On October 16, according to Reuters citing four informed sources, Anthropic, which was previously seen as a core asset for the next round of capital frenzy, has recently disclosed a slowdown in revenue growth. Specific revenue figures, growth percentage, and profit or loss data have not been explicitly stated, but the judgment of "slowdown" is sufficient to shift the narrative around its IPO valuation from enthusiastic to cautious. In the same report, some existing and potential investors are said to be reassessing the potential IPO pricing of this AI company, lowering the previously widely circulated expectation of about $2 trillion to a new discussion range of about $1.5 trillion. It should be emphasized that these two figures represent the game between investors and market expectations, not any official pricing or conclusions in prospectuses, and all current news about revenue growth and valuation ranges remains at the level of a single source cited by Reuters. Due to the lack of more detailed financial disaggregation and a clear IPO timetable, this adjustment from $2 trillion down to $1.5 trillion resembles a “rehearsal” in the primary market under conditions of incomplete information: on one side is the continued enthusiasm for the high growth and high imagination of the large model business, while on the other side, there is a return to rational calculations of cash flow and sustainability when faced with signals of slowing growth. This sense of tearing itself is the most worthy part of the current AI valuation story to be questioned.
Slowing revenue growth breaks the myth of high growth
In past rounds of valuation imagination, Anthropic was presumed to be placed in a narrative framework of “forever high growth,” with revenue seen merely as an abstract symbol that would only rise along a steeper curve. It is within this narrative context that the phrase “slowing revenue growth” appears particularly jarring—according to four unnamed informed sources cited by Reuters, Anthropic's latest revenue growth has no longer been in the accelerated state as previously rumored, but the briefing did not provide any revenue figures, growth percentages, or comparative base data. For a leading AI company, this means investors must acknowledge a reality: even if the absolute scale is still growing, as long as the acceleration is not sustained, the “limitless expansion” story granted by the market begins to fracture, and high growth is no longer a premise that can be written into valuation models without substantiation.
The awkwardness lies in the fact that the information currently held by the primary market comes almost entirely from the paraphrasing of such informed sources, rather than formal disclosures at the company level. Without detailed revenue, breakdown by product line, or even verification of profitability, investors can only conduct reverse reasoning on the ambiguous conclusion of “slowing growth”: whether it has fallen from a very high growth rate to still robust ranges, or whether it has encountered structural constraints right from the start, with different assumptions corresponding to completely different valuation ranges. Meanwhile, Anthropic has not publicly responded to the revenue performance or IPO valuation news in the existing materials, and existing and potential investors can only conduct internal calculations and scenario analyses based on a single source conveyed by a single media outlet. In the absence of formal company disclosures, “slowing revenue growth” itself becomes the most critical yet ambiguous variable for investors reevaluating Anthropic's long-term story.
From $2 trillion to $1.5 trillion: AI valuation bargaining
After the news of slowing revenue growth surfaced, some existing and potential investors began to lower the discussion valuation of Anthropic's potential IPO from about $2 trillion to about $1.5 trillion, according to informed sources cited by Reuters. This nominal change from “2” to “1.5” actually reflects an expected discount of nearly one quarter, marking the first round of tentative repricing by investors who have regraded the growth story on the basis of a single media outlet and a single source. Both figures currently remain within the “discussion range” and are not publicly provided pricing guidance from the company or underwriters, nor have they been verified by a broader market.
In the context of the primary market, such valuation ranges serve as tools for negotiation: $2 trillion appears more as a psychological price point that optimists and the company's management hope to maintain, while $1.5 trillion reflects the risk premium that cautious funds are willing to bear under the narrative of pressurized revenue growth. Investors test the limits of other participants by throwing out different figures in internal meetings and external communications, gradually narrowing the pricing disparity regarding Anthropic's growth potential and uncertainty. As long as the official formal IPO disclosure and pricing process has not been initiated, these figures remain expectations and negotiation chips, and $2 trillion and $1.5 trillion represent coordinates of two different risk-reward trade-offs, rather than conclusions that have been collectively confirmed by the market.
