Records in the IPO market rarely last long during a boom cycle — and 2026 is proving that in dramatic fashion. SpaceX’s June debut set an all-time high for IPO size, raising roughly $75 billion at a valuation near $1.8 trillion. Just months later, Anthropic is reportedly positioning for a listing that could push past that mark entirely, with investors discussing a valuation of $2 trillion or more. Here’s how the two offerings actually compare, and what it would take for Anthropic to claim the record.

Key Takeaways

• SpaceX’s June 12, 2026 IPO priced at $135 per share, raising approximately $75 billion and closing its first day near a $2.1 trillion market cap.
• Anthropic’s reported target valuation of ~$2 trillion would rival or exceed SpaceX’s opening print, and comfortably exceed SpaceX’s settled valuation of roughly $1.5–1.84 trillion.
• U.S. IPOs had raised $160.6 billion through August 19, 2026 — closing in on the 2021 full-year record of $195.2 billion, with months still to go.
• Both companies share a structural quirk that amplifies price moves: an unusually low free float at listing.
• Anthropic’s IPO is reportedly targeted for September or October 2026, which would put the two largest offerings in history within roughly four months of each other.

Setting the Bar: What SpaceX Actually Did

SpaceX’s IPO on June 12, 2026 was, by nearly every measure, historic. The company priced shares at $135, raising approximately $75 billion in the offering — the largest capital raise ever completed in a single IPO. Its market capitalization closed the first trading day near $2.1 trillion before settling into a range closer to $1.5 trillion by late July, and has since stabilized around $140 per share, implying a market cap of roughly $1.84 trillion.

That settling pattern — a dramatic first-day pop followed by a pullback — is common in low-float IPOs, where a small percentage of total shares outstanding are actually available to trade. Early price discovery in these situations tends to overshoot before institutional and retail flows normalize the price closer to fundamental value.

The Anthropic Comparison, Side by Side

The most important distinction: SpaceX’s valuation is anchored in aerospace infrastructure, satellite internet (Starlink), and government/commercial launch contracts — a capital-intensive but tangible-asset-heavy business. Anthropic’s valuation, by contrast, rests almost entirely on software revenue growth and AI model licensing — an asset-light but computationally expensive business model with a much steeper, more recent growth curve.

Why Anthropic Could Actually Take the Record

1. A steeper growth trajectory. Anthropic’s revenue run rate grew roughly sevenfold in about seven months (from $9B to $65B). Few companies of any kind — let alone one preparing a public listing — have shown that rate of acceleration this close to an IPO.
2. Two-year forward pricing. Bankers are reportedly using a 2028 revenue projection of $190–200 billion to justify the $2 trillion figure, implying a roughly 10x forward multiple — a framework that gives more room to argue for a higher headline valuation than a purely trailing-revenue approach would.
3. A hot IPO market overall. With $160.6 billion already raised across U.S. IPOs through mid-August 2026, nearing the full-year 2021 record of $195.2 billion, market conditions are unusually supportive of large, ambitious offerings.
4. Underwriter reuse and confidence. The same lead banks that priced SpaceX’s record deal are reportedly leading Anthropic’s — suggesting they believe the market can support back-to-back trillion-dollar-plus tech listings within the same year.

Why It Might Not Happen

• The $2 trillion figure is unconfirmed. It comes from investors and bankers circling the deal, not from Anthropic’s own guidance. SpaceX’s final valuation, by contrast, was a completed, priced transaction.
• A run rate isn’t revenue. Anthropic’s $65 billion figure is an extrapolation from a short, recent period. If growth decelerates even modestly before pricing, the valuation math could compress.
• Post-listing performance matters more than headline valuation. SpaceX’s first-day peak of ~$2.1 trillion wasn’t sustained — it settled meaningfully lower within weeks. Anthropic could technically “beat” SpaceX’s opening valuation and still underperform it on a settled, weeks-later basis.
• Market conditions can shift quickly. A cooling in the broader 2026 IPO boom between now and Anthropic’s expected September–October window could compress achievable pricing.

