Anthropic has filed for an initial public offering (IPO) ahead of rival OpenAI, and financial analysts say the move gives the AI startup a significant advantage in the race to become a trillion-dollar company. Anthropic, valued at $965 billion, filed its IPO paperwork with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in early June, catching OpenAI off guard. OpenAI, valued at $852 billion, announced its own public offering plans just a week later. Both companies could cross the trillion-dollar threshold if their IPOs succeed, joining an exclusive club that currently includes only Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Tesla.

Why Is Anthropic Considered the Stronger IPO Candidate?

Financial analysts give Anthropic the edge on the stock market, primarily because of its superior revenue trajectory and enterprise customer base. Anthropic is forecast to generate $47 billion in revenue this year, well ahead of OpenAI's projected $30 billion, despite having raised less total capital since its founding. According to Harrison Rolfes, an analyst at PitchBook, a U.S.-based data and research firm, Anthropic has achieved this efficiency with $127 billion in total funding compared to OpenAI's $186 billion.

The difference comes down to where each company makes its money. Anthropic has built a dominant position in the enterprise market, where large corporations pay substantial fees for AI services. Over 1,000 enterprise customers are each spending more than $1 million annually on Anthropic's Claude AI system. This creates predictable, high-margin revenue streams that investors find attractive.

"Anthropic is the better IPO story right now, and the numbers make the case," said Harrison Rolfes, an analyst at PitchBook.

Harrison Rolfes, Analyst at PitchBook

How Do the Two Companies' Business Models Differ?

OpenAI dominates the consumer market through ChatGPT, which boasts over 900 million weekly users. However, this massive user base presents a fundamental challenge: most of them use the service for free. Converting a free user base into paying customers at scale is significantly more difficult than selling directly to corporations that already understand the value of AI tools and have budgets allocated for them.

This difference in business models shapes how each company approaches growth and profitability. Enterprise customers provide steady, predictable revenue, while consumer users offer reach but require different monetization strategies. For investors evaluating an IPO, the enterprise model is generally considered lower-risk and more attractive.

What Are the Key Differences Between Anthropic and OpenAI?

• Revenue Forecast: Anthropic is projected to generate $47 billion in annual revenue, compared to OpenAI's $30 billion projection for the same period.
• Enterprise Customers: Anthropic has over 1,000 enterprise customers spending more than $1 million annually each, while OpenAI relies heavily on consumer users through ChatGPT.
• Capital Efficiency: Anthropic has raised $127 billion since founding, while OpenAI has raised $186 billion, yet Anthropic is generating higher projected revenue.
• User Base: OpenAI's ChatGPT has 900 million weekly users, but most use the free version, creating monetization challenges.
• Computing Resources: OpenAI partners with Microsoft, while Anthropic draws on Amazon and has recently tapped Elon Musk's Colossus data center.

What Is the Broader Context for AI Company Valuations?

The timing of both IPOs coincides with explosive growth in AI spending globally. Research firm Gartner estimates that global AI spending will exceed $2.5 trillion this year alone, with the largest share going toward infrastructure, chiefly the construction and leasing of large data centers that provide the computing power AI systems require. This massive market opportunity is driving investor interest in AI companies and supporting the high valuations both Anthropic and OpenAI command.

Until now, both companies have funded themselves through private investment rounds, attracting capital from corporations and venture funds betting on their future success. An IPO would give them access to public markets and potentially accelerate their growth, though it would also subject them to greater regulatory scrutiny and shareholder pressure.

What Do Experts Say About the Real Competition Ahead?

Beyond the IPO race, both companies are pursuing the same ultimate goal: Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), a system capable of performing any intellectual task as well as or better than a human can. Both CEOs believe AGI is within reach, and whoever achieves it first could gain an enormous competitive advantage. However, experts caution that reaching AGI first does not automatically guarantee market dominance.

"Getting there 'first' doesn't win the battle. Turning AI into lasting profit requires broad adoption, the trust of enterprise customers, and solid margins. The real battleground isn't ChatGPT versus Claude, it's which AI engine gets embedded inside the world's largest companies," said Harrison Rolfes.

Harrison Rolfes, Analyst at PitchBook

Pedro Domingos, an emeritus professor of computer science at the University of Washington, noted that Anthropic has stronger demand but less computing capacity than OpenAI. He observed that the rivalry between the two companies is deeply personal, rooted in a 2021 disagreement when Dario Amodei, now Anthropic's CEO, left OpenAI over concerns about the company's focus on profit over responsibility. Since founding Anthropic, Amodei has positioned himself as a cautious voice in the AI industry, pushing for strong regulation and refusing to allow Claude to be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons systems.

OpenAI, by contrast, has moved to fill the gap left by Anthropic's military restrictions. OpenAI software is now set to be deployed by the Pentagon, and the company is increasingly cast as the industry's "bad guy" in public perception. This represents a striking reversal from OpenAI's founding in 2015 as a non-profit dedicated to responsible AI development.

The IPO race between these two AI giants reflects broader questions about how artificial intelligence will be developed, deployed, and governed in the coming years. As both companies prepare to go public, investors and regulators will be watching closely to see which business model proves more sustainable and which company better balances growth with responsibility in an industry still finding its footing.