Original text: Wu Says Blockchain

TL;DR:

The three major tech giants are going public, potentially sparking one of the largest technology IPO waves in recent years: SpaceX's target IPO valuation, along with the latest financing valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, now exceeds $35 trillion. This not only tests the capital market's pricing ability for innovative technology but also triggers extensive discussions on the impact of liquidity in the market.

SpaceX's valuation logic is shifting from space business to global infrastructure: The market's focus has gradually changed from rocket launches to the global communication network built by Starlink, emphasizing its long-term growth potential and infrastructure attributes.

OpenAI and Anthropic may provide the capital market with the first large investment targets in foundational models: The two companies represent the core productivity of generative AI, and their IPOs may drive a repricing of the AI sector, creating competition for some concept-driven AI targets.

The "capital siphon effect" of super IPOs may be overestimated by the market: Historical experience shows that large IPOs often represent a reallocation of capital rather than liquidity disappearing, which itself rarely becomes a direct cause of systemic risk.

The crypto market is facing a phase of capital competition, but is still primarily driven by its own cycle: Some AI concept tokens may bear the strain of capital diversion, but the long-term trend of the crypto market still depends more on macro liquidity, regulatory environment, and Bitcoin cycles.

What truly deserves attention is whether high valuations can materialize: If future revenue growth, commercialization progress, or profitability improvement falls short of market expectations, related companies and the tech growth sector may face valuation repricing pressure.

The capital market in 2026 is set to witness one of the most anticipated technology IPO waves in recent years.

Discussions surrounding the listing processes of super unicorns SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic are heating up on Wall Street, in Silicon Valley, and in the crypto market. Based on SpaceX's target IPO valuation and the latest financing valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, the combined valuation of the three companies now exceeds $35 trillion. If the respective listing plans progress as market expectations suggest, this will represent one of the largest waves of technology company listings in recent years. Among them, SpaceX's target valuation is about $1.75 trillion, OpenAI's valuation is approximately $852 billion, and Anthropic's valuation is around $965 billion. It is worth noting that Anthropic's current financing valuation has surpassed that of OpenAI, but this mainly reflects different financing rounds and market pricing expectations, and does not mean its commercial scale has exceeded that of OpenAI. Regardless of how the final issuance price is adjusted, this will become one of the largest and most impactful technology company listing waves in recent years.

Such a massive scale naturally raises market concerns about liquidity. Some investors believe that the listings of the three companies could siphon away substantial funds, putting pressure on other growth stocks and even impacting the crypto market. Others are worried that the ongoing popularity of AI and space concepts is forming a new asset bubble, and if their performance post-listing does not meet expectations, it could trigger a valuation repricing across the tech sector and even the risk asset market.

However, at the same time, there are views suggesting that the market's concerns about the "capital siphon effect" are significantly amplified. The total market capitalization of the U.S. stock market has reached several tens of trillions of dollars, and super IPOs are more about reallocating capital than about funds disappearing entirely. Historically, whether it was Alibaba or Saudi Aramco, similar discussions have arisen, but they ultimately did not trigger market crashes. So, what is different this time? What do the listings of these three companies truly signify? Do they really have the ability to cause a crash in the stock and crypto markets?

SpaceX: The Market Is No Longer Buying Rockets, But Global Infrastructure

If one must choose the most legendary company among the three, SpaceX is undoubtedly the strongest candidate. Since its founding in 2002, Elon Musk has spent over twenty years transforming a startup into the core force of the global commercial space industry. For a long time, external perceptions of SpaceX have primarily remained in the realm of rocket launches and space exploration, but now the capital market's valuation logic has fundamentally changed.

According to publicly disclosed prospectuses, the company is projected to generate around $18.67 billion in revenue by 2025. Of this, revenue from Starlink-related businesses is projected to be about $11.39 billion, accounting for about 61% of total revenue, already becoming the company's main source of income. Compared to the rocket launch business, Starlink evidently has a larger growth space. By deploying low-orbit satellite networks, Starlink is building a global data communication infrastructure, and its business model is closer to that of an internet platform rather than a traditional aerospace company. For investors, the core value of SpaceX is no longer rockets, but a network platform that can cover global users.