What “Largest IPO Ever” Actually Measures

It’s worth being precise about what record is actually being discussed, because there are at least three distinct measures:

• Capital raised — the actual dollar amount sold to investors (SpaceX: ~$75 billion)
• Valuation at pricing — the implied market cap based on the offer price (SpaceX: ~$1.8 trillion)
• First-day peak market cap — the highest valuation reached during initial trading (SpaceX: ~$2.1 trillion)

Anthropic could plausibly set a record on one of these measures without setting a record on all three — for instance, achieving a higher headline valuation target while raising less absolute capital than SpaceX did, depending on how many shares the company decides to sell in the offering.

FAQ

Is Anthropic definitely going to have the largest IPO in history? Not confirmed. Investors and bankers are reportedly targeting a valuation around $2 trillion, which would exceed SpaceX’s settled valuation and rival its first-day peak, but no final valuation, share price, or capital raise amount has been set.

How much did SpaceX raise in its IPO? SpaceX raised approximately $75 billion in its June 12, 2026 IPO, pricing shares at $135 and reaching a first-day market cap near $2.1 trillion.

Why do both SpaceX and Anthropic have such volatile early trading potential? Both companies reportedly have a low free float — a small percentage of total shares available for public trading at listing — which tends to amplify price swings in both directions during early trading.

Could Anthropic’s IPO underperform SpaceX’s despite a higher target valuation? Yes. A higher headline target valuation doesn’t guarantee stronger post-listing performance. SpaceX itself saw its valuation compress from a $2.1 trillion first-day peak to roughly $1.5 trillion within weeks before stabilizing.

Palo Alto Networks (NASDAQ: PANW) beat every guided metric in its fiscal Q4 2026 report — including record Remaining Performance Obligations (RPO) of $21.2 billion, up 34% year-over-year — yet shares fell roughly 5% during the regular session on September 1, 2026, and slipped further after hours to around $355. The selloff centers on a decelerating fiscal 2027 growth outlook and gross-margin compression, not on any weakness in underlying demand.

Q4 FY26 & FY27 Guidance By the Numbers

Sources: Palo Alto Networks Q4 FY2026 earnings release and investor presentation, September 1, 2026 (period ended July 31, 2026); CNBC, Seeking Alpha, GuruFocus, Investing.com.

Deep Dive: Why a Beat-and-Raise Quarter Still Sold Off

Record Numbers, But the Deceleration Story Is What Traders Are Pricing

Palo Alto’s fiscal 2026 was, by any conventional measure, a strong year: revenue grew 24% to $11.5 billion, RPO crossed $20 billion for the first time in company history and finished at $21.2 billion, and NGS ARR — the company’s core forward-looking security-subscription metric — grew 63% to $9.1 billion, with nearly $1 billion of that added in the fourth quarter alone.

The problem for the stock is what comes next. FY27 guidance calls for NGS ARR growth of just 22–23%, a sharp deceleration from 63%. Some of that math is mechanical — a metric growing off a much larger base naturally decelerates in percentage terms — but management’s own commentary added a more specific headwind: a nine-figure ARR benefit tied to a large LLM customer migrating workloads to Chronosphere (part of Palo Alto’s recently completed acquisition) is expected to fade out after the first quarter of fiscal 2027, meaning the easy comparison boost investors saw in Q4 FY26 won’t repeat.

The Margin Story Underneath the Headline Beat

Total gross margin compressed 100 basis points year-over-year in the quarter to 74.8%, and full-year gross margin similarly slipped 60 basis points to 75.8%. Management’s own forward commentary flagged that cloud hosting costs are expected to grow faster than total revenue in fiscal 2027, a direct consequence of the accelerating mix shift toward cloud- and SaaS-delivered security products (as opposed to legacy on-premises appliances, which historically carried different cost structures).