Valuation game risks under a single source of information
The current discussion surrounding the slowdown in Anthropic's revenue growth and the adjustment of valuation from about $2 trillion to about $1.5 trillion is nearly entirely locked within a Reuters report, which cites four anonymous informed sources but does not provide basic financial metrics such as revenue size, specific growth percentage, and loss situation. The concentration of information on a single media outlet and unnamed sources means that the market is interpreting these valuation ranges while “not being able to see the underlying numbers”; any optimism or pessimism regarding growth can easily be amplified into an emotional judgment about $2 trillion or $1.5 trillion, rather than a pricing decision based on verifiable data.
Equally concerning is that this round of valuation bargaining lacks key execution information such as IPO scheduling, underwriting institutions, and proposed listing locations; there have also been no official comments or clarifications from Anthropic or major investors on related rumors in the fact database. Under such informational hierarchies, the so-called $2 trillion and $1.5 trillion can only be regarded as “valuation discussions in market rumors,” at best serving as psychological anchor points in the negotiation process, while formal IPO pricing must be built upon complete prospectuses, roadshow feedback, and book-building results. Until more public disclosures occur, understanding these two figures as anticipated ranges yet to be validated, rather than prices officially confirmed by the market or regulators, is the most fundamental risk safeguard regarding the current information environment.
Risk preference switch: AI valuation and crypto greed
On the same day that discussions lowered Anthropic's valuation from about $2 trillion to about $1.5 trillion and cited its slowing revenue growth, the crypto market displayed a starkly different emotional picture. According to Foresight News citing Alternative.me data, the crypto fear and greed index on that day was 63, while the previous day the index was 53, still classified as “neutral,” with a short-term shift from neutral to “greedy” reflecting traders' increased willingness to bear risk amid price fluctuations. However, this sentiment indicator only captures the subjective state of crypto asset participants and belongs to a distinctly different realm from the tug-of-war in the primary market regarding Anthropic's valuation, and should not be used as evidence to explain the latter's adjustment.
What is more noteworthy in this juxtaposition is the misalignment of risk preferences: on one side, equity investors are choosing to tighten their valuation expectations for AI companies based on the revenue slowdown news relayed by a single media source in a complex macro environment; on the other side, crypto traders show a higher willingness to leverage as the index rises from 53 to 63. Thus, there may be a divergence in the emotional rhythm between tech stocks and crypto assets, with one reevaluating growth assumptions and the other amplifying short-term volatility opportunities. It is important for readers to understand that the crypto fear and greed index is merely a reference signal for observing the mindset of the crypto market, and cannot be extrapolated as a cause for the adjustment of Anthropic's valuation, nor can it simply be used to derive the pricing direction of the entire AI asset class; it can only be viewed as supplementary evidence of the current structure of risk preferences.
Observing the valuation reshuffle from Anthropic to the AI sector
From the discussion of lowering Anthropic's valuation expectation from about $2 trillion to about $1.5 trillion, it can be seen that the primary market is beginning to attempt to reprice the growth trajectory of leading AI companies. This milestone event appears more like a concentrated stress test of the narrative combination of “high growth, quick IPO, high valuation,” rather than a simple case. Currently, all information regarding slowing revenue growth and IPO valuation ranges remains at the single media reported level based on four sources cited by Reuters, and lacks specific revenue or profit-loss data, as well as any official timetable or regulatory filings as more solid anchors. Therefore, it is more appropriate to observe this as an early signal that “pricing logic is adjusting,” rather than concluding about the entire AI sector based on it. What is truly worth tracking going forward is whether the financial disclosure rhythm of Anthropic and similar companies accelerates, whether the path to profitability can transition from story to numbers, and whether more valuation ranges emerge in subsequent financing or IPO negotiations. Until these variables are clarified, investors should remain cautious about the narrative of valuation downgrades from a single source and wait for more public data to validate current assumptions; that is the most rational response to this round of AI valuation reshuffling.
Join our community, let's discuss and grow stronger together!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到[email protected]，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
