The trillion-dollar valuation test: Are the three major super IPOs a celebration for tech stocks or a nightmare for the crypto market?

Original: Wu Talks Blockchain

TL;DR:

The concentration of three major tech giants going public may trigger one of the largest tech IPO waves in recent years: SpaceX's target IPO valuation, combined with the latest financing valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, has exceeded $3.5 trillion. This not only tests the capital market's pricing ability for innovative technologies but also sparks widespread discussion about the impact on liquidity.

SpaceX's valuation logic is shifting from aerospace to global infrastructure: The market's focus has gradually shifted 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 first large-scale investment targets for foundational models in the capital market: The two companies represent the core productivity of generative AI, and their public listings could drive a repricing of the AI sector and create competition for some concept-driven AI targets.

The "capital siphoning effect" of super IPOs may be overestimated by the market: Historical experience shows that large IPOs often reflect a reallocation of funds rather than a disappearance of liquidity, and they rarely become direct triggers for systemic risk.

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

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

The capital market in 2026 is about to welcome one of the most closely watched tech IPO waves in recent years.

Discussions in Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the crypto market continue to heat up around the IPO processes of the three super unicorns: SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic. Based on SpaceX's target IPO valuation and the latest financing valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, the combined valuation of the three companies has exceeded $3.5 trillion. If the related IPO plans proceed as the market expects, this will become one of the largest waves of tech company listings in recent years. Among them, SpaceX's target valuation is about $1.75 trillion, OpenAI's valuation is about $852 billion, and Anthropic's valuation is about $965 billion. It is worth noting that Anthropic's current financing valuation is higher than OpenAI's, but this mainly reflects different financing rounds and market pricing expectations, and does not mean its business scale has surpassed OpenAI. Regardless of how the final issue price is adjusted, this will become one of the largest and most impactful tech 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 may siphon off a large amount of capital, putting pressure on other growth stocks and even impacting the crypto market. Others worry that the ongoing heat around AI and aerospace concepts is forming a new asset bubble, which, if the post-listing performance falls short of expectations, could trigger a repricing of the entire tech sector and even the risk asset market.

However, at the same time, some viewpoints argue that the market's concerns about the "capital siphoning effect" are significantly exaggerated. 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 funds rather than disappearing funds. Historically, both Alibaba and Saudi Aramco have sparked similar discussions, but ultimately did not become triggers for market crashes. So, what is different this time? What do the listings of these three companies really mean? Do they really have the ability to crash the stock and crypto markets?

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

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

According to publicly disclosed prospectuses, the company is expected to generate approximately $18.67 billion in revenue by 2025. Among this, revenue from Starlink-related businesses is about $11.39 billion, accounting for approximately 61% of total revenue, making it the company's primary source of income. Compared to the rocket launch business, Starlink clearly has greater growth potential. By deploying a low-orbit satellite network, 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, SpaceX's core value 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 believe that SpaceX's current valuation logic is closer to "the aerospace version of Amazon" or "the space version of AWS," with the market's focus gradually shifting from rocket launch business to the global communication infrastructure network represented by Starlink. Theoretically, as the network deployment matures, the marginal cost corresponding to new users is expected to decrease, while user growth may bring long-term and stable cash flow. Meanwhile, government contracts, commercial launches, and future commercial applications of Starship also provide additional growth space for the company.

Of course, such a high valuation is not without controversy. According to public information, the company is still expected to record a net loss of about $4.9 billion in 2025. For traditional investors, it seems difficult to understand how a company that has not yet achieved stable profitability can obtain a trillion-dollar valuation. However, Wall Street is clearly more focused on long-term growth potential. Whether it is Starlink's expansion or Starship's development, both are typical projects requiring significant upfront investment. The market is willing to tolerate current profit pressure, provided it believes that these investments can translate into a larger market share in the future.

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

However, precisely because of SpaceX's massive scale, its IPO has become a major source of market concern regarding liquidity pressure. According to the currently circulating issuance plan in the market, SpaceX could become one of the largest IPOs in history. For large institutional investors, this means they must adjust their positions in advance to make room for new stock subscriptions. Some tech growth stocks, high-valuation AI concept stocks, and even some risk assets may become sources of funds. Therefore, SpaceX is referred to by many analysts as a "super capital magnet" in this round of IPO wave.

