Anthropic vs. OpenAI: Five Advantages – Why is OpenAI consistently outperformed by Anthropic? Anthropic's internal unity versus OpenAI's chronic internal strife is the first advantage. OpenAI's organizational conflicts escalated to the point where the board directly dismissed the CEO, only for the CEO to return forcefully a few days later, forcing a board reorganization. Following this, OpenAI experienced frequent departures of senior and mid-level executives, and recently, multiple members of its security team resigned, one of whom publicly criticized OpenAI's corporate culture. In contrast, Anthropic has largely maintained Dario's autocratic leadership. As the saying goes, unity is strength, and strength is unity. Anthropic's strategic choices are sound, while OpenAI is prone to indecisiveness. This is the second advantage. While everyone's attention was focused on consumer-facing chat, Anthropic dared to make unconventional decisions, prioritizing business-facing (B2B) and coding. OpenAI, on the other hand, had many more factors to consider. Initially, OpenAI invested too many resources in consumer-facing chat, and then hastily shifted its focus after seeing Anthropic's revenue success in B2B and coding. However, unwilling to abandon existing investments, they simultaneously maintained many directions, including less valuable businesses like Sora and the AI browser, wasting considerable energy and computing power. This illustrates the advantage of the founder's autocratic leadership. Within the company structure, autocratic leadership equates to excellence, while collective decision-making is seen as ineffective. Anthropic sets standards, while OpenAI follows suit—this is the third advantage. Anthropic launched MCP and Agent Skills. Being the first to propose these standards has significant practical benefits. Anthropic allows product implementation and specification design to progress together, enabling its models to acquire the necessary capabilities in advance. In contrast, OpenAI could only reluctantly adapt its products and models after these standards became de facto standards. This back-and-forth wasted considerable time and resulted in a significant lag in model performance compared to Opus 4.6 for a considerable period. Anthropic cultivates numerous allies, while OpenAI makes enemies everywhere—this is the fourth advantage. Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and SpaceX AI are all important allies of Anthropic, providing them with substantial computing power. In contrast, OpenAI has a history of conflicts with Musk, a falling out with Microsoft over an initial investment agreement, and competition with Google in the consumer market. Anthropic embraces a broader humanistic approach, while OpenAI is purely a tool—this is its fifth advantage. Starting with Opus 4.5, it's clear that the Claude model's ability to speak in a human-like manner is far superior to GPT. Although there was a detour from Opus 4.7 to Opus 5 (possibly due to the distillation of GPT), Opus 5.5 corrected this in time. Anthropic officials stated that they consciously improved the model's ability to speak in a human-like manner in this generation. GPT is purely a tool model, lacking any intellectual or aesthetic appeal. Moreover, OpenAI seems quite satisfied with this positioning, recently making rapid progress in solving mathematical problems. Anthropic, on the other hand, has consistently strengthened its connections with religious and philosophical circles. Some ridicule it as a charlatan company, unaware that working in AI is about creating gods, and AI practitioners must be prepared to become priests of the god of AI. I'd like to specifically mention Ali here. When they eliminated Lin Junyang, there was nothing wrong with that in itself, but at the same time, they also said they wouldn't put anyone on a pedestal.