With Anthropic’s IPO reportedly targeted for September or October 2026 and a valuation debate centered around $2 trillion, many retail investors are looking for ways to gain AI exposure right now rather than waiting for a listing they may not get full access to at the offer price. The good news: you don’t need to wait. A handful of publicly traded ETFs and stocks already offer meaningful exposure to the same enterprise AI infrastructure boom fueling Anthropic’s growth.

Key Takeaways

• Semiconductor and infrastructure ETFs have been the strongest-performing AI trade of 2026, with names like the Invesco Semiconductors ETF up over 130% year-to-date.
• Diversified AI ETFs such as the Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ) spread risk across chipmakers, cloud providers, and software companies rather than betting on a single winner.
• Individual mega-cap stocks — Nvidia, Broadcom, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta — all have direct financial exposure to the same compute demand driving Anthropic’s growth.
• Pre-IPO platforms exist for direct Anthropic exposure but carry liquidity, accreditation, and fee-structure risks not present in publicly listed ETFs and stocks.
• No single ETF or stock is a perfect proxy for Anthropic specifically — this is about sector exposure, not a substitute for owning the company itself.

Why Consider AI-Adjacent Exposure Before the IPO?

Retail investors are structurally disadvantaged when it comes to accessing shares at the actual IPO offer price — that allocation typically goes to institutional clients and high-net-worth wealth management relationships tied to the underwriting banks (Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan, in Anthropic’s case). Building exposure to the broader enterprise AI ecosystem ahead of time is one practical way to participate in the theme without needing IPO-day access.

It’s also a risk-management move. Anthropic’s reported valuation target implies a multiple of roughly 30x its trailing $65 billion revenue run rate — a single-name bet at that pricing carries real valuation risk if growth decelerates even modestly. Diversified exposure spreads that risk across dozens of companies at various points in the AI value chain.

1. Semiconductor ETFs: The Infrastructure Backbone

AI models like Claude don’t run without chips. The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) and the Invesco Semiconductors ETF (PSI) both offer concentrated exposure to the companies building the physical infrastructure behind every large language model’s training and inference workloads — including Nvidia, Broadcom, and equipment makers whose revenue scales directly with AI compute demand.

• VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH): Tracks a market-cap-weighted index of roughly 25 semiconductor companies; heavily concentrated in Nvidia and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSMC).
• Invesco Semiconductors ETF (PSI): A narrower, 30-stock portfolio focused specifically on chip production; posted triple-digit percentage gains in 2026 amid the broader AI infrastructure buildout.

Trade-off: These funds are more exposed to Nvidia- and TSMC-specific risk than diversified software-focused funds, and don’t capture the enterprise software/SaaS side of the AI value chain where Anthropic itself operates.

2. Diversified AI & Technology ETFs

For investors who want exposure across the full AI stack — chips, cloud, software, and applications — rather than concentrated semiconductor risk, broader thematic ETFs offer a more balanced approach.

• Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ): Holds a mix of established tech leaders and faster-growing innovators across machine learning, cloud computing, and data analytics, with top holdings including Taiwan Semiconductor, Nvidia, and Apple. Roughly $7.6 billion in assets under management.
• Invesco AI and Next Gen Software ETF (IGPT): Leans more heavily toward AI software developers and cloud infrastructure providers rather than pure semiconductor exposure, with holdings including Micron, Meta, and AMD.

Trade-off: Diversification reduces concentration risk but also dilutes the magnitude of any single winner’s outperformance relative to a concentrated bet.

3. Data Center & Digital Infrastructure Exposure

Every additional dollar of AI revenue — Anthropic’s included — requires physical data center capacity. The Global X Data Center & Digital Infrastructure ETF (DTCR) offers a distinctive angle: roughly split between technology stocks and real estate investment trusts (REITs) tied to data center construction and operation, capturing the physical buildout side of the AI boom rather than the model layer.

Trade-off: REIT exposure introduces interest-rate sensitivity that pure tech ETFs don’t carry, which can be a benefit or drawback depending on the broader rate environment.

4. Individual Mega-Cap Stocks With Direct AI Compute Exposure

For investors comfortable with single-stock risk, several established companies have direct financial ties to the same compute demand fueling Anthropic’s growth:

Amazon in particular has a direct commercial relationship with Anthropic through AWS, which has both invested in and hosts Anthropic’s models for enterprise customers — making AMZN one of the more directly linked mega-cap plays on Anthropic’s specific success, short of owning Anthropic stock itself.