This is the same tension investors are pricing into many platform-transition software names: as a company shifts revenue mix toward cloud consumption models, near-term margin can compress even as long-term unit economics (higher retention, larger net-new ARR per customer through platformization) improve. The Q1 FY27 EPS guidance of $0.96–$0.98 — below the $1.02 non-GAAP EPS Palo Alto just reported for Q4 FY26 — is the clearest quantified signal that management itself expects near-term margin pressure or seasonal softness before the FY27 outlook of a 29.5% operating margin and 38% free cash flow margin plays out over the full year.

Integration Risk From CyberArk and Chronosphere Is the Real Swing Factor

Much of Palo Alto’s FY26 growth came from large-scale M&A integration — the CyberArk identity-security acquisition and the Chronosphere observability acquisition both closed and began contributing meaningfully within the fiscal year, with Idira (the segment housing recently acquired capabilities) generating $1.26 billion in pro forma revenue at 21% pro forma growth. Management has publicly claimed that CyberArk’s profitability will converge with Palo Alto’s core business three to six months ahead of the original integration plan — a claim that, if validated in coming quarters, would support the bull case that platformization economics offset near-term margin dilution from acquired, lower-margin revenue streams.

Reading the Technical Setup After the Drop

The stock’s post-earnings decline pushed shares below several short-term moving averages, with the 50-day EMA near 339.67 acting as a level technical traders were watching as either support (a floor for a “buy-the-dip” thesis) or a level that, if breached decisively to the downside, would signal the market is pricing in a more prolonged deceleration story than a single quarter’s guidance reset.

The AI-Threat Tailwind Cuts Both Ways

CEO Nikesh Arora has repeatedly tied the company’s growth to what management terms accelerating AI-driven cyberattack sophistication — the argument that AI is simultaneously the biggest new attack surface and the most urgent reason enterprises need to modernize security spend. That framing supports Palo Alto’s expanding AI-native product line, including its Prisma AIRS platform, which management has called the fastest-growing product in company history with a clear trajectory toward $100 million in ARR. The bear case counters that this narrative is now widely priced into cybersecurity valuations across the sector, meaning Palo Alto increasingly has to out-execute rather than simply ride a macro tailwind.

Actionable Takeaways for Investors

1. Distinguish deceleration math from demand deterioration. NGS ARR growth slowing from 63% to a guided 22–23% is largely a base-effect and one-time-benefit story, not evidence that net-new bookings are collapsing — check next quarter’s actual net-new NGS ARR dollar figure, not just the percentage, to validate this.
2. Watch gross margin trend for two more quarters before drawing conclusions. A single 100-basis-point compression tied to cloud-cost mix shift is a data point, not a trend; the real signal is whether margin stabilizes near the FY27 operating-margin guide of 29.5% or continues eroding.
3. Track CyberArk and Chronosphere integration proof points. Management’s claim of accelerated profitability convergence is testable — watch segment-level disclosures in the next two quarters for confirmation or walk-back.
4. Use the post-earnings pullback as a data point for entry timing, not a standalone signal. A stock with record RPO and beat-and-raise guidance selling off on deceleration optics has, historically across the software sector, offered entry points for investors with a multi-quarter horizon — but only if the margin and integration questions above resolve favorably.
5. Size cybersecurity sector exposure around platformization proof, not narrative. The AI-driven threat narrative is now broadly priced across the group; differentiate PANW’s specific execution (RPO growth, ARR quality, integration costs) from sector-wide sentiment.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did PANW stock drop after beating Q4 FY26 earnings estimates? Palo Alto Networks beat every guided metric for the quarter, but shares fell about 5% intraday and slipped further after hours because fiscal 2027 guidance implies a sharp deceleration in Next-Gen Security ARR growth (from 63% to 22–23%) and forecasts continued gross margin compression from rising cloud hosting costs.

What is Palo Alto Networks’ RPO and why does it matter?

