3D Systems entered 2026 with its clearest operating improvement in years. Dental, medtech and aerospace demand strengthened, gross margin improved and adjusted EBITDA turned positive. Then, less than a month later, the company raised $50 million through a new equity offering.

The contrast captures the investment case. The product and market thesis is improving. The balance-sheet and cash-generation thesis is not yet solved.

What changed?

• Q1 2026 revenue reached $95.5 million, up 1% year over year and 11% excluding divestitures.
• Healthcare Solutions revenue increased approximately 21% to $50.1 million.
• Dental, medtech and aerospace & defense each grew more than 20%.
• Gross margin improved to 35.9%, from 34.6%.
• Adjusted EBITDA improved to positive $2.1 million, from a large loss a year earlier.
• ROE Dental expanded its fleet of NextDent 300 systems across multiple sites.
• 3D Systems priced a $50 million upsized public offering at $3.05 per share.

Why dental matters more than a normal product cycle

Digital dentistry is one of the few additive-manufacturing markets with repeatable production volumes, recurring materials demand and a clear replacement path for conventional workflows.

3D Systems’ NextDent 300 jetted-denture solution targets monolithic, multi-material dentures. The significance is not only print speed. It is the possibility of combining automation, consistency and labor reduction in a market still dependent on skilled manual processes.

ROE Dental’s decision to add systems across multiple locations is a stronger commercial signal than a first installation. It suggests that the platform has moved beyond evaluation and is being deployed to expand real manufacturing capacity.

Healthcare is becoming the center of the company

Healthcare revenue now rivals the Industrial segment. That shift matters because dental and medtech applications can offer better utilization, recurring materials sales and more resilient demand than discretionary capital-equipment markets.

3D Systems also benefits from decades of regulatory, workflow and application knowledge. In healthcare, the moat is not simply the printer. It is the validated combination of hardware, materials, software and process expertise.

The Q1 recovery was real

Excluding divested software businesses, revenue grew 11%. Adjusted EBITDA improved by more than $25 million year over year and turned positive. Net loss also narrowed sharply.

This was not only a cost-cutting quarter. Growth in healthcare and aerospace & defense contributed to better mix and higher gross margin.

However, one positive quarter does not establish a durable earnings model. System demand remains cyclical, and product launches require working capital, inventory and commercial investment before revenue fully scales.

Why the equity raise changes the interpretation

In June, 3D Systems sold 16.4 million shares at $3.05 per share for approximately $50 million in gross proceeds. The underwriters also received an option for additional shares.

The capital strengthens liquidity and gives management more room to fund launches and operations. But it also dilutes existing shareholders and shows that the operating turnaround has not yet generated enough internal cash to remove financing risk.

The important question is therefore not whether the raise was necessary. It is whether this capital funds a self-sustaining growth cycle—or simply extends the runway until the next raise.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?

AML3D’s U.S. defense story is beginning to look like deployment rather than experimentation. The company now has operating systems inside Newport News Shipbuilding, four more on order and a paid contract to manufacture submarine components for in-service trials.

That does not yet prove a scalable business. But it is stronger evidence than a typical additive-manufacturing pilot because customers are buying multiple systems, commissioning them inside strategic shipyards and assigning real supply-chain problems to the technology.

What changed?

• Newport News Shipbuilding ordered four ARCEMY X systems for approximately A$9.9 million.
• The order will take NNS to six custom ARCEMY X systems.
• The first two NNS systems, from an earlier A$4.5 million order, were commissioned in June 2026.
• AML3D received an approximately A$2.61 million order to manufacture five U.S. Navy submarine components.
• The components will be used in in-service trials and address parts no longer supported by the original manufacturer.
• The first portable ARCEMY system became operational at the U.S. Navy Additive Manufacturing Center of Excellence.
• AML3D is investing to double capacity at its Stow, Ohio technology and manufacturing center.

Why six systems at HII matter

A single machine can be a technology evaluation. A fleet of six systems inside the largest U.S. military shipbuilder points to a more durable commitment.

Newport News Shipbuilding builds nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines. Its production challenges include long lead times, constrained suppliers and large metal components that are difficult to source conventionally. Large-format wire-arc additive manufacturing is relevant because it can create near-net-shape parts faster and with less material waste than some traditional routes.

