Research all public reporting on Anthropic's IPO preparations as of October 2026, including banks and law firms hired, expected…

The process is well documented; next I’ll pin down counsel, the exchange, analyst multiples, and whether a public S-1 is out as of today.
Anthropic is in confidential registration, not a priced IPO. As of October 3, 2026, the live plan is a Nasdaq debut with marketing as soon as the week of November 9 and trading before Thanksgiving, aimed at roughly $2 trillion and as much as $100 billion of proceeds. That price is a banker and investor target, not a company-set offer price, and independent research does not treat $2 trillion as earned until margins and the $518 billion compute stack are clearer.

The process is real, late, and still not public

Anthropic, PBC, confidentially submitted a draft Form S-1 on June 1, 2026, four days after closing a $65 billion Series H at a $965 billion post-money valuation. The company said the filing only preserves the option to list after SEC review, and that share count and price were not set. [1] [2] Reuters reviewed that confidential prospectus in late September. It was still not on EDGAR as of September 26, and as of October 3 there is no company announcement of a public S-1. [3] [4] [5]

The calendar has slipped twice. Early September reporting had a public prospectus in late September and marketing from mid-October, with a listing days before the November 3 midterms. By October 1, Bloomberg’s sources had formal marketing as soon as the week of November 9, trading before Thanksgiving on November 26, and a year-end deadline if that window moves again. IFR’s bankers, the same day, said November after the midterms is the working plan. Renaissance Capital’s October 2 week-ahead note uses the same November 9 marketing date and tracks the company as pre-IPO under an internal ticker ANTH.RC, with the public ticker still TBA. [6] [7] [8] [9]

Venue is the firmer fact. Business Insider reported on September 13 that Anthropic had selected Nasdaq; Bloomberg and Reuters carried the same account. A Nasdaq listing would also make the stock eligible for the Nasdaq-100, which is why the venue fight mattered after Nasdaq won SpaceX. [10] [11] [12]

Banks are inside the deal but the tombstone is not final. The Financial Times reported September 4 that Morgan Stanley was in pole position for “lead left” and Goldman Sachs was expected to be stabilization agent, with the lead-left choice not yet locked. JPMorgan, Citigroup, and Barclays were expected in leading roles after providing debt. Reuters named the same four—Morgan Stanley, Goldman, JPMorgan, and Citi—as working on the IPO. In parallel, Anthropic has been finalizing a $15 billion revolving credit facility, up from a prior aim around $10 billion, with Morgan Stanley leading the syndicate and the IPO banks committing at the top tier so credit roles convert into underwriting roles. [13] [6] [14]

Counsel is thinner in the public record. Anthropic retained Wilson Sonsini for IPO preparation, first reported by the Financial Times in December 2025; the firm has advised the company since 2022. No 2026 report retrieved here names underwriters’ counsel or confirms a second issuer firm. [15] [16]

The raise is a banker number, not a filed amount. The New York Times reported August 21 that bankers told potential investors Anthropic could seek more than $100 billion at a $2 trillion valuation. IFR, citing a leaked draft prospectus on October 1, said bankers leading the deal were targeting $100 billion of proceeds at $2 trillion. Anthropic has not set either figure. For scale, SpaceX listed in June at $1.77 trillion and raised $85.7 billion, per the Times; the FT put that deal at $1.78 trillion and $86 billion. [17] [8] [13]

What that means for anyone trying to get allocated: the book is being built around a credit syndicate and a still-unfinalized lead-left bank, and the public document that would let buyside set its own price is not out. Missing the pre-midterm window did not kill the 2026 listing; it moved the marketing into a compressed post-election, pre-Thanksgiving slot.

