By Maksym Misichenko · Yahoo Finance ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panelists unanimously expressed bearish sentiments regarding Anthropic's IPO, citing potential overvaluation, supply saturation, and risks associated with AI regulation and earnings misses.
Risk: Liquidity cliff due to multiple mega-IPOs and institutional capital pivoting to safer investments.
Opportunity: None identified.
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 →
Concerned about an AI bubble? Sign up for The Daily Upside for smart and actionable market news, built for investors.
Another day, another historic IPO.
With the SpaceX debut just days away, Wall Street’s marquee investment banks are already lining up for the right to underwrite a roughly $1 trillion IPO from Anthropic, expected sooner rather than later after the firm’s confidential registration filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission this week.
Sign up for The Daily Upside at no cost for premium analysis on all your favorite stocks.
READ ALSO: Macy’s Gets Some ‘Spring’ in its Step from CEO’s Turnaround Plan and Private Market Jitters Return as Partners Group Caps Withdrawals
To Fee or Not to Fee
Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase are all shoo-ins for large roles in Anthropic’s IPO. After all, private companies don’t raise more than $100 billion in funding without getting a little cozy with Wall Street’s biggest institutions; one Polymarket contract asking who will lead the IPO gives Morgan Stanley a slight edge among the three heavy favorites as of Tuesday afternoon. It’d be a nice win for the bank, which led all Wall Street banks in equity capital markets revenue last year but has recently lost ground to Goldman Sachs. If Goldman gets the nod, it’d go two-for-two in securing the premier position for this year’s mega-IPOs after recently scoring the top slot among the 23 banks underwriting the SpaceX IPO.
Just being involved in the process is a prize. In March, The Information reported that bankers involved in taking the company public expect it to raise a monstrous $60 billion in its IPO, at a roughly $1 trillion valuation, though that was before Anthropic’s most recent private fundraising round. Everyone’s going to want a piece of that pie, though if the SpaceX IPO is any indication, underwriting a giga-sized IPO might require one small concession:
- According to a Bloomberg report on Tuesday, Elon Musk’s conglomerate is attempting to negotiate its IPO underwriting fees to a mere 0.75%. For reference, a ho-hum $1 billion IPO typically comes with fees of 4% to 7%, though Wall Street will take fees slightly above 1% for mega-IPOs.
- Still, even a smaller-than-usual 0.75% underwriting fee would net underwriters some $500 million, as SpaceX seeks to raise a record-breaking $75 billion from the public market while setting its trajectory toward a $1.8 trillion valuation.
Liquid Death: Of course, banks will get another shot at a jackpot whenever OpenAI gets itself across the IPO finish line. But being slow out of the gate may have consequences for Sam Altman’s firm. “SpaceX is going to consume an absolute ton of capital, and the guy that goes second is going to have a better position than the guy that goes third,” Patrick Healy, founder of IPO advisory firm Issuer Network, recently told The Wall Street Journal. Worse for OpenAI, Google just cut in line. On Monday, the internet giant said it is seeking to sell $80 billion in stock to fund its ongoing AI infrastructure buildout, which is now eating into its substantial free cash flow, and analysts say other hyperscalers could soon follow suit. The clock’s ticking, Sam.
This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive razor sharp analysis and perspective on all things finance, economics, and markets, subscribe to our free The Daily Upside newsletter.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The mega-IPO hype around Anthropic is likely mispriced given uncertain demand, uncertain profitability, and regulatory risk, making a successful near-term $1T listing unlikely."
Anthropic's IPO story reads like hype-driven fever: a $1 trillion headline valuation, three top banks circling underwriting, and mega-fee economics that imply outsized demand. The strongest risk the piece glosses over is pricing realism and actual investor demand. Mega-IPOs have struggled to land cleanly in volatile markets, and Anthropic's revenue path, profitability, and regulatory exposure remain opaque. If AI hype cools or antitrust scrutiny bites, demand for a private AI company-turned-public could evaporate, forcing a sizable discount. And Google's $80B infra push could divert capital from a single listing into a broader AI-capex race, depressing IPO returns.
The strongest counterpoint is that the market has no proven demand for a $1T AI IPO, so pricing could crater or the deal could slip, even with marquee banks; regulatory risk and hype deceleration could render the story untenable.
"The simultaneous rush of capital-intensive firms like Anthropic and SpaceX to public markets signals a peak-liquidity environment that will likely pressure valuations across the AI sector."