This is also one of the important reasons why some investors are willing to support its target IPO valuation of about $1.75 trillion. From a valuation logic perspective, some investors view SpaceX's current valuation logic as resembling that of "the aerospace version of Amazon" or "the space version of AWS," with market attention gradually shifting from rocket launch businesses to the global communication infrastructure network represented by Starlink. Theoretically, as network deployment matures, the marginal cost associated with new users is expected to decrease, while user growth may bring about long-term and stable cash flow. Meanwhile, government contracts, commercial launches, and the future commercialization of Starship also provide the company with additional growth space.

Of course, such a high valuation is not without controversy. According to public data, the company is still projected to record a net loss of about $4.9 billion by 2025. For traditional investors, it seems difficult to understand how a company that has not yet achieved stable profitability could command a valuation in the trillion-dollar range. But Wall Street clearly pays more attention to long-term growth capabilities. Whether it's Starlink's expansion or Starship's research and development, these are typical projects that require heavy upfront investment. The market is willing to tolerate current profit pressure, provided that it believes these investments can translate into a larger market share in the future.

More importantly, SpaceX's IPO is not only a corporate financing event but also regarded as an important milestone for the commercial aerospace industry. The aerospace industry has long been considered capital-intensive, with long cycles and limited exit channels. If SpaceX successfully completes its IPO, it will significantly enhance the financing capabilities and valuation levels of the entire industry chain, benefiting satellite manufacturers, ground communication equipment providers, and aerospace materials suppliers.

However, precisely because of SpaceX's immense size, its IPO becomes a significant source of market concern regarding liquidity pressures. According to the currently circulating issuance scheme in the market, SpaceX could potentially become one of the largest IPOs in history. For large institutional investors, this means they must adjust their holdings in advance to free up space for new stock subscriptions. Some tech growth stocks, highly valued AI concept stocks, and even some risk assets may become sources of capital. Thus, SpaceX has been referred to by many analysts as a "super capital magnet" in this IPO wave.

OpenAI and Anthropic: Two Tickets for the AI Era

If SpaceX represents future infrastructure, then OpenAI and Anthropic symbolize future productivity.

In the past three years, generative AI has rapidly transformed from a laboratory technology to one of the most significant investment themes in the global capital market. Since the release of ChatGPT, artificial intelligence has almost reshaped the development logic of the entire tech industry. Whether it is Microsoft, Google, or Amazon, all are engaged in a new round of competition centered around AI. At the center of this wave are OpenAI and Anthropic.

OpenAI is widely seen as one of the most significant beneficiaries of the current wave of generative AI. With ChatGPT, the company has remarkably transitioned from a research organization to a commercial platform in a very short time. API services, enterprise solutions, and ecosystem partnerships are driving its rapid revenue growth. Although the company is still in a high-investment phase, investors generally believe that OpenAI has the potential to become the next-generation software platform. After completing a new round of financing in March 2026, the company reached a valuation of approximately $852 billion and has confidentially submitted IPO documents. The market widely speculates that if the future IPO progresses smoothly, its valuation could approach the trillion-dollar range, though no official valuation guidance has been disclosed yet.

In contrast to OpenAI, Anthropic's development path is relatively low-key, but its growth rate has also drawn market attention. Established much later than OpenAI, the company rapidly gained recognition from corporate clients with its Claude series models and ongoing investments in AI safety and reliability. According to the latest financing disclosure, Anthropic's valuation reached approximately $965 billion, higher than OpenAI's current financing valuation of about $852 billion. At the same time, the company has also confidentially submitted IPO documents. For many institutional investors, Anthropic represents an alternative AI development path—one that emphasizes enterprise scenarios, risk control, and long-term governance structure.

From a capital market perspective, the IPOs of OpenAI and Anthropic are significant beyond the companies themselves. In recent years, AI concepts have dominated the global tech stock valuation system, but there are very few pure AI leaders available for direct investment. Nvidia is more of a provider of computing power, while Microsoft and Google belong to integrated tech platforms. OpenAI and Anthropic are among the few that can directly represent the value of the large model industry.

This means that once the two companies go public, global capital will have the opportunity to directly invest in large foundational model companies for the first time. For many institutions, this attraction may even surpass some traditional tech giants. Because of this, many investors are beginning to worry: when capital concentrates on AI leaders, will other tech assets and even the crypto market face obvious diversion?

Why Is the Market Worried That the Three IPOs Will "Draw Out" Market Liquidity?

In fact, whenever super IPOs appear in the market, similar concerns always resurface.