5. Quantum & Next-Generation Compute (Higher Risk, Longer Horizon)

For investors willing to take on more speculative, longer-horizon exposure, the Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM) invests in companies developing next-generation computing technology that could eventually reshape AI training economics, including Tower Semiconductor, Rigetti Computing, and Teradyne.

Trade-off: Quantum computing remains years away from mainstream commercial application in AI workloads — this is a long-duration, speculative complement to core AI exposure, not a near-term Anthropic proxy.

Comparing the Options

What None of These Options Replace

It’s worth being direct: no ETF or adjacent stock replicates Anthropic’s specific growth trajectory, its ~$65 billion revenue run rate, or its potential re-rating catalyst around IPO day. These are sector proxies, not substitutes. Investors specifically seeking Anthropic exposure will eventually need to either buy shares in the open market after listing or explore pre-IPO platforms — each with materially different risk profiles than a liquid, exchange-traded fund.

FAQ

Is there an ETF that already holds Anthropic stock? Not currently, since Anthropic is not yet publicly traded. Once it lists, some broad-based AI and technology ETFs may add it to their holdings depending on index methodology and market-cap weighting rules.

What’s the safest way to get AI exposure before the Anthropic IPO?

Diversified ETFs like AIQ or IGPT generally carry lower single-name risk than concentrated semiconductor funds or individual stocks, making them a more conservative way to participate in the broader AI theme ahead of the listing.

Does Amazon benefit directly from Anthropic’s growth?

Yes — Amazon has an investment and infrastructure relationship with Anthropic through AWS, which hosts Anthropic’s models for enterprise customers via AWS Bedrock, giving AMZN a more direct (though indirect, non-equity) link to Anthropic’s commercial success.

Should I wait for the Anthropic IPO instead of buying AI ETFs now?

That depends on your risk tolerance and time horizon. Many financial advisors suggest building diversified sector exposure over time rather than trying to time a single event like an IPO, which can carry significant first-day volatility.

When a company chooses its underwriters, it’s telling the market something before a single share trades. Anthropic’s reported selection of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs — alongside JPMorgan — as lead banks on its expected IPO is being read by Wall Street as a signal of confidence in the company’s ability to command a valuation near $2 trillion. Here’s what these roles actually mean, mechanically and strategically, for anyone considering an investment.

Key Takeaways

• Morgan Stanley reportedly holds the “pole position” for the coveted lead-left spot on Anthropic’s IPO, according to sources cited by the Financial Times.
• Goldman Sachs is running “neck-and-neck” with Morgan Stanley for a top-tier underwriting role.
• JPMorgan, Citigroup, and Barclays are expected to round out the broader syndicate.
• These same three lead banks — Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan — anchored the SpaceX IPO in June 2026, the current record-holder for largest offering.
• The banks previously provided Anthropic with debt financing, including work toward a reported $15 billion pre-IPO credit facility.
• Underwriter selection influences pricing strategy, institutional allocation, and after-market stabilization — all of which affect retail investors indirectly.

What “Lead-Left” Actually Means

In IPO terminology, the lead-left bank is the underwriter listed first (traditionally on the left side) on the cover of the prospectus — a position that comes with outsized responsibility and outsized reward. The lead-left bank typically:

• Runs the bookbuilding process, collecting and aggregating institutional investor orders
• Sets the final offer price in coordination with the issuer’s board
• Takes the largest underwriting fee allocation among the syndicate
• Leads after-market stabilization activities, including exercising the “greenshoe” over-allotment option if the stock trades up
• Serves as the primary point of contact between the company and public market investors during the roadshow

If Morgan Stanley secures this role for Anthropic, as reporting suggests is likely, it puts the bank in the driver’s seat for what could be the largest IPO ever completed — surpassing even its own recent work, alongside Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan, on the SpaceX offering.

Why Two (or Three) Top-Tier Banks Matters for Investors

A syndicate anchored by Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs — both perennially ranked among the top global equity underwriters — sends a specific signal: institutional demand is expected to be deep enough to require serious distribution muscle. For investors, this translates into a few practical implications:

1. Broader institutional reach. These banks’ wealth management and institutional sales networks span pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, and large asset managers globally, which typically supports stronger initial demand and a more orderly aftermarket.
2. More rigorous pricing discipline. Top-tier lead underwriters have reputational incentive to avoid a “busted IPO” — a listing that trades below its offer price shortly after debut — because it damages their standing for future mandates.
3. Deeper aftermarket support. Lead banks typically commit capital to stabilize the stock in early trading through the over-allotment mechanism, which can reduce (though not eliminate) early volatility.