OpenAI and Anthropic: Two Tickets to the AI Era

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

In the past three years, generative AI has rapidly grown from a laboratory technology to one of the most important 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 around AI. At the center of this wave are OpenAI and Anthropic.

OpenAI is widely regarded as one of the most important beneficiaries of this round of generative AI wave. With ChatGPT, the company has completed the transformation from a research institution to a commercial platform in a very short time. API services, enterprise-level solutions, and ecosystem collaborations 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's valuation reached about $852 billion, and it has confidentially submitted IPO documents. The market generally speculates that if the IPO proceeds smoothly in the future, its valuation may further approach the trillion-dollar range, but no official valuation guidance has been disclosed yet.

In comparison to OpenAI, Anthropic's development path is relatively low-key, but its growth rate has also attracted market attention. Established much later than OpenAI, the company has quickly gained recognition from enterprise clients thanks to its Claude series models and continuous investment in AI safety and reliability. According to the latest financing disclosure, Anthropic's valuation has reached about $965 billion, higher than OpenAI's current valuation of about $852 billion. Meanwhile, the company has also confidentially submitted IPO documents. For many institutional investors, Anthropic represents another AI development route—one that places greater emphasis on enterprise scenarios, risk control, and long-term governance structures.

From the perspective of the capital market, the significance of the IPOs of OpenAI and Anthropic goes far beyond the two companies themselves. In recent years, AI concepts have almost dominated the global tech stock valuation system, but the number of pure AI leading companies that investors can directly invest in is actually very limited. Nvidia is more of a computing power provider, while Microsoft and Google belong to comprehensive tech platforms. OpenAI and Anthropic are among the few companies that can directly represent the value of the large model industry.

This means that once the two companies enter the public market, 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 that of 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 significant diversion?

Why is the Market Concerned that the Three IPOs Will "Siphon" Market Liquidity?

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

The logic behind this is not complex. An IPO essentially delivers new stock supply from the primary market to the secondary market, and the funds used by institutional investors to participate in subscriptions do not appear 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 existing portfolios. Therefore, when multiple super-large IPOs occur simultaneously in the market, the phenomenon of funds flowing from other assets to new stocks is almost inevitable.

From this perspective, SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic indeed have the conditions to create a "siphoning effect." Based on current market expectations, the combined valuation of the three companies exceeds $3.5 trillion, and even if the actual proportion of circulating shares is far below this number, it is still sufficient to become one of the most important capital allocation directions in the global capital market. For many institutions that are 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's concern is not about the IPO itself, but about where the funds might flow out from. If institutional investors choose to reduce their holdings in existing tech stocks to participate in subscriptions, then some growth sectors may face pressure in the short term. If the sources of funds further extend to high-risk assets, then some crypto assets may also be affected. Therefore, whenever a large IPO approaches, discussions about "liquidity bloodletting" arise in the market.

However, the problem 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, and the daily trading volume is also at a considerable scale. Even if all three companies ultimately complete their IPOs, the actual proportion of shares entering market circulation remains limited. Historical experience shows that what truly determines market direction is never the new stock supply but the overall liquidity environment. When the market is in a loose cycle, even if super-large IPOs occur, the new supply is often quickly absorbed; conversely, when the market is in a tightening cycle, even without IPOs, the market may still experience a pullback due to economic slowdown or rising interest rates.

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

What Does Historical Experience Tell Us?

Looking back at the capital markets of the past twenty years, large IPOs have often attracted attention, but cases that truly lead to systemic risk are extremely rare.

In 2014, when Alibaba went public on the NYSE, the fundraising scale set a global record at the time. The market was similarly concerned that such massive financing would impact U.S. stocks. However, the facts 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 its bullish pattern.

In 2019, Saudi Aramco completed nearly $30 billion in financing, once again breaking the global IPO record. Considering the global economic slowdown and rising geopolitical risks at that time, many analysts believed that such a massive financing demand could affect market liquidity. But the final result also proved that the market's capacity to absorb super IPOs far exceeded expectations.

Even the highly watched Arm IPO in recent years did not have a decisive impact on the overall trend of tech stocks. Short-term volatility did exist, but it reflected more of a reallocation of funds within the industry rather than a disappearance of overall market liquidity.

