Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

anthropic.com

161–170 of 458 posts

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#161

I wish I could invest into it, I'd at the very least have invested in their Series F. It was a no brainer by that point. If anyone could teach me how to get into stuff like this, that'd be awesome. I'm from the Netherlands, so not American. Though I'm married to an American.

[dead]

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#163
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Even Anthropic is such better branding than OpenAI (especially considering they're not open at all). My wife knows about Claude because that's what I use and we pay for. She uses it also as a result. And inevitably she will talk about Claude to her friends.

> The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Absolutely not, you live in a bubble. Everybody knows about ChatGPT. Few non-programmers have heard of anthropic or claude, nor do they care. But they all know what ChatGPT is.

>Few non-programmers have heard of anthropic or claude

They ran a super bowl ad. It's all over the construction industry. Claude is still not quite the Kleenex that ChatGPT is, but there is a pretty good chance lay people have heard of ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude by now.

To disagree with the person below/above me that ChatGPT is the word used generically, when someone uses Gemini or Claude or Copilot, they TELL you which one they used, because they are essentially saying "i didnt use ChatGPT by choice."

Gemini is the one most likely to be used without people knowing which one they used.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's semantics, but the latest raise might have been a follow-on to Series M, not a new round (to be clear, I know nothing about their finances, just speaking from experience at another company).

What happens when you make it to Z do they then start doing Z1 rounds or does it reset to AA like excel (though that would be confusing)? Hex?

The AA scheme has already been used for "down round", so they might have to get creative.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#165
> Since our Series G in February, adoption has continued to grow across global enterprise customers, and our run-rate revenue crossed $47 billion earlier this month.

OK, so their self-reported run-rate revenue hit $47bn in early May.

For comparison:

Apr 6th 2026: https://www.anthropic.com/news/google-broadcom-partnership-c... - "Demand from Claude customers has accelerated in 2026. Our run-rate revenue has now surpassed $30 billion—up from approximately $9 billion at the end of 2025."

So that's $30bn at the start of April.

Feb 12th 2026: https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-raises-30-billion-s... - "Today, our run-rate revenue is $14 billion, with this figure growing over 10x annually in each of those past three years."

That was $14bn on Feb 12th.

And $9bn in December (according to the above April 6th link.)

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Absolutely not, you live in a bubble. Everybody knows about ChatGPT. Few non-programmers have heard of anthropic or claude, nor do they care. But they all know what ChatGPT is.

Agreed. My Mom, who is a grandma, uses ChatGPT every day. Lots of nontech people use it.

Is she paying for anything though?

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people at medium size companies where they are tracking AI costs very carefully. They are pulling back to levels under $100/week in AI spend per engineer, encouraging use of lower quality, lower cost models, etc.

I don't doubt you, but $100 is approximately the cost to company of one hour of dev time. If companies end up being willing to spend only 2% of their dev budget on AI, this bubble is not going to last long.

I agree. $100/week is absurdly low if you want to allow for any real experimentation and productive use of these tools.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#169
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people at medium size companies where they are tracking AI costs very carefully. They are pulling back to levels under $100/week in AI spend per engineer, encouraging use of lower quality, lower cost models, etc.

You can run models near 24/7 per developers at that price with judicious choice of subscriptions, so that's not really saying much. Most people don't yet have mature enough setups to fully exploit that level of use.

With open models, perhaps. But $100/week isn't going to get you 24/7 use of Claude Sonnet.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#170
post #67

Anthropic has a great product, but what's going on in the stock market is astonishing. Companies waiting to be valued at a trillion dollars before going public? (I'm writing this comment with the assumption that they will go public soon and the valuation will be higher than this $965 billion dollar private valuation) The stock market used to be a place for companies to raise money from investors. But that isn't what…

Yeup, no shortage of tech IPOs over the past five years that are now valued at like 5% of what they were after being dumped onto the market: ZoomInfo, Bumble, Gemini And many more that are 50% of what they were: Snowflake, Coinbase And many more that went back to private companies and then were sold off: Carbon Black, etc... I'm actually too lazy to go list out all of them. But employees, beware, of those gnarly lock…

... still, "on average" IPOs tend to make money, no? that's why people (fight to be able) to buy them.

this gives a nice comfy exit to many late-stage investors, etc.

and, of course, it's hard to say that it's great that these companies are mere shadows of themselves post-IPO, but also it's impossible to non-misleadingly assess each IPO as if they were in a vacuum.

obviously Coinbase is/was a stupid venture, but at the same time it was a pretty good bet at the time. and the same stands for a lot of these.

Post reply on HN