The Debt-Equity Connection: Why the $15 Billion Credit Facility Matters Here

It’s not a coincidence that the banks reportedly structuring Anthropic’s equity offering previously provided the company with debt financing. Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan are also reportedly involved in finalizing a $15 billion pre-IPO credit facility for Anthropic — capital that gives the company balance sheet flexibility to fund continued compute infrastructure buildout independent of the equity raise itself.

This dual relationship — debt financier and equity underwriter — is common for large-cap tech IPOs and gives the lead banks unusually deep visibility into Anthropic’s financials heading into the roadshow. For investors, that can be read two ways:

• Bullish read: The banks have extensive due diligence exposure and are still willing to lead a ~$2 trillion offering.
• Cautious read: The banks have a strong financial incentive (underwriting fees plus debt relationship preservation) to see the deal price successfully, which doesn’t guarantee the valuation is fundamentally sound.

Historical Precedent: The SpaceX Playbook

Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan ran the book on SpaceX’s IPO in June 2026, which priced at $135 per share and raised approximately $75 billion at a valuation near $1.8 trillion — the current record for largest IPO in history. That stock has since traded in a range from a first-day peak near $2.1 trillion market cap down to roughly $1.5 trillion by late July, before stabilizing.

The reuse of essentially the same underwriting trio for Anthropic suggests the banks are applying lessons learned from the SpaceX process — particularly around managing a low free-float listing, which both companies share as a structural feature.

Risks the Underwriter Roster Doesn’t Solve

Even the strongest underwriting syndicate can’t eliminate fundamental risk. Investors should keep in mind:

• A low float amplifies volatility regardless of which bank is managing the book — SpaceX’s post-IPO price swing from $2.1T to $1.5T illustrates this even with top-tier underwriters involved.
• Underwriter confidence is not a valuation guarantee. Banks earn substantial fees regardless of long-term stock performance; their willingness to lead the deal reflects market appetite and relationship value, not a certification of fair value.
• Multiple additional banks joining the syndicate (Citigroup, Barclays) spreads risk but also dilutes any single bank’s accountability for pricing outcomes.

FAQ

What does it mean that Morgan Stanley is the “lead-left” bank on Anthropic’s IPO? It means Morgan Stanley would run the bookbuilding process, help set the final offer price, and lead after-market stabilization — the most influential and highest-fee role in the underwriting syndicate.

Does Goldman Sachs having a top role change the IPO outlook?

Having two top-tier global banks (Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs) sharing lead roles typically signals strong expected institutional demand and broader distribution capacity, though it doesn’t guarantee post-IPO stock performance.

Are Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs also lending Anthropic money?

Yes — reporting indicates these banks previously provided debt financing to Anthropic and are involved in structuring a reported $15 billion pre-IPO credit facility alongside their equity underwriting roles.

Did the same banks handle the SpaceX IPO?

Yes. Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan anchored the SpaceX IPO in June 2026, which currently holds the record for the largest offering in history.

For years, the OpenAI-versus-Anthropic rivalry played out in model benchmarks and enterprise contracts. In 2026, it’s playing out on Wall Street. Both companies have confidentially filed IPO paperwork with the SEC — but reporting suggests Anthropic is on track to reach the public markets first, and potentially at a larger valuation. Here’s how the two AI leaders actually compare, number for number.

Key Takeaways

• Both Anthropic and OpenAI have confidentially filed for an IPO with the SEC, but Anthropic’s listing is reportedly targeted for September or October 2026, ahead of OpenAI’s, which is seen as more likely in 2027.
• Anthropic’s revenue run rate reportedly reached $65 billion by end of July 2026, versus OpenAI’s most recently reported run rate of roughly $40 billion.
• Anthropic’s last private valuation was $965 billion (May 2026 Series H); reported IPO valuation target is ~$2 trillion.
• Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan are reportedly leading Anthropic’s offering — the same trio that anchored the SpaceX IPO.
• The two companies may not calculate revenue the same way, which complicates a clean apples-to-apples comparison.
• Neither company has confirmed final valuation, share pricing, or exact listing date.

