估值差异是转向的核心。文中引述 Pitchbook/Bloomberg 的数据指出 OpenAI 估值 852 亿美元，而 Anthropic 为 380 亿美元，超过两倍差距。Next Round 亦表示 OpenAI 二级市场估值约 765 亿美元，较先前 850 亿美元约折价 10%。反观 Anthropic，市场需求报价已近 600 亿美元，较前一轮估值高逾 50%，而 Hiive 登记 Anthropic 需求超过 16 亿美元，皆在溢价区间。Augment 的 Adam Crawley 将此形容为近年少见的高需求，且认为其在近期具较佳风险报酬特征。
OpenAI 周二宣布完成 1220 亿美元（12.2 0?)? 筹集，创下史上单笔募资新高，并持续被讨论有望今年上市；Anthropic 亦在观察同样方向。投资人正在比较营运前景：OpenAI 被认为未来基建支出更高、且由消费端向高利润企业端转换较慢；相对地，Anthropic 在企业市场占有率更高、毛利品质被视为更具优势。此同时伴随风险：Anthropic 遭美国国防部列入供应链风险争议、并刚发生 Claude 内部原始码意外外泄事件。通路层面，OpenAI 被报导可透过零手续费管道参与，而 Goldman Sachs 对 Anthropic 案件仍收取约 15%–20% 的 carry。
OpenAI has become hard to unload on the secondary market despite its large fundraising activity. Ken Smythe at Next Round Capital said about a half-dozen institutional investors, including hedge funds and venture capital firms, recently tried to sell about $600 million of OpenAI shares, yet found few buyers. He said his firm, which has handled about $2.5 billion of secondary transactions, still could not place most lots. In contrast, he said buyers reportedly had about $2 billion of cash ready for Anthropic. The result is that capital allocation is shifting to Anthropic, even though both companies are closed-access and trades rely on indirect mechanisms rather than an open market.
The valuation gap is central. Pitchbook and Bloomberg figures cited place OpenAI at $852 billion versus Anthropic at $380 billion, a gap of more than double. Next Round also reported current Anthropic bids around $600 billion, over 50% above its prior financing valuation, while Hiive recorded Anthropic demand above $1.6 billion, all at a premium. OpenAI secondary bids were seen around $765 billion, roughly a 10% discount to a prior $850 billion reference. Augment’s Adam Crawley described this as an unusually strong demand environment and said the near-term risk-reward looked better in Anthropic.
OpenAI announced a $122 billion raise on Tuesday, its largest ever to date, and it is still being discussed as a possible IPO this year; Anthropic is watching the same path. Investors are comparing operating economics: OpenAI is seen as planning much higher infrastructure spending and moving more slowly from consumer demand to higher-margin enterprise customers, while Anthropic has stronger enterprise traction and higher-margin positioning. Risks remain, including Anthropic’s dispute over a U.S. Department of Defense supply-chain designation and a recent accidental Claude source-code exposure. Distribution terms also differ, with OpenAI reportedly offering no-fee channels, while Goldman Sachs is reported to charge about 15%–20% carry on Anthropic-related deals.