Author: Wu Shuo Blockchain

TL;DR

The simultaneous IPOs of three major tech giants could trigger one of the largest tech IPO waves in recent years: SpaceX's target IPO valuation, combined with the latest funding valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, has exceeded $3.5 trillion. This not only tests the capital market's ability to price innovative technologies but also sparks widespread discussion about its impact on liquidity.

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

OpenAI and Anthropic may provide the capital market with its first large-scale foundational model investment targets: the two companies represent the core productivity of generative AI, and their listings could drive a repricing of the AI sector and create competition for some concept-driven AI targets.

The "capital-siphoning effect" of mega-IPOs may be overestimated by the market: Historical experience shows that large IPOs are more about the reallocation of funds than the disappearance of liquidity, and are less likely to be a direct cause of systemic risk.

The crypto market is facing periodic competition for funds, but it is still mainly driven by its own cycle: some AI concept tokens may be under pressure from the diversion of funds, but the long-term trend of the crypto market still depends more on macro liquidity, regulatory environment and Bitcoin cycle.

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

The capital market in 2026 is witnessing the most anticipated wave of technology IPOs in recent years.

Discussions surrounding the IPOs of three super unicorns—SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic—continue to heat up on Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the crypto market. Based on SpaceX's target IPO valuation and the latest funding valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic, the three companies' combined valuations exceed $3.5 trillion. If their IPO plans proceed as expected, this will be one of the largest waves of tech company IPOs in recent years. SpaceX's target valuation is approximately $1.75 trillion, OpenAI's is approximately $852 billion, and Anthropic's is approximately $965 billion. It's worth noting that Anthropic's current funding valuation is higher than OpenAI's, but this primarily reflects different funding rounds and market pricing expectations, and does not necessarily mean that its commercial scale has surpassed OpenAI's. Regardless of the final offering price, this will be the largest and most far-reaching wave of tech company IPOs in recent years.

Such a massive scale has naturally raised concerns about liquidity in the market. Some investors believe that the listing of these three companies could absorb a large amount of capital, putting pressure on other growth stocks and even impacting the crypto market. Others worry that the continued hype surrounding AI and aerospace concepts is creating a new asset bubble, and if their performance falls short of expectations after listing, it could trigger a repricing of the entire technology sector and even the risk asset market.

However, some argue that concerns about a "capital drain" effect have been significantly amplified. The total market capitalization of the US stock market has reached trillions of dollars, and mega-IPOs are more about the reallocation of funds than their disappearance. Historically, both Alibaba and Saudi Aramco have sparked similar discussions, but ultimately did not trigger market crashes. So, what's different this time? What do the listings of these three companies truly signify? Do they really have the power 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 of the three companies, SpaceX would undoubtedly be the strongest contender. From its founding in 2002 to the present, Elon Musk has spent over two decades transforming a startup into a core force in the global commercial space industry. For a long time, the outside world's understanding of SpaceX was primarily limited to rocket launches and space exploration, but the valuation logic of the capital market has now fundamentally changed.

According to its publicly disclosed prospectus, the company's revenue in 2025 is approximately $18.67 billion. Of this, Starlink-related revenue is approximately $11.39 billion, accounting for about 61% of total revenue, making it the company's primary source of income. Compared to its rocket launch business, Starlink clearly has greater growth potential. By deploying a low-Earth orbit satellite network, Starlink is building a globally covering data communication infrastructure, and its business model is closer to an internet platform than a traditional aerospace company. For investors, SpaceX's core value is no longer rockets, but a network platform capable of reaching users worldwide.

This is also one of the key reasons why some investors are willing to support its target IPO valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. From a valuation perspective, some investors see SpaceX's current valuation logic as closer to that of a "space version of Amazon" or a "space version of AWS," with market focus gradually shifting from rocket launches to the global communications infrastructure network represented by Starlink. Theoretically, as network deployment matures, the marginal cost of adding new users is expected to decrease, while user growth could bring long-term and stable cash flow. At the same time, government contracts, commercial launches, and future commercial applications of Starship also provide the company with additional growth potential.

Of course, such a high valuation is not without controversy. According to public information, the company still recorded a net loss of approximately $4.9 billion in 2025. For traditional investors, it seems difficult to understand why a company that has not yet achieved stable profitability can be valued at a trillion-dollar level. However, Wall Street is clearly more focused on long-term growth potential. Both Starlink's expansion and Starship's R&D are typical examples of projects requiring significant 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 considered a significant milestone for the commercial space industry. The space industry has long been perceived as capital-intensive, time-consuming, and with limited exit channels. A successful IPO for SpaceX will significantly enhance the financing capabilities and valuation levels of the entire industry chain, potentially benefiting everything from satellite manufacturing and ground communication equipment to aerospace material suppliers.

However, precisely because of SpaceX's massive size, its IPO has become a significant source of market concerns about liquidity pressures. Based on current market projections of the offering plan, SpaceX could become one of the largest IPOs in history. For large institutional investors, this means they must adjust their holdings in advance to make room for new share subscriptions. Some technology growth stocks, overvalued AI concept stocks, and even some risky assets could become sources of funding. Therefore, many analysts have called SpaceX a "super magnet for funds" in this wave of IPOs.