The leaked prospectus is a growth story strapped to a utility bill

The numbers Reuters extracted from the confidential filing are why the multiple debate is not abstract. Revenue rose about twelvefold in 2025 to nearly $4.6 billion, from roughly $386 million. Operating loss widened to $8.06 billion from $2.98 billion. Compute and infrastructure spending was $7.33 billion. Net loss was about $42 billion, of which roughly $34 billion was an accounting charge on financing that could convert into shares, not cash spent running the business. Cash, equivalents, and short-term investments were $20.28 billion at December 31, 2025. [3] [18]

2026 is a different company than 2025. First-quarter revenue of $4.73 billion already exceeded all of 2025. Preliminary second-quarter revenue topped $11.5 billion; the Times separately cited $11.6 billion for the quarter. By late July the annualized run rate was more than $65 billion, versus about $9 billion at the end of 2025 and the $47 billion run rate Anthropic disclosed with the May round. The Financial Times has also reported that the company told a small group of investors it expects a second consecutive quarter of positive adjusted operating income, with gross margins above 80% before partner revenue-share and training costs. [18] [19] [17] [20]

The binding number is $518 billion of cloud, compute, and infrastructure obligations over roughly the next decade, about 80% non-cancelable or payable even if usage falls short. Reported slices include at least $111.1 billion to Google, $110 billion to Amazon, $31.4 billion to Microsoft, and about $161.2 billion of Broadcom-related equipment leases. PitchBook’s reading of the same leak: many large customers can cut spend at any time, so revenue is flexible and a large share of cost is not. Two customers supplied nearly a quarter of 2025 revenue. [21] [22] [23] [18]

Governance will also be in the public filing. Reuters’ review describes a Founder LLC through which Anthropic’s seven co-founders would hold 50.1% of voting power via Class F shares, including on board elections. [5]

The mechanism that makes $2 trillion arguable is the run-rate jump, not the audited year. A buyer paying 435 times 2025 sales is really underwriting that July’s pace holds, that 2028 revenue of roughly $190–200 billion—which Reuters reported in August from people familiar with the company’s financials—shows up, and that the non-cancelable compute bill is filled by customers who are not locked in. [24]

Each valuation camp is using a different clock

There is no single sell-side price target, because the banks inside the deal are restricted and the public S-1 is not out. What exists is a stack of reported targets, each tied to a different revenue year.

Banker and venture target, about $2 trillion, sometimes above. The Times and IFR both describe a $2 trillion valuation with up to or about $100 billion raised. Half a dozen Anthropic investors told the FT they expected $2 trillion or more, largely off the May $47 billion run rate and a year-end 2026 pace of $100–120 billion. One of those investors said that if growth stayed near 800%, the company could command at least 30 times revenue and be worth about $3 trillion. Bloomberg’s October 1 sources put the “fair” ballpark that prospective investors are using at $1.8–2.0 trillion, and said the company expects to match or beat SpaceX’s deal size. [17] [8] [25] [26]

The multiple only looks ordinary if the denominator is forward revenue. On the July run rate above $65 billion, $2 trillion is just under 31 times sales (PitchBook’s calculation). On a year-end pace above $110 billion, which the Motley Fool attributes to updated company expectations, it is about 18 times. Morningstar’s Michael Field, speaking to Reuters, said a $2 trillion price “sounds outlandish” until it is restated as roughly 18–20 times sales, which he called more reasonable than SpaceX. That framing implies a sales base around $100–111 billion, not the $4.6 billion audited year. On the Reuters 2028 forecast of $190–200 billion, $2 trillion is about 10–10.5 times sales—below where SpaceX and Cloudflare were trading at 41.6 times expected 2026 revenue, and well below Palantir at 53 times, on LSEG figures Reuters cited in August. [23] [27] [28] [24]

Public-market institutions, closer to $1.5 trillion. The Information, as summarized on October 1, reported that some banks had discussed about $2 trillion in early talks, while two major institutional investors thought closer to $1.5 trillion was appropriate, citing rates, compute capex, and funding pressure. An earlier August account of The Information had bankers discussing as much as $1.5 trillion, so that figure has functioned as both a banker ceiling and a buyside floor depending on the week. At $1.5 trillion the July run rate is about 23 times sales, and the 2028 forecast is roughly 7.5–8 times. [29] [30]

PitchBook will not underwrite $2 trillion on the leak alone. Harrison Rolfes’s September 30 note, republished by Morningstar, says the filing supports a value well above $1 trillion and does not justify $2 trillion until the public document shows gross margin, the payment schedule on the $518 billion, and a path to free cash flow. The test he sets: $150 billion of annual revenue at a 30% free-cash-flow margin would produce $45 billion of cash, and $2 trillion would be about 44 times that cash flow. That is a mechanism argument, not a point target. [23] [18]

Renaissance Capital has not published an IPO valuation range in the materials retrieved. Its public AI tracker, updated around October 3, lists Anthropic as pre-IPO, AI-centric, ticker TBA, at $965 billion—the last private round, not an estimated offer price. Its October 2 note confirms the November 9 marketing rumor and does not add a multiple. [31] [9]

Secondary markets are a scarcity premium, not a clearing price. Prints disagree by platform and date, which is the point: almost no one wants to sell into a rumored $2 trillion IPO.