The Race to Wall Street: Timeline Comparison

Revenue Growth: Anthropic’s Steeper Curve

The headline gap between the two companies isn’t just the absolute revenue number — it’s the shape of the growth curve. Anthropic’s run rate moved from roughly $9 billion at the end of 2025 to $65 billion by the end of July 2026, a sevenfold increase in about seven months. OpenAI’s run rate, by contrast, has roughly doubled over a comparable period, from about $20 billion to $40 billion, according to figures shared internally by OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman.

Both trajectories are, by any historical standard for software companies, extraordinary. But Anthropic’s pace of acceleration is the steeper one right now, and it’s the reason bankers are willing to entertain a valuation approaching $2 trillion despite the company’s last private mark sitting at less than half that figure just months earlier.

One caveat matters here: the two companies may not measure revenue the same way. Run-rate methodology, what counts as recognized revenue, and treatment of enterprise contracts versus consumer subscriptions can all vary. A side-by-side comparison should be read directionally, not as a precise scientific measurement.

Why Anthropic Might Get There First

Several structural factors point toward Anthropic reaching Wall Street ahead of OpenAI:

1. Filing timeline. Anthropic’s confidential S-1 was filed June 1, 2026, giving it a multi-month head start in the SEC review process relative to OpenAI’s reported filing.
2. Underwriter readiness. Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are reportedly close to finalizing lead roles, with Citigroup and Barclays also expected to join the syndicate — a sign of advanced deal preparation.
3. Capital structure prep. Anthropic is finalizing a reported $15 billion pre-IPO credit facility, a step companies typically take shortly before a public listing to shore up balance sheet flexibility.
4. Corporate structure decisions. Anthropic is reportedly considering super-voting shares for co-founder Dario Amodei and other founders — the kind of governance decision typically finalized in the run-up to a roadshow.

Valuation Multiples: Which Company Is Priced More Aggressively?

Using Anthropic’s reported figures, a $2 trillion valuation implies:

• ~30x trailing 2026 run rate ($65B)
• ~17–20x projected full-year 2026 revenue ($100–120B)
• ~10x projected 2028 revenue ($190–200B)

OpenAI’s IPO valuation target has not been reported with the same specificity, making a direct multiple comparison premature. What can be said is that Anthropic’s reported multiple sits below software comparables like Palantir (53x revenue) and Cloudflare (41.6x revenue), suggesting bankers are not pricing Anthropic at the most extreme end of current AI/SaaS valuations — even at $2 trillion.

Investor Positioning: How Institutional Money Is Splitting Its Bets

Institutional investors exposed to both companies through earlier private funding rounds are unlikely to view this as a binary, winner-take-all outcome. The broader enterprise AI software market has shown room for multiple scaled players — Anthropic leaning into coding and agentic enterprise workloads, OpenAI maintaining a broader consumer and developer platform footprint. For investors building exposure through AI-focused ETFs or diversified tech portfolios, the more relevant question may not be “which company wins” but how much combined market cap the sector can support once both companies are public.

What Could Change the Order

• Regulatory review delays. SEC review timelines are not guaranteed; either company’s IPO could slip.
• Market conditions. U.S. IPOs had raised $160.6 billion through August 19, 2026, closing in on the 2021 record of $195.2 billion — a hot market that could cool and affect timing for either company.
• A surprise OpenAI acceleration. If OpenAI’s board decides to move up its own filing timeline in response to Anthropic’s progress, the “who’s first” narrative could shift quickly.

FAQ

Is Anthropic definitely going public before OpenAI?

It’s the most likely outcome based on current reporting — Anthropic filed confidentially in June 2026 and is targeting a fall listing, while OpenAI’s IPO is seen as more likely in 2027 — but neither timeline is confirmed or guaranteed.

Which company has higher revenue: OpenAI or Anthropic?

As of the most recent reporting, Anthropic’s revenue run rate (~$65 billion) is reported higher than OpenAI’s (~$40 billion), though methodology differences mean this isn’t a perfectly apples-to-apples comparison.

Will OpenAI and Anthropic use the same underwriters?

Anthropic is reportedly working with Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JPMorgan. OpenAI’s underwriting syndicate has not been confirmed in current reporting.

Should investors buy both companies once they’re public?

That depends on individual risk tolerance, portfolio construction, and valuation at the time of listing. Diversifying across AI infrastructure and enterprise software exposure — rather than concentrating in a single name — is a common approach financial advisors suggest during high-profile IPO waves.