The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →New Constructs, a research firm, has called a potential Anthropic initial public offering the “most ridiculous IPO of 2026,” according to a CNBC report published October 7, 2026. The label is that firm’s opinion, not a market finding. As of that report, Anthropic had not made its prospectus public, and no listing date or final IPO price has been confirmed. Every valuation and financial figure below should be read as attributed to the people or outlets that reported it.
What the analyst actually said
New Constructs’ argument is that Anthropic is worth far less than the valuation that a public offering could imply, and that its economics are weak. CNBC reports the firm’s view directly: “We don’t think Anthropic has a viable business.” That sentence is attributed to the firm as a whole. The report does not tie it to a named individual, so it should be quoted as New Constructs’ position and nothing more personal.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The valuation math behind the headline
According to CNBC, New Constructs values Anthropic at about $150 billion. It argues against a potential valuation of $2 trillion. The firm’s central test is profitability: it says Anthropic would need profits roughly twice Nvidia’s trailing four-quarter net income to justify the higher figure. CNBC reports that Nvidia’s net income over those four quarters topped $190 billion. Doubling that figure implies profits on the order of $380 billion, a level the report implicitly treats as far beyond what Anthropic can show.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Two qualifications matter here. First, these are inputs to New Constructs’ argument, not a valuation model that has been independently reproduced. Second, the comparison depends on Anthropic reaching profits it has not been reported to have earned in any period of the reported figures below.
#1 Best Overall
The financial figures and how much weight each can bear
Several numbers circulate around the IPO story. They come from different sources and carry different levels of certainty, so they should not be merged into one timeline.
| Figure | Reported by | Basis | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 revenue of $4.6 billion | Reuters, as cited by CNBC | Leaked copy of a prospectus | Reported figure; not an audited public filing |
| 2025 net loss of $42 billion | Reuters, as cited by CNBC | Leaked copy of a prospectus | Reported figure; not an audited public filing |
| Annualized revenue run rate of $65 billion, about seven times the year-earlier level | Anthropic, reported by CNBC | Company claim made at the end of July 2026 | Company-stated run rate; not full-year revenue |
| On pace for $100 billion in annualized revenue by end-2026 | The New York Times, as cited by CNBC | September 2026 report | Projection, not a result |
| Q2 2026 revenue of $11.5 billion and back-to-back operating profits | Yahoo Finance, dated October 8, 2026 | Not identified in the coverage | Unverified; conflicts with the losses reported by CNBC |
The run-rate figure is a snapshot of recent monthly revenue multiplied out to a year. It is useful for showing momentum, but it does not show what a company earned across a full year, and it is not the same as the loss figures above.
Why the revenue reports do not add up
The Yahoo Finance report is the outlier. It describes second-quarter 2026 revenue of $11.5 billion and operating profits in consecutive periods. CNBC’s account, built on the leaked prospectus, describes a large net loss for 2025. Both cannot be fully reconciled from the coverage available. The Yahoo report does not identify the document or data behind its figures, and it does not explain how a company with those quarterly profits could carry the annual loss described elsewhere. Until a primary document, such as a public filing, confirms one account, the discrepancy should be treated as unresolved rather than averaged into a middle estimate.
The open-source argument
Beyond valuation, New Constructs’ case rests on competition. The firm argues that open-source AI models could pressure the pricing and margins of closed, proprietary models such as Anthropic’s. CNBC’s report presents this as the firm’s reasoning, not as a documented trend in Anthropic’s own results. Whether open-source pressure is already visible in Anthropic’s revenue is a separate question that the reported figures do not answer.
How much to weigh the firm’s track record
New Constructs’ earlier calls are mixed, and CNBC’s account gives examples on both sides. Readers can use that record to judge how much weight to give the firm’s current opinion, but a past miss or hit does not settle whether this particular assessment is right.
Calls that went against the firm
- DoorDash (2020): New Constructs named DoorDash its “most ridiculous” IPO pick for 2020. According to the report, DoorDash rose sharply on its first trading day and later reached a much larger market capitalization.
Calls that went in the firm’s favor
- WeWork: The firm criticized WeWork ahead of its IPO, which was later withdrawn.
- Allbirds: The firm was bearish on Allbirds, whose assets were later sold for a reported amount. CNBC’s account does not establish that outcome in a way that proves the firm’s specific valuation view.
What is still unknown
- Whether Anthropic has filed a registration statement or made a prospectus public.
- When, or whether, an offering will take place, and at what price.
- Whether the leaked-prospectus figures for 2025 match the final filed numbers, if a filing is made.
- Which of the conflicting revenue and profit accounts, if either, is accurate for 2026.
- Whether New Constructs will revise its $150 billion estimate after any public disclosure.
The most reliable way to check progress is the company’s own filings and the announcements that accompany them. Until those exist, every figure in this story is an attributed claim, a projection, or an estimate, and should be labeled that way wherever it is repeated.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