The logic behind it is not complicated. An IPO essentially delivers new stock supply from the primary market to the secondary market, and the capital used by institutional investors to participate in the subscription does not generate out of thin air. For large pension funds, mutual funds, sovereign funds, and hedge funds, participating in new stock issuances often means needing to free up funds from their existing portfolios. Therefore, when multiple oversized IPOs occur in the market simultaneously, the phenomenon of funds flowing from other assets to new stocks is almost unavoidable.

From this perspective, SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic do indeed have the conditions to create a "siphon effect." According to current market expectations, the combined valuation of these three companies exceeds $35 trillion; even if the actual circulate share proportion is far lower than this number, it is still enough to become one of the most important directions for capital allocation in the global capital market. For many institutions optimistic about AI and technological innovation in the long term, participating in these companies' IPOs is not only an investment opportunity but also a strategic allocation.

The market is not so much worried about the IPO itself, but rather about where funds might flow out to. If institutional investors choose to reduce their holdings in existing tech stocks to participate in subscriptions, then some growth sectors could face pressure in the short term. If the sources of funds further expand to high-risk assets, then some crypto assets could also be affected. Thus, every time a large IPO approaches, market discussions about "liquidity being drawn out" arise.

However, the issue is that theoretical capital diversion does not equate to a market crash.

The total market capitalization of U.S. listed stocks is nearing $80 trillion, with daily trading volumes also reaching quite substantial levels. Even if all three companies ultimately complete their IPOs, the actual proportion of shares entering the market for circulation remains limited. Historical experience shows that what can truly determine market direction is never just the increase in stock supply, but the overall liquidity environment. When the market is in a loosening cycle, even if super-large IPOs happen, the new supply can often be rapidly absorbed; when the market is in a tightening cycle, even without an IPO, the market may also see a correction due to economic slowdown or rising interest rates.

In other words, super IPOs are more like amplifiers than root causes. If the market itself is in a fragile state, then large IPOs may exacerbate volatility; but if market liquidity is abundant and risk appetite is high, IPOs are often merely part of the capital rotation.

What Do Historical Experiences Tell Us?

Looking back over the past twenty years of capital markets, large IPOs have drawn attention, but cases that have truly led to systemic risks are extremely rare.

In 2014, Alibaba's IPO on the New York Stock Exchange set a record for the largest fundraising at the time. At that time, there were also concerns about the gigantic financing impacting U.S. stocks. However, it proved that Alibaba's listing attracted global capital's attention to the Chinese internet industry, without changing the overall trend of the U.S. stock market. In the following years, the U.S. stock market continued to exhibit a bullish pattern.

In 2019, Saudi Aramco completed nearly $30 billion in fundraising, once again breaking the global IPO record. Given the prevailing slowdown in global economic growth and rising geopolitical risks at that time, many analysts believed such a massive financing requirement might impact market liquidity. However, the final outcome also proved that the market's capacity to absorb super IPOs far exceeded expectations.

Even the recent IPO of Arm, which has drawn significant attention, did not have a decisive impact on the overall trajectory of tech stocks. Short-term volatility does exist but is more reflective of internal capital reallocation within the industry rather than a disappearance of overall market liquidity.

The fundamental reason for this phenomenon is that capital markets are not fixed-capacity water pools. The listing of high-quality assets often attracts new funds into the market, rather than merely withdrawing funds from old assets. Especially for global institutional investors, when truly rare investment targets appear, they often come with new allocation demands rather than simple internal adjustments.

Therefore, historically speaking, while the market volatility brought about by SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic is not surprising, equating it directly to a market crash lacks sufficient justification.

Impact on the Stock Market: Short-term Volatility Is Inevitable, Long-term More Like a Valuation Restructuring

If one must identify which market the three IPOs will most directly impact, the answer is undoubtedly the technology stocks.

In recent years, AI has become one of the most dominant investment themes in the global capital market. From Nvidia to cloud computing, from data centers to software services, many companies have received valuation premiums due to AI relevance. However, the companies that can truly represent the value creation of large models have not entered the public market until now. The emergence of OpenAI and Anthropic means investors now have the opportunity to invest directly in core AI assets.

This change is likely to lead to a repricing within the AI sector.