Remaining Performance Obligations (RPO) represents contracted revenue not yet recognized — a leading indicator of future revenue. PANW’s RPO hit a record $21.2 billion in Q4 FY26, up 34% year-over-year, and management guided FY27 RPO to $25.2–$25.4 billion, signaling continued, if decelerating, forward demand.

Is Palo Alto Networks stock a buy after the September 2026 pullback?

The post-earnings dip reflects a guidance-driven deceleration and margin story rather than a demand shortfall, and record RPO plus continued platformization gains support the underlying growth case; however, near-term EPS guidance below the just-reported quarter and unresolved margin questions warrant monitoring the next one to two quarters before treating the pullback purely as a buying opportunity.

How is Palo Alto Networks’ AI security business performing?

Management describes its Prisma AIRS platform as the fastest-growing product in company history, with a clear path to $100 million in ARR, positioned around the argument that AI is simultaneously expanding the attack surface and driving urgent enterprise security modernization spend.

GoPro shares rocketed 46% on August 31, 2026 — with a further 55% gain in after-hours trading — after Bloomberg reported that YouTube creator Mark Fischbach, known online as Markiplier, had quietly built an 8.5% stake in the struggling action-camera maker, an extraordinary single-day move for a company that has lost more than 60% of its value over the past year and warned investors of “substantial doubt” about its ability to continue as a going concern.

The Trigger: A Creator, Not an Activist Investor

According to Bloomberg’s reporting, Fischbach — who has built a YouTube audience approaching 40 million subscribers over roughly 15 years — disclosed a passive 8.5% ownership position in GoPro via Schedule 13G filing, corresponding to 13.5 million Class A shares worth approximately $18.4 million at the time of disclosure. Crucially, Fischbach is not taking an activist posture: there is no indication he is seeking board representation or pushing for operational changes. In his own words, he described the purchase in simple terms: “I saw the stock and where it was, I was like that seems undervalued,” adding, “It’s just something I’ve been cooking in the background; I want the company to succeed.”

The market reaction was dramatic relative to GoPro’s recent trading history. Shares surged from around $0.60 to close at $0.8762, a 46.1% gain, on trading volume of roughly 142.5 million shares — nearly 20 times the average volume of the previous five sessions. The stock continued climbing after hours, reaching $1.3615 by late afternoon Eastern time.

The Fundamentals Fischbach Is Betting Against

The rally is notable precisely because it runs counter to GoPro’s underlying financial trajectory, which has been deteriorating for years. Recent quarterly results paint a difficult picture:

• Q2 2026 revenue: $104.93 million, down 31.3% year-over-year.
• Q2 2026 net loss: $51 million.
• Camera unit sell-through: Fell 38% to approximately 291,000 units.
• Going-concern warning: Management has disclosed substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue operating without additional capital or a turnaround.
• Workforce reduction: GoPro has laid off 23% of its workforce during 2026 and has explored a potential sale of the company.
• Founder support: CEO and founder Nicholas Woodman has personally lent the company money through stock purchases, a signal of insider commitment but also of the severity of GoPro’s cash position.

Full-year FY2025 revenue came in at $651.5 million, down 18.7% year-over-year, and that decline accelerated sharply into Q1 2026, when revenue fell 26.2% year-over-year to $99.1 million. Regional breakdowns show the pain was not confined to one market: EMEA revenue declined 26.3% in FY2025 and a dramatic 48.2% in Q1 2026, while Asia-Pacific fell 52.8% in FY2025. Only the United States showed resilience in FY2025, up 6.5%, before that too reversed into an 11.9% decline in Q1 2026.

Why GoPro Keeps Losing Ground: The Competitive Geometry

Independent analysis attributes GoPro’s structural decline to what one report called “competitive geometry” rather than any single misstep. Sony Group dominates the imaging-sensor supply chain that action cameras depend on, while Garmin has quietly built a dominant franchise across outdoor, fitness, and adventure devices. Both companies are order-of-magnitude larger than GoPro, competing for shelf space, developer attention, and R&D dollars against a much smaller rival that lacks the scale to match their investment.

