Michael Weiland / CNBC In the transition from gas-powered vehicles to electrics, the fuel every automaker wants these days is hard cash. Established automakers and startups alike are introducing new battery-powered models in an effort to meet growing demand. Ramping up production of a new model was already a fraught and expensive process, but rising material costs and difficult federal incentive arrangements are putting even more pressure on coffers. Prices of the raw materials used in many electric vehicle batteries — lithium, nickel and cobalt — have soared in the past two years as demand has soared, and it may be several years before miners can significantly increase supply. Further complicating the situation, new US rules governing EV buyer incentives will require automakers to source more of these materials in North America over time if they want their vehicles to qualify. The result: new cost pressures for an already costly process. Automakers typically spend hundreds of millions of dollars designing and tooling to build high-volume new vehicles — before a new car is even shipped. Almost all global automakers now hold large cash reserves of $20 billion or more. These reserves exist to ensure that companies can continue to work on their next new models if and when a recession (or a pandemic) takes a bit of a bite out of their sales and profits for a few quarters. All that money and time can be a risky gamble: If the new model doesn’t resonate with customers, or if manufacturing problems delay its launch or compromise its quality, the automaker may not make enough to cover what he spent For newer automakers, the financial risks of designing a new electric vehicle can be existential. Take Tesla. When the automaker began preparations for the Model 3 launch, CEO Elon Musk and his team designed a highly automated production line for the Model 3, with robots and specialized machinery reportedly costing more than a billion dollars. However, some of that automation didn’t work as expected, and Tesla moved some final assembly work to a stage outside its factory. Tesla learned many expensive lessons in the process. Musk later said he called the Model 3 launch experience “production hell” and said it nearly brought Tesla to the brink of bankruptcy. As newer EV startups ramp up production, more investors are learning that taking a car from design to production is capital intensive. And in the current environment, where deflated stock prices and rising interest rates have made it harder to raise money than it was just a year or two ago, EV startups’ cash is drawing particular attention from Wall Street. Here are some of the most prominent US electric vehicle startups of recent years, in terms of cash:

Rivian

Production of Rivian R1T electric trucks on April 11, 2022 at the company’s plant in Normal, Ill. Michael Weiland / CNBC Rivian is by far the best-placed of the new EV startups, with more than $15 billion on hand as of late June. That will be enough to fund the company’s operations and expansion through the planned launch of its smaller ‘R2’ vehicle platform in 2025, CFO Claire McDonough said during the company’s Aug. 11 earnings call. Rivian has struggled to ramp up production of its R1 series pickups and SUVs amid supply chain hiccups and early manufacturing challenges. The company burned through about $1.5 billion in the second quarter, but also said it plans to cut short-term capital spending to about $2 billion this year from $2.5 billion in its previous plan to ensure it can hit the most its long-term goals. At least one analyst thinks Rivian will need to raise cash well before 2025: In a note after Rivian’s earnings report, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said his bank’s model assumes Rivian will raise $3 billion $3 billion through a secondary stock offering before the end of next year and another $3 billion through additional raises in 2024 and 2025. Jonas currently has an “overweight” rating on Rivian stock, with a price target of $60. Rivian ended trading Friday at about $32 a share.

Clear

People test drive the Dream Edition P and Dream Edition R electric vehicles at the Lucid Motors factory in Casa Grande, Arizona, September 28, 2021. Caitlin O’Hara | Reuters Luxury electric vehicle maker Lucid Group doesn’t have as much cash in reserve as Rivian, but it’s not in a bad position. It ended the second quarter with $4.6 billion in cash, up from $5.4 billion at the end of March. That’s enough to last “well into 2023,” CFO Sherry House said earlier this month. Like Rivian, Lucid has struggled to ramp up production since launching the Air luxury sedan last fall. It plans major capital expenditures to expand its Arizona plant and build a second plant in Saudi Arabia. But unlike Rivian, Lucid has a deep-pocketed backer — Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, which owns about 61 percent of the California-based electric vehicle maker and is almost certain to step in to help if the company has no cash. For the most part, Wall Street analysts weren’t worried about Lucid’s second-quarter cash burn. Bank of America’s John Murphy wrote that Lucid still has “run to 2023, especially given the company’s recently secured revolver [$1 billion credit line] and phased funding from various agencies in Saudi Arabia earlier this year.” Murphy has a “buy” rating on Lucid stock and a $30 price target. He compared the startup’s potential future profitability to that of Ferrari, which makes luxury sports cars. Lucid currently trades for around $16 per share.

