result was affected.
Aug 5, 2026 · Pulsar Helium
Replaced the July 10 framework with an integrated, formula-driven Topaz project model covering sustained-well deliverability, resource constraints, installed plant cost, CO2 economics, royalties and taxes, financing, partner economics, dilution, market-implied pricing and automated integrity checks.
Previous
July 10, 2026 workbook with 10 sheets, 227.360 million modeled fully diluted shares and strategic utilization that was not directly capped by sustained-well feed.
Revised
August 5, 2026 workbook with 20 linked sheets, 228.810 million company-reported fully diluted shares, explicit field-supported utilization, full sources-and-uses financing and current preliminary website outputs.
Reason
Post-model financing, warrant and PSU information, the plant reservation, updated technical disclosures and the need to separate peak flow tests from sustained commercial deliverability materially changed the appropriate valuation architecture.
Source
Pulsar stock information, July financing disclosures, plant reservation and Topaz technical updates
Estimated effect
Reduces the Base fully funded value to approximately C$0.19 per share, exposes an estimated US$51.3 million Base equity gap and shows that the current enterprise value requires materially stronger netback, resource, utilization, capex or option-value assumptions than the Base case.
Further reading
Pulsar Helium
A source-backed valuation of Pulsar Helium's Topaz project that distinguishes contingent and prospective resources from reserves, short-duration test rates from sustainable commercial feed, the reserved equipment package from all-in installed cost, and project funding from common-shareholder value.
Report a formula error, unsupported assumption, missing source, or unclear explanation. Material corrections are added to the public revision history rather than silently overwritten.