In March 2026, OpenAI made headlines across Silicon Valley by securing $122 billion in funding and achieving an $852 billion valuation, only to find itself entangled in an investor trust crisis on the brink of its public debut. While ChatGPT continues to dominate the consumer market, OpenAI faces setbacks from Anthropic in the enterprise sector and intense pressure from Google. Amidst strategic confusion, stagnant profitability, and escalating competition, this AI valuation giant confronts the most significant structural skepticism since its inception.

I. The Paradox of Soaring Valuation: Rapid Growth Masks Massive Losses

OpenAI's valuation narrative was once underpinned by extraordinary user and revenue growth. By April 2026, ChatGPT boasted over 900 million weekly active users and 50 million paid subscribers, with annualized revenue reaching $25 billion. Yet, behind these impressive numbers lie substantial losses and skyrocketing operational costs. Compared to its competitors, OpenAI's financial shortcomings are stark: Anthropic's annualized revenue has surpassed $30 billion (outpacing OpenAI), with enterprise clients constituting 80% of its business. Its projected 2026 loss, based on EBITDA, stands at $11 billion. Meanwhile, Alphabet, Google's parent company, reported a staggering market cap, with full-year 2025 revenue hitting $402.8 billion and net profit reaching $132.17 billion, its AI division achieving full profitability through advertising and cloud ecosystems. Despite being unlisted, OpenAI commands a valuation equivalent to 40% of Google's and nearly triple that of Anthropic, yet it significantly trails in both profitability and enterprise market share.

The secondary market has already cast its vote: OpenAI's secondary stock transactions value the company at around $765 billion, roughly a 10% discount to its official funding valuation. In contrast, Anthropic's secondary market valuation stands at $600 billion, a premium of over 50% compared to its last funding round. Investors are signaling their judgment through these price disparities: OpenAI's $852 billion valuation is facing a crucial test of market confidence.

II. Strategic Missteps: Failing to Defend Consumer Market and Capture Enterprise Opportunities

At the heart of the controversy lies OpenAI's strategic "U-turn" as it prepares for its IPO. The company claims to be solidifying ChatGPT's consumer dominance while abruptly shutting down Sora, an AI video generation platform launched just six months earlier, to focus entirely on enterprise APIs and programming tools. This "dual-front war" has drawn criticism from investors, who see it as a "severe loss of strategic focus."

On the consumer front, ChatGPT's competitive edge is under threat. Gemini is rapidly gaining ground, leveraging the Google Search and Workspace ecosystems, with its app surpassing 750 million monthly active users. Open-source models and Chinese competitors (such as Tongyi Qianwen and Doubao) are eroding market share with cost-effective, adaptable solutions, boasting 203 million and 315 million MAUs, respectively. OpenAI's decision to shut down Sora and other moves have been perceived by outsiders as a retreat from the consumer market.

In the enterprise arena, Anthropic is surging ahead. Data from March 2026 reveals that among new enterprises purchasing AI services for the first time, Anthropic captured approximately 73% of the market share, while OpenAI held just 27%. The Claude series now accounts for 40% of enterprise API market spending and 54% of the programming segment. More critically, OpenAI's enterprise client revenue share stands at around 40%, well below Anthropic's 80%, indicating a loss of high-value customers.

Investors' questions strike at the core: Why would a cash cow with nearly 1 billion weekly active users and $25 billion in annual revenue abandon innovation to invade a B-side battlefield already dominated by rivals? The answer lies in anxiety—OpenAI recognizes that consumer AI competition is intensifying and that the enterprise market represents the high-margin, long-cycle core. However, its hasty transition and tactical confusion have left the company trapped in a dilemma of "failing to defend old territory and unable to capture new ground."

III. Valuation Reassessment: From "AGI Faith" to "Commercial Realism"

The foundation of OpenAI's valuation has shifted from "AGI monopoly faith" to "commercial value validation." Before 2025, capital was willing to pay a premium for the "ultimate dream of artificial general intelligence"; by 2026, as the industry enters a commercialization phase, investors are beginning to re-evaluate using traditional metrics like revenue, profit, and price-to-sales (PS) ratios.

Based on current data: OpenAI's $852 billion valuation corresponds to $25 billion in annualized revenue, yielding a PS ratio of approximately 34x; Anthropic's roughly $380 billion valuation corresponds to $30 billion in annualized revenue, yielding a PS ratio of about 13x. For comparison, traditional tech giants typically have PS ratios in the single digits. More concerning is that OpenAI may achieve cash flow break-even later than its rivals. According to sources, Anthropic is expected to achieve EBITDA-based profitability for the first time in 2028, while market analysis suggests OpenAI's profitability timeline may not arrive until 2030. In the rational capital environment of 2026, the narrative of "burning money for the future" no longer resonates with all investors.

Internal pressures are more direct: The current $122 billion funding round imposes extremely high exit requirements for the future. However, with Anthropic closing in with a lower valuation and faster growth, and Google leveraging its trillion-dollar market cap and ecosystem to dominate, OpenAI is losing ground in the enterprise market, challenging the realization of its valuation targets. Signs of waning confidence among some early investors are already evident in the secondary market, where OpenAI's shares are trading at a discount.

IV. Reshaping the AI Oligopoly: Can OpenAI Maintain Its Crown?

The global AI landscape has evolved from OpenAI's "lone dominance" to a more intricate competitive pattern: OpenAI defends its consumer base but faces growth ceilings and loss pressures; Anthropic attacks the high-end enterprise market with superior growth and client quality; Google mounts a comprehensive counterattack leveraging its technology, computing power, and cloud ecosystem.

In this upheaval, OpenAI's core risk is "strategic misalignment": On the consumer side, shutting down innovative projects (like Sora) may erode its image as a technological leader; on the enterprise side, its hasty entry lacks the deep client and product accumulation enjoyed by Anthropic. In contrast, Anthropic has consistently focused on the enterprise segment, achieving high synergy across its products, team, and ecosystem; Google has seamlessly integrated AI into Search, Workspace, and cloud services, forming an irreplicable closed loop.

For investors, the essence of the $852 billion valuation is paying for a "dual-front transformation filled with uncertainty." But the market has already provided some answers: As Anthropic rises rapidly with superior fundamentals and a clearer strategy, and as Google presses its absolute advantage, OpenAI's valuation myth is under unprecedented pressure.

From ChatGPT igniting the AI revolution to its $852 billion valuation sparking a trust crisis, OpenAI's journey mirrors the AI industry's shift from frenzy to rationality. Capital no longer blindly pays for vaporous AGI dreams but instead turns to commercial value that can be realized, generate profits, and build barriers. For OpenAI, the urgent task may be to halt strategic drift, focus on core strengths, and prove to the market that its massive investments can translate into sustainable profitability—otherwise, this valuation edifice built on capital may show cracks before the IPO bell even rings.

Source: Investor Network