The first two systems are now commissioned, while four additional systems are scheduled for delivery in early 2027. That progression—from initial order, to commissioning, to fleet expansion—is one of the strongest commercial signals in AML3D’s history.

The submarine-parts contract is more important than its size

The A$2.61 million contract covers five large, non-safety-critical replacement components for in-service trials on U.S. Navy submarines. The components are no longer available from the original manufacturer, creating a clear sustainment problem.

AML3D will print the parts in nickel-aluminum-bronze, an alloy it has already qualified to U.S. Navy standards. This follows successful hydrostatic testing of earlier components.

The significance is not the revenue alone. It is the transition from printing prototypes to manufacturing parts intended for operational evaluation. If the components perform successfully, the addressable opportunity could expand to additional obsolete or supply-constrained naval parts.

A distributed production network may be forming

AML3D’s installed base is spreading across several parts of the U.S. Maritime Industrial Base. Systems are operating or planned at Newport News Shipbuilding, the Navy’s Additive Manufacturing Center of Excellence, FasTech and other defense-related suppliers.

This matters because the strongest business model may not be centralized contract manufacturing. It may be a distributed network of customer-owned ARCEMY systems supported by AML3D software, qualification, service and process knowledge.

Such a network could create recurring service and support revenue while embedding AML3D’s process into customer production systems. It could also reduce shipping and lead-time constraints by moving manufacturing closer to point of need.

The U.S. Navy demand forecast is not guaranteed revenue

AML3D has cited a U.S. Navy letter of intent identifying its technology as relevant to a broader plan for additive-manufacturing installations and component output. Those forecasts are strategically encouraging, but they should not be treated as firm purchase orders.

The investable evidence is the signed order book: systems sold, systems commissioned and paid parts contracts. Future fleet and component forecasts remain upside scenarios until they become funded awards.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?

Materialise did not grow in the first quarter of 2026. Yet the company may have delivered something more important: better margins, positive free cash flow, stronger net cash and a more focused portfolio.

The quarter highlights a different kind of additive-manufacturing thesis. Materialise is not trying to win through aggressive hardware volume or acquisition-led scale. It is attempting to improve the quality of a diversified business built around medical applications, software and manufacturing services.

What changed?

• Q1 2026 revenue was stable at €66.3 million.
• Gross margin increased to 57.2%, from 55.3% a year earlier.
• Adjusted EBIT rose to €2.47 million, from €0.65 million.
• Adjusted EBITDA increased to €8.05 million, from €6.15 million.
• Net profit reached €1.82 million, versus a €0.54 million loss.
• Operating cash flow was €6.91 million and free cash flow was positive.
• Net cash increased to €72.8 million.
• Medical revenue grew 6.7%, while Manufacturing revenue declined 8.1%.
• Materialise transferred its eyewear business to management after selling Rapidfit.

Flat revenue can still hide a better quarter

Total revenue was almost unchanged year over year, but the income statement improved materially. Gross profit rose despite flat sales, adjusted EBIT nearly quadrupled and all three operating segments improved adjusted EBITDA.

This suggests that the company is getting more disciplined about pricing, mix and operating cost. Research, sales and administrative expenses remained broadly stable in aggregate, allowing gross-margin gains to flow through to profit.

The improvement is more credible because it also appeared in cash flow. Materialise generated positive operating and free cash flow while increasing net cash and buying back shares.

Medical remains the economic engine

Materialise Medical generated €33.2 million of revenue, up 6.7%, and €9.2 million of adjusted EBITDA. The segment represented roughly half of group revenue but substantially more than half of segment EBITDA.

This matters because medical additive manufacturing is built around patient-specific workflows, regulated software, clinical relationships and repeatable procedure volumes. Those characteristics can create stronger switching costs and more resilient economics than general-purpose printing services.

The risk is that Medical’s adjusted EBITDA margin slipped to 27.8% from 29.1%. Growth remains healthy, but investors should watch whether future investment or pricing pressure limits margin expansion.

Software is showing operating leverage

Software revenue declined 1.4%, yet segment adjusted EBITDA rose 87% and margin improved to 11.6% from 6.1%.

That is encouraging because software should ultimately be one of Materialise’s most scalable assets. The company’s long-term value depends not only on selling licenses, but on embedding its workflow, build-preparation and quality tools inside industrial production systems.

