By Maksym Misichenko · Yahoo Finance ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel overwhelmingly expresses bearish sentiments regarding Anthropic's potential $900B valuation and IPO, citing unverified ARR, competition from OpenAI, potential AI regulation, and risks associated with secondary market premiums collapsing under public scrutiny.
Risk: Mispriced liquidity: primary terms could erode post-IPO upside and mute any multiple re-rate when the company misses targets.
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
A feeding frenzy in the animal kingdom is, at its core, vicious competition.
The idiom “feeding frenzy” gained prominence in the mid-century, first primarily to describe the behavior of sharks frenetically ripping into large schools of fish. It’s chaotic, ruthless, and triggered by the perception of abundance. And I suspect the phrase gained popularity both because it’s evocative, and because there’s more than one kind of shark out there. And right now, quite a few sharks are circling the secondaries market around Anthropic, which is widely expected to go public this year (as is rival OpenAI).
If you’ve missed the ruckus: Anthropic, the maker of Claude and last publicly valued at a now-quaint $380 billion, is raising a new round of funding—the company’s reportedly looking to rake in as much as $50 billion at a valuation in the $900 billion ballpark. And talking to brokers, investors, and founders about it, they all had the same, clear message: This is not normal.
“Anthropic has all this clumped-up, pent-up demand, and it’s like a pressure cooker ready to explode,” said Hari Raghavan, an angel investor and founder who’s currently starting a new fund with longtime private capital markets executive Clara Vydyanath. “If you have pent-up demand and a lack of clean paths you can use to vent the exhaust, what happens is that the whole thing blows up.”
And the demand for Anthropic is explosive, four industry insiders agreed. At the start of this decade, Anthropic didn’t exist, and this year, the company’s ostensibly set to take in $45 billion. This reported (and eye-watering) figure appears to be annualized revenue run rate, which is definitionally dicey—it’s a snapshot-estimate of where revenue will land if recent pace holds. That number isn’t reality, not yet.
But reality isn’t the driving force around the tidal wave of demand for Anthropic shares. It all started in late April, when Anthropic put out a call for investor allocations: The message? You want a block of Anthropic shares, you have 48 hours to submit the size of your offer.
The result: a market so frothy people are willing to wire hundreds of thousands of dollars to a broker, without verifying if the shares they’re buying are even real. Read my full story here.
Have a great long weekend and we’ll see you Tuesday,
Allie GarfinkleX: @agarfinks
Email:[email protected]
Submit a deal for the Term Sheet newsletter here.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Secondary froth at $900B signals overvaluation that will likely correct once Anthropic's actual margins and growth sustainability face public-market scrutiny."
The article portrays secondary demand for Anthropic as an unstoppable pressure cooker ahead of a potential $900B raise and IPO, yet this ignores that the cited $45B annualized revenue run rate remains unverified and far from realized profits. Secondary premiums frequently collapse once public scrutiny arrives, as buyers who wired funds without share verification already signal weak due diligence. Broader risks include OpenAI competition, potential AI regulation tightening capital access, and historical patterns where late-stage private valuations detached from fundamentals led to 40-60% drawdowns post-IPO. The frenzy may simply front-run an exit rather than confirm durable value.
Sustained enterprise adoption of Claude could validate the run rate within 18 months, allowing the IPO to clear at elevated multiples if macro liquidity remains supportive.
"Secondaries demand for Anthropic reflects liquidity-driven FOMO and allocation scarcity, not validated business fundamentals—a classic late-stage bubble tell."
The article conflates demand *for allocation* with demand for *the product*. Anthropic's $45B ARR is annualized run rate—explicitly acknowledged as 'dicey'—and the secondaries frenzy tells us more about FOMO and dry powder in late-stage VC than about sustainable unit economics. The 48-hour allocation window and people wiring hundreds of thousands without verifying share authenticity screams bubble mechanics, not fundamental strength. If Anthropic IPOs at $900B+ valuation, it enters the public market with zero margin of safety; any miss on ARR sustainability or competitive pressure from OpenAI/others triggers a 40-60% drawdown. The real risk: this feeding frenzy is the *peak* of hype, not the beginning.
Anthropic's product (Claude) demonstrably outperforms GPT-4 on many benchmarks, and enterprise adoption is real—the frenzy may reflect genuine scarcity value ahead of an IPO that could be genuinely scarce, not bubble. Secondaries volatility doesn't invalidate the underlying business.