• July: Caplight and Rainmaker described trades around $1.2 trillion, above OpenAI on the same screens. [32] [33]
• August 14: Business Insider, citing three secondary traders including Rainmaker’s Glen Anderson, said the few sellers were around $1.5 trillion. [34]
• September 2: the NYSE OpenVC Unicorn Index implied $1.17 trillion, about 21% above the May round. [35]
• October 1: Moonberg attributes a Nasdaq Private Market mark of $1.36 trillion, about $829 a share, 41% above Series H. [36]
• October 3: StockAnalysis, sourcing Clarity, shows a last trade of $1,075.57 and an “implied valuation” of $910 billion against the $965 billion confirmed round. Those two Clarity figures do not reconcile with each other on the Series H share price of $589.01, so the page should be read as a quote screen, not a fundamental mark. [37] [38]

FinanceFeeds’ arithmetic, using Forge’s Series H price of $589.01 and the $965 billion round, implies about 1.64 billion shares and about $1,221 a share at $2 trillion. Anthropic has not published a share count, so that is a reconstruction, not an offer price. [39]

Forecast and prediction markets sit on top of the banker number. A FutureSearch model re-run August 29, cited by Markets.xyz, put the median first-day market cap at $1.82 trillion, with a 10th percentile of $1.06 trillion and a 90th of $2.77 trillion. Moonberg’s October 3 aggregation of Polymarket and Kalshi shows an 83% implied probability of a listing by year-end and, conditional on an IPO, a median debut cap of about $2.1 trillion, with 66% odds of at least $2.0 trillion. Those are betting markets, not research. [40] [36]

FT Lex on September 21 pushed the bull case further as illustration, not a target: if 2028 sales were valued like SpaceX at 16 times that year’s revenue, the future value could be $5 trillion; discounting a 10-times multiple on a much larger out-year revenue base produced $4.5 trillion or, in an extreme share-of-knowledge-work scenario, $10 trillion today. Lex was showing how total-addressable-market inflation works, including a Journal report that Anthropic may tell investors its opportunity exceeds $30 trillion. [41] [42]

Low, base, and high — only ranges that someone has actually published

These are reported cases, not a model built for this note. “Low” is the cautious public-market and downside-forecast cluster. “Base” is the number bankers and the company are being associated with. “High” is what growth investors and tail forecasts require. Multiples in the last column are arithmetic on published revenue figures, marked as calculated where a source did not print the multiple itself.