The next step is top-line acceleration. Margin improvement without revenue growth can support earnings for a period, but durable software value requires rising adoption and recurring revenue.

Manufacturing is still the weak point

Manufacturing revenue fell 8.1% to €23.5 million. Segment adjusted EBITDA improved from a loss to a small positive result, but the 1.2% margin remains thin.

The segment is exposed to customer project timing, industrial cyclicality and price competition. It also carries a more capital- and labor-intensive cost structure than software.

The encouraging signal is that management restored positive segment EBITDA despite lower revenue. The stronger signal would be revenue stabilization accompanied by a sustained mid-single-digit or better margin.

Exiting eyewear and Rapidfit sharpens the portfolio

Materialise sold Rapidfit at the end of March and then agreed to transfer its eyewear activities to the eyewear management team. Materialise will retain a minority stake in the new eyewear company, while the financial terms were not disclosed.

These actions indicate that management is willing to remove businesses that consume capital or attention without strengthening the core platform. The company expects an impairment charge related to eyewear in Q2, so the exit is not costless.

Strategically, however, the direction is clear: concentrate resources on Medical, Software and selected Manufacturing capabilities where Materialise has stronger differentiation.

The balance sheet is becoming an advantage

Materialise ended Q1 with €133.0 million of cash, €60.1 million of gross debt and €72.8 million of net cash. The company also continued its share-buyback program.

That financial position distinguishes Materialise from many pure-play AM peers that rely on recurring equity issuance. It gives the company flexibility to invest in software, medical growth and selective strategic opportunities without immediate financing pressure.

Still, buybacks create value only if the business compounds earnings and cash flow. They should not substitute for organic growth.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?

Stratasys is buying Markforged to deepen its exposure to aerospace, defense and industrial production. The strategic logic is stronger than a simple portfolio expansion—but the deal will only matter if Stratasys converts a broader technology stack into better economics.

On May 27, 2026, Stratasys agreed to acquire Markforged from Nano Dimension in a $42.5 million all-cash transaction. The purchase adds continuous-carbon-fiber FFF systems, secure workflow software and an industrial customer base to Stratasys’ existing polymer additive-manufacturing platform.

The transaction could create one of the industry’s broadest production-oriented polymer AM offerings. But breadth alone is not a moat. The real test is whether Stratasys can produce cross-sales, recurring consumables, stronger channel productivity and positive incremental EBITDA.

What changed?

• Stratasys agreed to acquire Markforged for $42.5 million in cash.
• The transaction is expected to close in the second half of 2026, subject to regulatory approvals and customary conditions.
• Markforged generated approximately $70 million of revenue in 2025, including a metal binder-jetting line that Nano Dimension will retain.
• Stratasys expects meaningful cost synergies and positive adjusted EBITDA contribution within the first year after closing.
• Q1 2026 Stratasys revenue was $132.7 million, compared with $136.0 million a year earlier.
• Adjusted EBITDA fell to $2.0 million, from $8.2 million.
• Stratasys ended Q1 with $237.8 million in cash, equivalents and short-term deposits and no debt.

Why Markforged fits Stratasys

Stratasys already has scale in polymer printing, an extensive installed base, application expertise and recurring revenue from consumables and service. Markforged adds a differentiated continuous-fiber platform, secure software and a stronger presence in rugged factory-floor applications.

The combination is especially relevant in aerospace and defense, where customers need lightweight tooling, fixtures, replacement components and low-volume production parts that can be manufactured close to the point of use. Markforged’s Digital Forge platform is designed around controlled workflows, simulation and repeatability—capabilities that matter more than raw printing speed in regulated environments.

Stratasys also gains a broader channel and more opportunities to sell materials, software, support and additional systems into existing customer accounts.

This is not a metal-AM acquisition

Nano Dimension will retain Markforged’s metal binder-jetting product line. Investors should therefore avoid describing the deal as a full acquisition of Markforged’s historical metal portfolio.

The asset Stratasys is acquiring is primarily the end-to-end FFF platform, including continuous-fiber capabilities, software, materials and customer relationships. The strategic rationale is production-grade polymer and composite manufacturing—not ownership of a broad metal-printing platform.

The purchase price looks manageable

At $42.5 million, the transaction represents a relatively modest use of Stratasys’ liquidity. The company held $237.8 million in cash, equivalents and short-term deposits at the end of Q1 and reported no debt.