Some companies relying on concept-driven narratives may face contraction in valuation premiums, as investors finally possess purer AI targets. Meanwhile, those companies that can genuinely benefit from the expansion of AI infrastructure, such as computing power providers, data center operators, and enterprise software platforms, may continue to receive financial support.

The impact of SpaceX, on the other hand, is somewhat different. For satellite communications, commercial aerospace, and related infrastructure companies, SpaceX's IPO will serve as a new industry valuation anchor. The market will finally have a publicly traded commercial aerospace leader as a reference point, which could promote a repricing across the entire industry chain.

From a long-term perspective, the IPOs of the three companies are more likely to reinforce the importance of the tech sector rather than weaken it. Over time, once the relevant conditions are met and they are included in major indices, a large number of ETFs and index funds will passively allocate these companies. At that point, the scale of global capital inflow could even exceed the IPO phase itself.

Thus, for the stock market, the real focus should not be on the performance on the day of the IPO, but on whether these companies can meet the growth expectations set by the market over the coming years.

Impact on the Crypto Market: Competition Does Exist, But It Doesn’t Necessarily Mean a Downside

Compared to the stock market, the crypto market is more sensitive to changes in capital flow, and thus related discussions are more intense.

In recent years, AI and Crypto have almost been the two main lines of focus for venture capital. Some venture capital funds and growth capital have simultaneously invested in the AI and Crypto tracks, with significant overlap in their sources of funds. When OpenAI and Anthropic officially enter the public market, it is almost a high probability event that some institutional funds will shift towards AI assets.

For some AI concept tokens, this competition may be particularly pronounced.

When AI companies are not yet listed, many investors choose to express their optimism about the artificial intelligence industry through AI-related tokens. However, once OpenAI or Anthropic become publicly traded assets, investors will naturally consider a question: if they can directly hold the most core companies of the AI industry, is it still necessary to bear the higher volatility and risks of some concept tokens?

From this perspective, some narrative-driven AI tokens, VC concept projects, and crypto assets lacking real income support may indeed face capital diversion pressure.

However, extrapolating this pressure further to suggest a "crypto market crash" also lacks foundation.

Bitcoin and the entire crypto market have gradually formed relatively independent operational logics. ETF capital flows, regulatory environments, global monetary policy, and Bitcoin's own cycles usually have more decisive influences than a single IPO event. Historically, the U.S. stock market and the crypto market have shown both synchronous rises and significant divergences, making it difficult to explain the trends in both markets with a single event.

More importantly, AI and blockchain do not represent a fully competitive relationship. As the scale of AI applications continues to expand, decentralized computing networks, on-chain data markets, and AI Agent infrastructure may instead gain new opportunities for development. In the long run, the prosperity of the AI industry may not diminish Crypto but rather create new integrated scenarios.

What We Really Need to Be Cautious About Is Not the IPOs, But the Valuation Expectations

If there are real risks associated with the three major IPOs, those risks do not come from the IPO itself, but from the market's expectations for future growth.

Whether it is SpaceX, OpenAI, or Anthropic, their current valuations are already based on extremely optimistic future assumptions. The reason investors are willing to assign trillion-dollar valuations is because they believe that these companies will become the most important infrastructure platforms globally in the future. If revenue growth slows, commercialization progress falls short of expectations, or profitability improvement does not meet market expectations, valuation repricing will be inevitable.

This risk will primarily impact the AI sector and high-growth tech stocks rather than the entire market. The higher the market's expectations for the future, the greater the adjustment will tend to be when discrepancies arise between reality and those expectations.

From this perspective, what the market truly needs to focus on is not the IPO itself, but the performance realization capability after the IPO.

Conclusion

The IPOs of SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic resemble a concentrated pricing by the global capital market on the next-generation technological infrastructure and AI platforms, rather than a precursor to a market crash. In the short term, capital diversion, sector rotation, and valuation repricing are nearly unavoidable, and some AI concept stocks and crypto assets may also face competitive pressures. However, based on historical experience, super IPOs rarely become direct causes of systemic risk, let alone determine the long-term directions of the stock or crypto markets.

What truly determines market trends are still the macro liquidity environment, corporate profitability, and investor risk preferences. For investors, rather than worrying about whether the three major IPOs will bring down the market, it is wiser to focus on whether the growth logic behind these trillion-dollar valuations can ultimately be realized. After all, capital markets have never feared big dreams; what truly hurts the market is often unmet expectations.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。