Fisher

People gather and take pictures after the unveiling of the Fisker Ocean all-electric SUV at the Manhattan Beach Pier on November 16, 2021 in Manhattan Beach, California. Mario Tama | Getty Images Unlike Rivian and Lucid, Fisker has no plans to build its own factory to build its electric vehicles. Instead, the company founded by former Aston Martin designer Henrik Fisker will use contract manufacturers – global automotive supplier Magna International and Taiwan’s Foxconn – to build its cars. This represents something of a cash exchange: Fisker won’t have to spend as much to put the upcoming Ocean SUV into production, but it will almost certainly give up some profit to pay manufacturers later. Production of the Ocean is scheduled to begin in November at an Austrian plant owned by Magna. Fisker will have significant expenses in the interim—money for prototypes and final engineering, as well as payments to Magna—but with $852 million on hand at the end of June, it will have no problem covering those costs. RBC analyst Joseph Spack said after Fisker’s second-quarter report that the company will likely need more cash, despite the contract-build model — what he estimated will be about $1.25 billion over the “next few years.” Spak has an “outperform” rating on Fisker stock and a $13 price target. The stock closed Friday at $9 a share.

Nikola

Nikola Motor Company Source: Nikola Motor Company Nikola was one of the first electric vehicle manufacturers to go public through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. The company has begun shipping the Tre battery-electric pickup truck in small numbers and plans to ramp up production and add a long-range hydrogen fuel cell version of the Tre in 2023. But as of now, he probably doesn’t have the cash to get there. The company has had a harder time raising capital after allegations from a short-seller, a slump in its stock price and the ouster of its outspoken founder Trevor Milton, who now faces federal fraud charges over statements made to investors. Nikola had $529 million available at the end of June, plus another $312 million available through an equity line from Tumim Stone Capital. That’s enough, CFO Kim Brady said during Nikola’s second-quarter earnings call, to fund operations for another 12 months — but more money will be needed soon. “Given our goal of maintaining 12 months of liquidity at the end of each quarter, we will continue to seek appropriate opportunities to replenish our liquidity on an ongoing basis in an effort to minimize dilution to our shareholders,” Brady said. “We are looking carefully at how we can spend less without jeopardizing our critical programs and reducing cash requirements for 2023.” Deutsche Bank analyst Emmanuel Rosner estimates Nikola will need to raise between $550 million and $650 million before the end of the year, and more later. He has a “hold” rating on Nikola with a price target of $8. The stock is trading at $6 as of Friday’s close.

Lordstown

Lordstown Motors drove prototypes of its upcoming Endurance electric truck on June 21, 2021 as part of its “Lordstown Week” event. Michael Weiland / CNBC Lordstown Motors is in perhaps the most precarious position of the lot, with just $236 million on hand as of late June. Like Nicola, Lordstown saw its share price collapse after its founder was forced out following allegations of fraud by a short-seller. The company shifted from a factory model to a contract manufacturing arrangement like Fisker’s, and finalized a deal in May to sell its Ohio plant, a former General Motors plant, to Foxconn for a total of about $258 million. Foxconn plans to use the plant to build electric vehicles for other companies, including Lordstown’s Endurance pickup and an upcoming Fisker small electric car called the Pear. Despite the significant challenges facing Lordstown, Deutsche Bank’s Rosner still has a “hold” rating on the stock. But he is not optimistic. He believes the company will need to raise $50 million to $75 million to fund operations by the end of this year, despite its decision to limit the first production run of the Endurance to just 500 units. “Most importantly, in order to complete the production of this first batch, management…