OpenAI and Anthropic: Two Tickets to the AI Era

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

Over the past three years, generative AI has rapidly grown from a laboratory technology into one of the most important investment themes in global capital markets. Since the release of ChatGPT, artificial intelligence has almost reshaped the development logic of the entire technology industry. Whether it's Microsoft, Google, or Amazon, they are all engaged in a new round of competition around AI. And at the center of this wave are OpenAI and Anthropic.

OpenAI is widely regarded as one of the most important beneficiaries of the current generative AI wave. With ChatGPT, the company rapidly transformed from a research institution into a commercial platform. API services, enterprise-level 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's valuation reached approximately $852 billion, and it has confidentially filed for an IPO. The market widely speculates that if the IPO proceeds smoothly, its valuation could further approach the trillion-dollar range, but no official valuation guidance has been disclosed at present.

Compared to OpenAI, Anthropic's development path has been relatively low-key, but its growth rate has also attracted market attention. Founded 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 its latest funding round disclosure, Anthropic's valuation has reached approximately $965 billion, higher than OpenAI's current valuation of approximately $852 billion. Meanwhile, the company has also confidentially filed for an IPO. For many institutional investors, Anthropic represents an alternative AI development path—one that places greater emphasis on enterprise scenarios, risk control, and long-term governance structures.

From a capital market perspective, the IPOs of OpenAI and Anthropic are significant far beyond the companies themselves. In the past few years, the AI concept has almost dominated the valuation system of global tech stocks, but investors have actually had very limited access to truly leading pure AI companies. Nvidia is primarily a computing power provider, while Microsoft and Google are comprehensive technology platforms. OpenAI and Anthropic, however, are among the few companies that directly represent the value of large-scale AI industries.

This means that once the two companies go public, global capital will have its first opportunity to directly invest in large-scale foundational model companies. For many institutions, this appeal may even surpass that of some traditional tech giants. Because of this, many investors are beginning to worry: when funds concentrate on AI leaders, will other tech assets and even the crypto market experience significant diversion?

Why is the market worried that the three major IPOs will "drain" market liquidity?

In fact, similar concerns resurface whenever a mega-IPO occurs in the market.

The underlying logic is not complicated. An IPO is essentially the transfer of 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 wealth funds, and hedge funds, participating in new share issuances often means freeing up funds from their existing portfolios. Therefore, when multiple mega-IPOs occur simultaneously, the flow of funds from other assets to new shares is almost inevitable.

From this perspective, SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic do indeed possess the conditions to generate a "siphoning effect." Based on current market expectations, the three companies are valued at over $3.5 trillion. Even if the actual percentage of outstanding shares is far lower than this, they are still enough to become one of the most important investment destinations in the global capital market. For many institutions that are bullish on AI and technological innovation, participating in these companies' IPOs is not only an investment opportunity but also a strategic move.

The market's main concern isn't the IPOs themselves, but rather where the funds might flow out. If institutional investors choose to reduce their holdings in existing tech stocks to participate in the subscription, some growth sectors could face short-term pressure. If the source of funds further expands to high-risk assets, some crypto assets could also be affected. Therefore, discussions about "liquidity drain" always arise when a large IPO is approaching.

However, the problem is that theoretically, the diversion of funds does not equate to a market collapse.

The total market capitalization of listed stocks in the United States is approaching $80 trillion, and the daily trading volume is also considerable. Even if all three companies eventually complete their IPOs, the proportion of shares actually entering the market will still be limited. Historical experience shows that what truly determines the market direction is never the new supply of stocks, but rather the overall liquidity environment. When the market is in an easing cycle, even with a massive IPO, 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 correction due to economic slowdown or rising interest rates.

In other words, mega-IPOs are more like amplifiers than the root cause. If the market itself is fragile, then large IPOs may exacerbate volatility; but if market liquidity is ample and risk appetite is high, IPOs are often just part of a rotation of funds.

What does historical experience tell us?

Looking back at the capital market over the past two decades, it is not uncommon for large IPOs to attract attention, but cases that actually lead to systemic risks are extremely rare.

In 2014, Alibaba's IPO on the New York Stock Exchange raised a record-breaking amount of capital, which was then global. At the time, the market was also concerned that the massive fundraising would impact the US stock market. However, as it turned out, Alibaba's listing primarily attracted global capital attention to China's internet industry and did not alter the overall trend of the US stock market. In the following years, the US stock market continued its bull market.

In 2019, Saudi Aramco completed a nearly $30 billion IPO, once again breaking the global IPO record. Given the global economic slowdown and rising geopolitical risks at the time, many analysts believed that such a massive fundraising demand might affect market liquidity. However, the final result proved that the market's ability to absorb such a mega-IPO far exceeded expectations.

Even Arm's highly anticipated IPO in recent years has not had a decisive impact on the overall performance of tech stocks. Short-term fluctuations certainly exist, but they are more a reflection of the reallocation of funds within the industry rather than a disappearance of liquidity in the entire market.

