Will OpenAI or Anthropic IPO first?

**Stage 1 — Blind analysis (ignore market price):**

OpenAI and Anthropic are both deep‑tech, capital‑intensive AI companies with significant strategic cloud and enterprise partnerships. Over a multi‑decade horizon to 2040, there is ample time for either firm to go public, be acquired, or remain private — but the gap in commercial traction and investor incentives that existed through mid‑2024 suggests OpenAI is more likely to pursue an IPO earlier.

Key factors pushing toward OpenAI first: larger, more diversified and earlier revenue streams (consumer and enterprise products, APIs, high‑value partner licensing), stronger public profile and brand, and a significant liquidity event incentive for early equity holders and employees. Large strategic investors (notably major cloud partners) also create both pressure and pathways for public listing or partial liquidity events that favor an earlier OpenAI listing. OpenAI's technical lead and broad market adoption increase both the feasibility and attractiveness of an IPO route.

Countervailing forces that reduce certainty: OpenAI's unusual governance (a capped‑return LP controlled by a nonprofit) and strategic partnerships can complicate a traditional IPO. Founders and board may prefer private governance for safety/mission reasons, or they may negotiate non‑standard exit structures (direct listings, strategic sales, or continued private funding with large strategic partners). Regulatory scrutiny of AI, national security considerations, and potential export controls or data‑localization pressures could delay or alter IPO timing. Anthropic's investors and partners could also prioritize a public offering if that becomes the fastest route to liquidity and capital — particularly if Anthropic's product roadmap accelerates or if OpenAI chooses to stay private longer for governance reasons.

Balancing these, I estimate the independent probability that OpenAI will IPO before Anthropic by 2040 at 70%. This reflects OpenAI's advantage on size, monetization, and public visibility, tempered by structural/governance constraints and plausible regulatory obstacles.

**Stage 2 — Market calibration (take current market prices into account):**

The market currently prices "Yes" at 83%. My 70% independent probability is meaningfully lower than that price. Possible explanations for the market tilt toward a stronger "Yes":

- Traders may overweight brand recognition and extrapolate near‑term monetization into a near‑term IPO, ignoring governance friction and the possibility of prolonged private status. Big‑name bias and liquidity‑seeking narratives push prices up for the better‑known firm (OpenAI). - There may be information asymmetry: insiders or informed traders could have private signals that increase probability above my estimate (e.g., drafting an S‑1, board discussions or investor desire for liquidity). If such signals exist, the market price is rational; absent them the market likely overprices OpenAI's advantage. - Market participants may underweight Anthropic's potential to IPO early (e.g., if Anthropic partners prefer a public route) or overestimate regulatory or governance obstacles for Anthropic relative to OpenAI.

Conclusion of calibration: The market at 83% seems somewhat optimistic for a guaranteed OpenAI‑first outcome across the long 2040 horizon. I view the market as modestly overconfident (my point estimate 70%), but not wildly so — there are plausible private signals or behavioural drivers that could justify the premium. If you want a market‑relative view: trade position sizing accordingly (I consider ~10–15 percentage points of overpricing plausible).