Case	Valuation	Who, and when	Methodology	Implied multiple
Last private round (anchor, not an IPO case)	$965 billion post-money	Anthropic Series H, May 28, 2026	Priced primary round; $65 billion raised. Run rate had just crossed $47 billion	~20.5× May run rate (SmartAsset calculation) [1] [43]
Low	About $1.5 trillion; forecast downside $1.06 trillion	Two large institutions via The Information, Sept. 30; FutureSearch p10, Aug. 29	Institutions weighting rates, capex, and funding need over growth. FutureSearch is a forecast distribution, not a DCF	~23× July run rate above $65 billion; ~7.5–8× the $190–200 billion 2028 forecast (calculated) [29] [40]
Research “not yet” band	Well above $1 trillion, short of $2 trillion	PitchBook / Morningstar, Sept. 30–Oct. 2	Will not pay 31× July sales until gross margin, commitment schedule, and free cash flow are in the public filing. Illustrative hurdle: $150 billion revenue at 30% FCF margin = $45 billion cash, and $2 trillion is ~44× that cash	$2 trillion = ~435× 2025 sales, ~31× July run rate [23] [18]
Base	$1.8–2.0 trillion, with “more than $2 trillion” still in circulation	Bloomberg investors, Oct. 1; NYT bankers, Aug. 21; Reuters on the prospectus, Sept. 28; IFR, Oct. 1	Forward sales, not trailing. Morningstar’s Field: 18–20× sales looks less extreme than SpaceX. Motley Fool: ~18× if year-end run rate exceeds $110 billion. On 2028 company forecast, ~10×	~31× July run rate; ~18–20× a ~$100–111 billion sales base; ~10–10.5× 2028 revenue [26] [28] [27] [24]
High	About $2.8–3 trillion, with illustration far above that	FutureSearch p90 $2.77 trillion; one FT-quoted investor ~$3 trillion; FT Lex illustrations of $4.5–10 trillion	30× revenue if ~800% growth holds and year-end run rate is $100 billion-plus. Lex applies 10–16× out-year sales, or a share of a $30–60 trillion knowledge-work TAM, then discounts	30× on $100 billion = $3 trillion (investor’s own math). Lex is scenario math, not a price target [25] [40] [41]
Secondary, not a case	$1.17–1.5 trillion recent prints; NPM-attributed $1.36 trillion on Oct. 1	Caplight, Rainmaker, OpenVC, Moonberg/NPM	Scarcity: holders will not sell into a $2 trillion rumor, so the print is an ask, not a fundamental clearing price	Premium of roughly 20–55% to the $965 billion round, depending on the screen [34] [35] [36]

Renaissance Capital does not appear in this table because its public tracker still carries the $965 billion private mark and does not publish low/base/high IPO values. [31]

A $2 trillion deal would be about 2.1 times the May round. On the July run rate it is a lower multiple than SpaceX’s roughly 94 times sales at its debut, which is the comparison bulls keep making. It is still a bet that revenue compounds into the commitments, not a bet that 2025’s $4.6 billion justifies the price. [27]

OpenAI is choosing a private mark instead of this window

The competitive fact is the sequencing, not the logo. Both companies filed confidentially in June. Anthropic is trying to list in 2026. OpenAI has pushed a debut to 2027. [8] [20]

OpenAI’s last priced round was $122 billion committed in March 2026 at an $852 billion post-money valuation. It is now in early talks to raise at least $30 billion at about $1.4 trillion before the new money, as a bridge in place of an IPO. Bloomberg and The Information both described the talks as early; The Information said no term sheet had been signed. A September 15 Bloomberg report had the company considering about $1.2 trillion. Sam Altman told Bloomberg TV on September 29 he does not want the pressure of being newly public while safety decisions are still in front of the company; CNBC reported OpenAI has ruled out a 2026 IPO. [44] [45] [46]

Revenue is the cleaner comparison. Axios, with the figure separately tied to Reuters in follow-on coverage, put OpenAI’s annualized revenue near $70 billion by DevDay, up more than 70% since the start of the third quarter, with enterprise sales more than doubled since July. Anthropic’s last widely reported run rate is the July figure above $65 billion, with investor and company expectations of $100–120 billion by year-end still unconfirmed in a public filing. [45] [44] [25]

On current run rate, the headline gap is mostly timing of the denominator. OpenAI at $1.4 trillion on about $70 billion is roughly 20 times sales (calculated). Anthropic at $2 trillion on a July pace above $65 billion is about 31 times, and on a $110 billion year-end pace is about 18 times. The companies are asking public or private investors for similar multiples on this year’s pace. Anthropic is asking them to capitalize a higher forward year, and to do it in the public market first, with $518 billion of mostly fixed compute against OpenAI’s choice to raise another private round and wait. [23] [27]

Secondary markets had already flipped the old hierarchy by July, with Anthropic near $1.2 trillion and OpenAI near $908 billion on Caplight. StockAnalysis’s October 3 Clarity screen still shows OpenAI’s last confirmed round at $852 billion and an implied mark around $906 billion. If the $1.4 trillion talks price, OpenAI would leapfrog Anthropic’s last primary round and land near the institutional “low” case for Anthropic’s IPO, while Anthropic’s bankers are still socializing twice OpenAI’s March mark. [33] [47] [44]

What has to be true for the base case to clear

The IPO is a pricing event for frontier AI, but the mechanism is narrower than the $2 trillion headline. Public investors are being asked to pay a high-teens to low-30s multiple of a run rate that did not exist a year ago, while underwriting contracts that force Anthropic to pay cloud and chip landlords whether customers stay. PitchBook’s condition is the right one: the public S-1 has to show that gross margin after partner share survives, that the $518 billion has a payment schedule the $15 billion revolver and the IPO proceeds can bridge, and that the largest customers cannot walk without the cost walking with them. [18] [6]

Three disagreements are still unresolved, and they move the table more than another week of timing rumors.