The root cause of this phenomenon lies in the fact that the capital market is not a pool with a fixed capacity. The listing of high-quality assets often attracts new funds into the market, rather than simply drawing funds from existing assets. Especially for global institutional investors, when truly scarce assets emerge, they are often accompanied by new allocation needs, rather than simple internal reallocation.

Therefore, based on historical experience, it is not surprising that SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic have caused market fluctuations, but it lacks sufficient basis to directly equate them with a market collapse.

Impact on the stock market: Short-term volatility is inevitable, but in the long run it's more like a valuation restructuring.

If we were to say which market the three major IPOs will have the most direct impact on, the answer would undoubtedly be technology stocks.

Over the past few years, AI has become one of the strongest investment themes in global capital markets. From Nvidia to cloud computing, from data centers to software services, numerous companies have received valuation premiums due to their AI-related aspects. However, companies that truly represent the value creation of large-scale models have remained largely absent from the public market. The emergence of OpenAI and Anthropic signifies, for the first time, that investors have the opportunity to directly invest in core AI assets.

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

Companies that rely heavily on concept-driven growth may face a contraction in valuation premiums as investors finally have access to purer AI targets. Meanwhile, those that truly benefit from the expansion of AI infrastructure, such as computing power providers, data center operators, and enterprise software platforms, are likely to continue receiving funding.

The impact of SpaceX's IPO is somewhat different. For satellite communications, commercial spaceflight, and related infrastructure companies, SpaceX's listing will become a new industry valuation benchmark. For the first time, the market will have a publicly traded commercial space leader as a reference point, which could drive a repricing of the entire industry chain.

From a long-term perspective, the listing of these three companies is more likely to strengthen, rather than weaken, the importance of the technology sector. Over time, once they meet the relevant criteria and are included in major indices, a large number of ETFs and index funds will passively allocate to these companies. At that point, the scale of global capital inflows may even exceed that of the IPO phase itself.

Therefore, what the stock market should really focus on is not the performance on the day of the IPO, but whether these companies can deliver on the growth expectations given by the market in the next few years.

Impact on the crypto market: Competition certainly exists, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing.

Compared to the stock market, the crypto market is more sensitive to changes in capital flows, leading to more intense discussions.

Over the past few years, AI and cryptocurrencies have been the two main themes attracting the most attention from venture capital. Some venture capital funds and growth capital firms have invested in both AI and cryptocurrencies, with significant overlap in their funding sources. With OpenAI and Anthropic officially entering the public market, it is highly likely that some institutional funds will shift towards AI assets.

This competition may be particularly pronounced for some AI-related tokens.

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 became publicly traded assets, investors naturally began to consider a question: if they could directly hold shares in the core companies of the AI industry, was it still necessary to bear the higher volatility and risks associated with some concept tokens?

From this perspective, some AI tokens that rely on narrative-driven approaches, VC-concept projects, and crypto assets that lack real revenue support may indeed face pressure from capital outflows.

However, extrapolating this pressure further to a "crypto market collapse" is also unfounded.

Bitcoin and the entire crypto market have gradually developed relatively independent operating logics. ETF fund flows, the regulatory environment, global monetary policy, and Bitcoin's own cycles typically have a more decisive impact than a single IPO event. Historically, the US stock market and the crypto market have both experienced synchronized rises and significant divergences, making it difficult to explain their trends with a single event.

More importantly, AI and blockchain are not entirely competitive. As AI applications continue 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 rather create new integration scenarios.

What we really need to be wary of is not IPOs, but valuation expectations.

If there is any real risk in the three major IPOs, it does not come from the listing itself, but from the market's expectations for future growth.

Whether it's SpaceX, OpenAI, or Anthropic, their current valuations are based on extremely optimistic future assumptions. Investors are willing to give them trillion-dollar valuations because they believe these companies will become the world's most important infrastructure platforms. If revenue growth slows, commercialization progress falls short of expectations, or profitability improves at a slower pace than the market anticipates, then a valuation repricing will be inevitable.

This risk will not initially impact the entire market, but rather the AI sector and high-growth technology stocks. The higher the market's expectations for the future, the greater the potential for correction once reality falls short of those expectations.

From this perspective, what the market really needs to focus on is not the IPO itself, but the ability to deliver results after the IPO.

Conclusion

The IPOs of SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic are more like a concentrated pricing of next-generation technological infrastructure and AI platforms by the global capital market, rather than a harbinger of a market crash. In the short term, capital outflows, sector rotation, and valuation repricing are almost inevitable, and some AI concept stocks and crypto assets may also face competitive pressure. However, historically, mega-IPOs rarely become a direct trigger for systemic risk, and are even less likely to determine the long-term direction of the stock or crypto market on their own.

Ultimately, market trends are determined by the macroeconomic liquidity environment, corporate profitability, and investor risk appetite. For investors, rather than worrying about whether the three major IPOs will crash the market, it's more important to focus on whether the growth logic behind these trillion-dollar valuations can ultimately be realized. After all, the capital market is never afraid of grand dreams; what truly hurts the market are often unfulfilled expectations.

Garrett Jin accurately timed the market top; the price of ETH had fallen 20% since he made a large deposit to Binance in early May.

Popular Articles