That financial capacity reduces balance-sheet risk, but a low purchase price does not guarantee a high return. Markforged has changed ownership after a period of public-market losses and restructuring. The burden is now on Stratasys to demonstrate that the acquired revenue can be stabilized and made profitable.

Why the deal matters now

Stratasys’ Q1 results showed a stable but pressured business. Revenue declined modestly, gross margins compressed and adjusted EBITDA fell sharply. At the same time, Stratasys Direct delivered strong organic growth led by drone customers, and management highlighted a building pipeline in high-requirement defense applications.

Markforged gives Stratasys a way to increase exposure to those applications without building every capability internally. If the combined platform wins production programs, the deal could improve mix and reinforce recurring revenue. If it merely adds overlapping channel and operating costs, it could distract from the core margin-recovery plan.

The integration challenge

Stratasys must integrate products, sales teams, software, service networks and materials strategies without confusing customers or weakening channel incentives. It must also decide which workflows remain distinct and where consolidation creates value.

The strongest outcome would not be a single oversized product catalog. It would be a coherent application ladder: customers start with tooling or fixtures, scale into production cells, and generate recurring demand for materials, software and support.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?

Velo3D is starting to look less like a distressed printer vendor and more like a defense-oriented production platform. The evidence is improving—but the company has not yet escaped its capital intensity.

In the first half of 2026, Velo3D reported faster revenue growth, positive gross margin, a five-year Defense Logistics Agency contract, a major production-campus expansion and another Sapphire XC order from Mears Machine. Taken together, these developments suggest that demand is moving beyond demonstrations and into repeatable production capacity.

The central question is no longer whether Velo3D can print difficult aerospace and defense parts. It is whether the company can scale that capability without repeatedly diluting shareholders.

What changed?

• Q1 2026 revenue reached $13.8 million, up 48% year over year.
• Gross margin improved to 17.2%, from 7.5% a year earlier.
• Adjusted EBITDA loss narrowed to $3.6 million, from $6.9 million.
• Bookings were $12 million and backlog ended the quarter at $30 million.
• Velo3D won a $9.8 million, five-year DLA IDIQ contract supporting the Joint Additive Manufacturing Acceptability pilot-parts program.
• The company announced a 288,747-square-foot Livermore production campus designed to support more than 100 metal printers.
• Mears Machine ordered a fifth Sapphire XC, with options for two more systems.

Why the Mears order matters more than a normal printer sale

A first machine can be experimentation. A fifth machine is different. It implies that a customer has already invested in operators, qualification, workflow integration and downstream machining—and still sees enough demand to expand.

Mears is using the platform across aviation, defense, energy and space, including advanced nickel alloys and aluminum. The strategic value is not just machine revenue for Velo3D. A growing multi-machine customer base can validate machine-to-machine consistency, process repeatability and distributed production—all essential if additive manufacturing is to move from isolated qualification programs into scalable supply chains.

The DLA contract is a pathway, not guaranteed revenue

The $9.8 million award is an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract. That distinction matters. It creates a procurement vehicle through which qualified parts can be ordered, but the headline ceiling should not be treated as immediately secured revenue.

Even so, the contract is strategically important. Defense sustainment is one of the strongest use cases for metal additive manufacturing because many components suffer from long lead times, obsolete tooling or a shrinking domestic supplier base. Velo3D’s Rapid Production Solution is aimed directly at this bottleneck.

The Livermore expansion raises both upside and risk

Velo3D says the Livermore campus will triple production capacity and can support more than 100 metal printers. If demand is real, this could shift the company toward a more diversified model combining system sales with recurring parts production.

But capacity announcements are not the same as utilized capacity. The facility must be equipped, commissioned, staffed and filled with qualified work. Management expects 2026 capital expenditure of $40 million to $50 million, primarily for Rapid Production Solution expansion—and explicitly notes that this spending depends on sufficient financing.

This makes utilization the key variable. A large facility with low loading would worsen cash burn. A highly utilized facility serving defense and aerospace programs could improve gross margin, recurring revenue and customer stickiness.

The balance-sheet problem has improved, not disappeared

Velo3D ended March with $16.6 million of cash, down from $39.0 million at year-end. In April, it sold 3,571,428 shares at $14 per share, raising approximately $50 million before fees. It also completed debt-to-equity conversions and reduced outstanding debt to roughly $9 million.