• Which revenue year is the multiple on. Trailing 2025 makes $2 trillion absurd at ~435 times. July’s run rate makes it a growth-stock price at ~31 times. The 2028 forecast makes it look cheaper than software comps at ~10 times. Bankers are selling the third. PitchBook is refusing to underwrite it without the cash conversion of the second.
• Primary versus secondary versus IPO. The only fully priced mark is $965 billion in May. Secondary asks of $1.2–1.5 trillion, and a reported NPM mark of $1.36 trillion, are what scarce stock costs ahead of a rumored pop. They are not evidence that a $100 billion book can be filled at $2 trillion.
• Anthropic versus OpenAI. OpenAI’s delay removes a same-quarter competing mega-deal, which helps Anthropic’s window. It also means the first public print will set the comp. If Anthropic lists at $1.5 trillion, OpenAI’s $1.4 trillion private talks look full. If it lists at $2 trillion on a similar current run rate, OpenAI’s 2027 process inherits a higher comp—and a public template for how investors haircut non-cancelable compute and dual-class founder control.

Nothing in the reporting says the deal is pulled. Renaissance Capital, Bloomberg, and IFR, all in the first days of October, still have a 2026 listing, with the next hard date the week of November 9. The number that will decide whether that listing prices near $1.5 trillion or $2 trillion is not in a prediction market. It is the gross-margin and commitment schedule that the confidential filing has not yet put on EDGAR.

---

Recent Findings Supplement (October 2026)

Anthropic confidentially filed its draft S-1 with the SEC on June 1, 2026, and has since advanced preparations for a Nasdaq IPO targeting a valuation exceeding $2 trillion—more than double its May 2026 private mark—with the latest reports pointing to a mid-November listing window after repeated delays.[1][2]

This positions Anthropic ahead of OpenAI (which has shifted to a potential 2027 timeline) in the race to become one of the first major AI labs publicly traded, testing whether public markets will pay frontier-lab multiples amid massive compute costs and governance risks highlighted in the filing.[3][4]

Recent Timeline Shifts and Marketing Plans

Anthropic has adjusted its IPO schedule multiple times in recent months due to regulatory reviews, market conditions, and a desire to include fuller Q3 financials.

• Confidential S-1 filed June 1, 2026; public prospectus reporting began late September 2026 (Reuters/FT review of the draft).[5]
• Earlier targets (mid-September prospectus, mid-October marketing) slipped; current plans call for investor meetings (e.g., Oct. 14 in San Francisco), formal marketing as early as the week of Nov. 9, and trading potentially before Thanksgiving (Nov. 26), with a year-end 2026 close at latest.[6][7]
• A $15 billion revolving credit facility is being finalized (with Nvidia reportedly in talks for up to $10 billion as an anchor).[8]

Implication for competitors/entrants: The compressed window and pre-IPO credit line underscore the need for strong balance-sheet optics before roadshow; delays signal sensitivity to quarterly momentum and external factors like midterms.

Banks, Exchange, and Raise Details

Lead underwriters are Morgan Stanley (lead-left) and Goldman Sachs (stabilizing agent), supported by JPMorgan and Citigroup (with possible Barclays or smaller firms in the syndicate).[8][9]

• Exchange: Nasdaq (reported).[8]
• Target raise: Up to ~$100 billion in a deal sized for a >$2 trillion valuation.[8]
• No public details on specific law firms in recent reporting.

Implication: Top-tier bulge-bracket involvement signals institutional confidence but also highlights capacity constraints across mega-deals; anchor interest from Nvidia could provide a valuation floor and signaling effect.