The market is conflating 'AI hype' with 'AI profitability.' While a $1 trillion valuation for Anthropic sounds historic, it implies a forward P/S ratio that likely ignores the brutal reality of inference costs and the commoditization of LLMs. If Anthropic goes public at these levels, it mirrors the 2021 SPAC mania where liquidity was mistaken for value. The real story isn't the IPO fees—it's the massive capital absorption. With SpaceX, Anthropic, and Google all tapping equity markets simultaneously, we are approaching a liquidity saturation point. Investors are funding a capex arms race that may never yield the margins required to justify these valuations, creating a dangerous 'crowded trade' scenario in the tech sector.
If Anthropic’s Claude 3.5 or future iterations achieve true agentic autonomy, the current $1 trillion valuation could actually look cheap compared to the total addressable market of global enterprise automation.
"The article assumes Anthropic's $1T private valuation will survive public market scrutiny, but no AI infrastructure company has yet proven unit economics at that scale—and fee compression suggests underwriters themselves are pricing in execution risk."
The article conflates three separate narratives—Anthropic's filing, SpaceX's imminent IPO, and Google's $80B buyback—into a 'gold rush' story that obscures real constraints. The 0.75% fee precedent is genuinely concerning for underwriter economics, but the article treats this as inevitable rather than negotiated-down-from-initial-asks. More critically: Anthropic's $1T valuation rests entirely on private market sentiment; public markets have shown zero appetite for unprofitable AI infrastructure plays at scale (see: Databricks, Scale AI staying private). The 'clock's ticking' framing assumes demand is fixed and first-mover advantage is real—neither proven.
If Anthropic's Claude actually achieves material enterprise adoption (vs. ChatGPT's consumer dominance) and demonstrates a defensible moat, a $1T public valuation becomes rational, not bubble-speak. The article may be premature skepticism of a genuine paradigm shift.
"Sequential trillion-dollar AI IPOs risk flooding the market with supply and amplifying valuation resets if early trading disappoints."
The article frames Anthropic's filing and the SpaceX IPO as straightforward wins for banks like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan, with $60B+ raises at trillion-dollar valuations. Yet it underplays cumulative supply risk: three AI-linked giants tapping public markets within months could overwhelm demand, especially after Google's $80B secondary. Fee compression to 0.75% already signals weaker negotiating power, and AI regulatory scrutiny or earnings misses post-IPO could trigger rapid de-rating. Missing context is how 2021 mega-IPO cohorts performed once growth slowed.
Strong private-market momentum and proven AI revenue traction could let these offerings clear easily at premium multiples without saturating demand.
"A mosaic of AI mega-IPOs could create a liquidity cliff if any one ouflow disappoints, pulling all AI-related listings down together."
I agree the supply spike is underappreciated, but I’d push deeper: a multiple-mega-IPOs wave risks a liquidity cliff if any one misstep hits. The 0.75% fee trend is a symptom—not a cure—underwriters may be forced to price-in far more discounting tail risk than today’s chatter implies. A single earnings miss, stricter AI regulation, or slower adoption could cascade across Anthropic, SpaceX, and the Google flow, depressing all IPOs together.
"Simultaneous mega-IPOs will force deep valuation discounts due to institutional capital crowding out and liquidity saturation."
Gemini’s liquidity saturation argument is the most critical factor here. We are not just looking at a supply spike; we are looking at a potential 'crowding out' effect where institutional capital pivots from high-risk growth to the relative safety of tech incumbents like Google. If Anthropic and SpaceX hit the tape simultaneously, the resulting bid-ask spread will likely force underwriters to slash valuations by 30-40% to clear the books, regardless of Claude’s actual agentic capabilities.
"Sequential filing order matters more than simultaneous supply; first-mover gets the valuation anchor, second-mover inherits the comp discount."
Gemini's 30-40% valuation slash assumes institutional capital is fixed and binary—tech incumbents or growth. That's incomplete. If Anthropic clears at $800B instead of $1T, it doesn't crowd out SpaceX; it resets the comp multiple downward for both, potentially clearing faster. The real risk isn't valuation compression—it's *timing*. If SpaceX files before Anthropic settles, Anthropic becomes the 'second mover' at a lower multiple. That's the cascade nobody's flagged.
"Post-IPO de-ratings from 2021 show timing alone won't prevent simultaneous multiple compression if scrutiny arrives."
Claude's timing cascade between SpaceX and Anthropic filings overlooks how 2021 mega-IPOs like Rivian still de-rated 40-60% post-listing even without overlap. Regulatory probes or earnings misses hitting during the staggered window would compress multiples simultaneously across both names, amplifying the supply saturation Gemini noted. Fee compression to 0.75% already signals underwriters pricing in that sequential execution risk rather than assuming clean sequencing clears the books.
The panelists unanimously expressed bearish sentiments regarding Anthropic's IPO, citing potential overvaluation, supply saturation, and risks associated with AI regulation and earnings misses.
None identified.
Liquidity cliff due to multiple mega-IPOs and institutional capital pivoting to safer investments.