The financing gives the company room to invest, but it also shows why the investment case remains fragile. The operational recovery is being funded partly through dilution. For shareholders, the relevant question is whether the new equity creates a self-sustaining production business—or merely postpones the next financing requirement.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?

Nano Dimension’s original additive-manufacturing roll-up thesis is being dismantled. The company is selling product lines, divesting Markforged and proposing to redeploy its cash and Nasdaq listing into an AI-powered preventive-health business.

For investors, this is no longer primarily an additive-manufacturing operating story. It is becoming a transaction, capital-allocation and residual-value story.

What changed?

• Nano sold its AME and Fabrica product lines for up to $12.5 million, including $2.0 million upfront and performance-based deferred payments.
• The company agreed to sell Markforged to Stratasys in a $42.5 million all-cash transaction, while retaining the Markforged metal binder-jetting product line.
• The two announced monetization actions are expected to reduce annualized cash burn by approximately $25 million.
• Q1 2026 revenue was $29.7 million, but adjusted EBITDA loss widened to $12.5 million and net loss reached $69.7 million, including a $40.4 million impairment.
• Liquidity was $441.6 million at March 31, 2026.
• Full-year guidance was suspended as the strategic-alternatives process accelerated.
• Nano signed a non-binding term sheet with Infinite Epigenetics for a proposed business combination valued at $890 million for Infinite.

The AM roll-up is unwinding

Nano Dimension spent years assembling a broad digital-manufacturing portfolio through acquisitions. The intended logic was scale, cross-selling and exposure to electronics, polymers, composites and metal additive manufacturing.

Management’s current actions imply that the portfolio did not generate sufficient strategic or financial returns. The company’s chief executive has stated that acquisitions made under prior leadership were too costly for the benefits obtained. The response is now straightforward: reduce operating expense, sell product lines and seek a different use for the balance sheet and public-company platform.

This matters because investors should not interpret reported revenue growth as evidence that the original strategy succeeded. Q1 revenue more than doubled largely because acquired businesses were included in the comparison. At the same time, adjusted EBITDA losses widened and the company recorded a major impairment.

Selling Markforged changes the identity of the company

Markforged was one of Nano Dimension’s most recognizable industrial AM assets. Its continuous-fiber composite systems, metal platforms, software and installed base offered a credible route into production applications.

The proposed $42.5 million sale to Stratasys is therefore more than a cost-cutting measure. It transfers much of Nano’s most visible operating exposure to another AM platform. Nano will retain the metal binder-jetting product line, but the broader investment identity is clearly moving away from being a diversified additive-manufacturing consolidator.

The Infinite Epigenetics proposal is effectively a strategic pivot

On June 15, Nano announced a non-binding term sheet to combine with Infinite Epigenetics, an AI-powered preventive-health and diagnostics company built around epigenetic data, a CLIA-certified laboratory and consumer-health operations.

If completed, the combined company is expected to operate under the Infinite Epigenetics name and trade under the proposed ticker IEAI. Existing Nano shareholders would retain a meaningful minority interest based on a stated value for Nano that reflects a 20% premium to estimated net cash at closing. They would also receive a contingent value right tied to potential proceeds from certain legacy Nano assets.

That structure makes the future investment case fundamentally different. Shareholders would own a minority stake in a healthcare-AI platform plus a claim on uncertain legacy-asset proceeds. The value of Nano’s remaining AM operations would become secondary to transaction economics.

Why the headline premium requires caution

The stated 20% premium is based on estimated net cash at closing—not necessarily on the current market price or a fixed cash payment to shareholders. The final exchange ratio, ownership split, cash balance, transaction expenses and treatment of remaining liabilities will determine the actual economic outcome.

The term sheet is also non-binding. There is no assurance that the parties will sign a definitive agreement or complete the combination. Shareholder, regulatory and other approvals would still be required.

What remains of the additive-manufacturing exposure?

Nano continues to operate remaining product lines and will retain Markforged’s metal binder-jetting business under the announced Stratasys transaction. But the company’s strategic priorities are now monetization and redeployment rather than building an integrated AM platform.

For Addithive’s company universe, this means Nano Dimension should increasingly be treated as a special situation rather than a clean additive-manufacturing pure play.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Type your email…

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?