Key New Disclosures from the September 2026 Prospectus Reporting

The leaked/reported draft S-1 provides the first detailed public view of trailing and forward metrics (post-April 2026 developments focus here):

• 2025 revenue: ~$4.6 billion (12x or 1,088% growth from $386 million in 2024); ~25% from two customers.[1][10]
• Operating loss: Widened to $8.06 billion (from $2.98 billion); net loss ~$42 billion (mostly ~$34 billion non-cash accounting charge on financing instruments).[1]
• Compute/infrastructure: $7.33 billion spent in 2025; ~$518 billion in future contractual obligations (~80% non-cancelable).[5]
• Forward guidance (per prospectus/investor updates): 2028 revenue $190–200 billion; run-rate reached ~$47 billion by May, ~$65 billion by July, with end-2026 targets of $100–120 billion or >$110 billion.[8][11]
• Risks emphasized: AI models potentially exhibiting blackmail or shutdown resistance; government actions (e.g., export controls, model bans) causing revenue disruption; heavy customer concentration and flexible spending.[5]

Cash position: $20.28 billion as of Dec. 31 (prior year).[1]

Implication: The filing reframes the narrative around explosive growth offsetting losses and capex commitments, but highlights execution risks (compute availability, customer stickiness) that could pressure multiples if margins or retention disappoint.

Valuation Ranges, Methodologies, and Table

Investor and analyst discussions center on revenue multiples applied to run-rate or forward revenue, benchmarked against SpaceX’s June 2026 IPO (~$1.77 trillion valuation) and growth trajectories. No detailed Renaissance Capital or named sell-side reports appeared in recent coverage; perspectives come from PitchBook/Morningstar analysis, investor models (FT), and commentators.[12][13]

Methodology common themes:
- Trailing 2025 revenue yields extreme multiples (~435x at $2T), so focus shifts to annualized run-rate (better captures momentum) or 2028 projections.
- Assumes continued hyper-growth (e.g., from $65B July run-rate toward $100B+ by year-end and $190–200B in 2028), margin expansion via scale/compute efficiencies, and stable/high-value customers.
- Comparables: SpaceX (AI-adjacent growth story); implied 18–31x on near-term run-rate at upper end (seen as aggressive but plausible by bulls given 12x+ YoY history; bears note need for FCF proof and ~$518B commitments).[12][11]

Valuation Table (Low/Base/High cases, synthesized from recent reports):

• Low case (~$1T or below current private): ~15x on $65B+ run-rate or conservative growth assumptions; PitchBook views $2T as not yet justified without stronger gross margins/FCF visibility, supporting well above $1T but short of peak target.[12]
• Base case ($1.5–1.8T): 20–25x on July run-rate or adjusted for risks; aligns with some investor models bridging private $965B and ambitious targets, or 18x on end-2026 projections.[14]
• High case (>$2T or $1.8–2T+): 30x+ on current run-rate or lower on 2028 revenue (~18x on $110B+); driven by revenue acceleration bets and SpaceX outperformance; most investor commentary clusters here.[1][11]

Sources for ranges: Primarily Reuters (target >$2T), Bloomberg/FT investor interviews ($1.8–2T+), PitchBook/Morningstar analysis (run-rate multiples and skepticism on full $2T), and secondary commentary.[12][6]

Latest private valuation: $965 billion post-money (May 2026 Series H, $65B raise).[3]

OpenAI comparison: OpenAI’s March 2026 round at $852 billion (lower revenue run-rate, e.g., ~$24–70B range reported variably); targeting ~$1–1.4T (bridge or IPO expectations); IPO delayed to 2027 amid higher reported losses and safety/governance focus.[15][16] Anthropic’s higher private valuation and faster-reported growth give it an edge in timing and perceived momentum.

Implication: A successful $2T+ print would reset AI valuation benchmarks upward (potentially pressuring or validating OpenAI’s path) but expose the company to quarterly scrutiny on compute ROI and customer concentration; entrants must demonstrate similar run-rate visibility or risk discounting.

Overall, post-June 2026 developments show accelerating preparations and ambitious targets backed by revenue momentum, tempered by explicit risk disclosures and timing flexibility. Public filing and roadshow demand will be the next key tests.