"The secondary market frenzy for Anthropic is driven by speculative mania and a dangerous lack of due diligence, bearing no resemblance to rational valuation metrics."
The reported $900 billion valuation for Anthropic is an absolute hallucination. Even assuming a $45 billion annualized revenue run rate, a 20x price-to-sales multiple—typical for high-growth SaaS—would imply a $900 billion valuation only if the company were already at massive scale, which it isn't. This 'pressure cooker' narrative is a classic symptom of late-stage liquidity desperation where secondary market participants are trading on FOMO rather than fundamentals. When investors wire funds without verifying share authenticity, the market has ceased to be an investment vehicle and has become a pure speculative casino. This is a liquidity trap, not a growth story.
If Anthropic’s LLM architecture achieves true AGI-level agentic capabilities this year, the revenue run rate could scale exponentially, making a trillion-dollar valuation look like a bargain in hindsight.
"The article’s numbers and timing are likely misrepresentative; genuine demand and liquidity in Anthropic’s private rounds are far more constrained and prone to a sharp re-rating once real verifications and terms emerge."
The piece reads like hype built on dubious numbers (e.g., $50B raise at ~$900B valuation) for a private AI firm. Private secondaries rarely reveal true demand or liquidity, and a 45B run-rate year is an extraordinary claim without verifiable financials. The 48-hour allocation window and buyers wiring large deposits before confirming share legitimacy scream marketing/structure risk more than real demand. Missing context includes: current cap table, terms, what portion is secondary vs. primary, and where an IPO would realistically land. Caution: this could be a valuation play to pressure the market, not a sustainable demand signal.
The frenzy could reflect strategic demand from big buyers positioning ahead of an IPO; if real, the round could de-risk public listing and justify high multiples, making the hype plausible rather than merely marketing noise.
"Gemini's math assumes SaaS margins apply, but AI compute costs make that multiple unsustainable at scale."
Gemini's claim that $900B requires 'massive scale' misfires because $45B ARR already qualifies as massive, yet the 20x SaaS multiple ignores AI labs' structurally lower gross margins from GPU spend. This leaves the secondary frenzy exposed to re-rating risk if enterprise churn appears in public filings. No one has flagged how a $50B primary raise would dilute existing secondaries, turning FOMO buyers into bagholders even before any IPO lockup.
"Secondary FOMO prices in a primary round that may never close at these terms, creating a two-stage collapse if anchor investors reprrice downward."
Grok nails the dilution trap—a $50B primary raise at $900B valuation obliterates secondary holders' ownership stakes without offsetting upside unless the IPO re-rates dramatically. But this assumes the primary actually closes at that valuation. If anchor investors balk or demand better terms, the secondary premium collapses retroactively, turning FOMO into realized losses. Nobody's modeled what happens if the raise downsizes to $20-30B or reprices to $600B. That's the real tail risk.
"Secondary buyers are structurally subordinated to primary investors, making their 'FOMO' positions essentially worthless in any scenario except a massive, sustained valuation expansion."
Claude and Grok are fixated on dilution, but they miss the strategic 'poison pill' of these secondary structures. If $50B is raised at a $900B valuation, the liquidation preferences attached to that primary capital will bury any secondary buyer who entered at a premium. These buyers aren't just betting on growth; they are effectively buying junior debt disguised as equity. When the IPO hits, those primary investors get paid first, leaving secondary holders with nothing but volatility.
"Primary terms in a big raise at sky-high valuation risk eroding secondary value and muting post-IPO upside."
Gemini’s $900B hallucination critique is reasonable as sanity check, but it misses the structure-driven risk baked into a huge primary raise. If a $50B primary comes at a $900B cap, liquidation preferences and anti-dilution terms can trap secondary buyers even if ARR growth proves durable. The real risk isn’t hype-driven scarcity—it’s mispriced liquidity: primary terms could erode post-IPO upside and mute any multiple re-rate when the company misses targets.
The panel overwhelmingly expresses bearish sentiments regarding Anthropic's potential $900B valuation and IPO, citing unverified ARR, competition from OpenAI, potential AI regulation, and risks associated with secondary market premiums collapsing under public scrutiny.
Mispriced liquidity: primary terms could erode post-IPO upside and mute any multiple re-rate when the company misses targets.