The fundamental reason for this phenomenon is that the capital market is not a fixed-capacity pool. The listing of quality assets often attracts new funds into the market rather than merely drawing funds from old assets. Especially for global institutional investors, when truly scarce targets appear, they often come with new allocation demands rather than simple internal adjustments.

Therefore, based on historical experience, it is not surprising that SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic bring market volatility, but equating this directly with a market crash lacks sufficient basis.

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

If one were to ask which market would be most directly impacted by the three IPOs, the answer would undoubtedly be tech 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 gained valuation premiums due to their association with AI. However, the companies that can truly represent the value creation of large models have not yet entered the public market. The emergence of OpenAI and Anthropic means that investors now have the opportunity to directly invest in core AI assets for the first time.

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

Some concept-driven companies may face a contraction in valuation premiums because investors finally have purer AI targets. Meanwhile, those companies that can truly benefit from the expansion of AI infrastructure, such as computing power suppliers, data center operators, and enterprise software platforms, may continue to receive funding support.

The impact brought by SpaceX is somewhat different. For satellite communication, commercial aerospace, and related infrastructure companies, SpaceX's IPO will become a new industry valuation anchor. The market will have a publicly traded commercial aerospace leader as a reference point for the first time, which may drive a repricing of the entire industry chain.

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

Therefore, for the stock market, what truly deserves attention is not the performance on the day of the IPO, but whether these companies can fulfill the growth expectations set by the market in the coming years.

Impact on the Crypto Market: Competition Does Exist, But It Doesn't Necessarily Mean Bad News

Compared to the stock market, the crypto market is more sensitive to changes in capital flow, and thus the 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 both AI and Crypto sectors, with significant overlap in their funding sources. Once OpenAI and Anthropic officially enter the public market, it is highly probable that some institutional funds will shift towards AI assets.

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

Before AI companies went public, many investors chose to express their optimism about the artificial intelligence industry through AI-related tokens. However, once OpenAI or Anthropic becomes publicly traded assets, investors will naturally ponder a question: if they can directly hold the most core companies in 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 revenue support may indeed face pressure from capital diversion.

However, extrapolating this pressure further into a "crypto market crash" also lacks basis.

Bitcoin and the entire crypto market have gradually formed a relatively independent operating logic. ETF fund flows, regulatory environments, global monetary policies, and Bitcoin's own cycles usually have more decisive impacts than a single IPO event. Historically, U.S. stocks and the crypto market have experienced both synchronized rises and significant divergences, making it difficult to explain their movements with a single event.

More importantly, AI and blockchain are not in a completely competitive relationship. As the scale of AI applications continues to expand, decentralized computing networks, on-chain data markets, and AI agent infrastructure may actually gain new development opportunities. In the long run, the prosperity of the AI industry may not weaken Crypto but could create new integration scenarios.

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

If there is a real risk associated with the three IPOs, it does not stem from the listings themselves but from the market's expectations for future growth.

Whether it is SpaceX, OpenAI, or Anthropic, the current corresponding valuations are built on extremely optimistic future assumptions. The reason investors are willing to assign trillion-dollar valuations is that they believe these companies can become the most important infrastructure platforms in the world. If revenue growth slows, commercialization progress falls short of expectations, or the pace of profit improvement is below market expectations, then valuation repricing will be inevitable.

This risk will first impact not the entire market, but the AI sector and high-growth tech stocks. The higher the market's expectations for the future, the greater the adjustment will be once a gap emerges between reality and expectations.

From this perspective, what the market truly needs to focus on is not the IPO itself, but the ability of these companies to deliver on performance after the IPO.

Conclusion

The IPOs of SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic resemble a concentrated pricing of the next generation of technological infrastructure and AI platforms in the global capital market, rather than a precursor to a market crash. In the short term, capital diversion, sector rotation, and valuation repricing are almost inevitable, and some AI concept stocks and crypto assets may also face competitive pressure. However, based on historical experience, super IPOs rarely become direct triggers for systemic risk, and it is even more challenging to determine the long-term direction of the stock or crypto markets based solely on them.

What truly determines market trends remains the macro liquidity environment, corporate profitability, and investors' risk appetite. For investors, rather than worrying about whether the three IPOs will crash the market, it is more prudent to focus on whether the growth logic behind these trillion-dollar valuations can ultimately be realized. After all, the capital market has never feared grand dreams; what truly hurts the market is often unmet expectations.