GoPro’s business model compounds the challenge: discretionary hardware with thin margins, limited ecosystem lock-in compared to smartphone-based alternatives, and a subscription service that — while growing — remains too small to meaningfully offset hardware revenue volatility. Subscription and service revenue did grow 11% year-over-year as of an August 10, 2026 disclosure, a bright spot suggesting a partial pivot toward recurring revenue, though not yet at a scale that changes the company’s overall financial trajectory.

The GP3 Launch: The Actual Turnaround Catalyst to Watch

Separate from the Markiplier-driven rally, GoPro’s more fundamental turnaround thesis rests on its GP3 camera platform. CEO Nicholas Woodman has framed GP3 as enabling “a more premium camera lineup with category-leading image quality and processing performance, positioning GoPro to compete at even higher tiers of the digital imaging market.” However, the company’s Q4 2025 earnings report — which included the GP3 announcement — actually triggered a 24% single-day stock decline after revenue of $202 million missed guidance of $220 million, despite the quarter producing positive adjusted EBITDA of $1 million. That mixed reaction underscores the skepticism embedded in GPRO’s valuation: investors have been unwilling to reward positive signals without clear, sustained proof that a new product cycle can reverse four consecutive years of revenue decline.

Valuation Snapshot

What the Technical Picture Says

Despite the sharp rally, technical analysis published the same day cautioned that GoPro’s longer-term downtrend remains firmly intact. The stock’s 200-day exponential moving average sat at approximately $0.98 — well above the post-rally price — while daily RSI readings suggested renewed buying interest without confirming a broader trend reversal. Hourly RSI readings in the mid-70s were flagged as “firmly overbought,” suggesting the move could be susceptible to near-term pullback even if the disclosure itself represents a genuine, durable shift in market sentiment toward the stock.

The Investment Question: Sentiment Catalyst vs. Fundamental Turnaround

For investors evaluating GPRO following this episode, the core question is whether Fischbach’s stake functions as a durable sentiment catalyst — potentially drawing renewed retail and creator-economy attention to a company whose core product overlaps directly with his content-creator audience — or whether it represents a temporary, idiosyncratic spike disconnected from the deteriorating fundamentals still playing out in GoPro’s revenue and unit-sales trends. The stock’s own trading history offers a cautionary parallel: GPRO has previously experienced retail-driven meme-stock rallies, including a 73% single-day spike in July 2025 driven by Reddit trading communities, that subsequently cooled without translating into sustained fundamental improvement.

Key Takeaways

• GoPro stock surged 46% in regular trading and a further 55% after-hours on August 31, 2026, after YouTuber Markiplier disclosed an 8.5% ownership stake.
• The rally occurred despite GoPro’s Q2 2026 revenue falling 31.3% year-over-year and a company disclosure of “substantial doubt” about its ability to continue as a going concern.
• GoPro’s structural decline is attributed to its inability to compete at scale against Sony (imaging sensors) and Garmin (outdoor/adventure devices).
• The company’s GP3 premium camera platform represents its primary fundamental turnaround catalyst, though its initial earnings reception was negative.
• Technical indicators suggest the stock’s longer-term downtrend remains intact despite the sharp single-day sentiment-driven rally.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did GoPro stock jump 46% on August 31, 2026?

Bloomberg reported that YouTube creator Markiplier (Mark Fischbach) disclosed an 8.5% ownership stake in GoPro, describing it as a personal conviction buy in a company he believes is undervalued.

Is GoPro’s business actually improving?

Not clearly. Q2 2026 revenue fell 31.3% year-over-year with a $51 million net loss, and the company has disclosed going-concern doubts, though subscription revenue grew 11% year-over-year as a partial bright spot.

Is Markiplier’s stake an activist investment?

No. Fischbach has described the purchase as a passive, personal investment and has not indicated any intent to seek board representation or push for operational changes at GoPro.