Search for Anthropic in a stock app and, until its IPO prices, you still get nothing: no ticker, no chart. In Tickers for the Tickerless it has the steepest chart on the board: six reported valuation points between May 2023 and May 2026, from $4.1B to $965B, each with its round, its date and its source attached. Here is how to read it, using only what the tool shows. The short explainer covers how the board works; this post is the Anthropic line itself.
1. What a point on this chart is
A point is a post-money valuation reported at a named funding round on a specific date. It is a negotiated price between the company and the investors in that round, reported by a named source, and it is neither a market price nor an official disclosure: private companies file no valuation with anyone. The tool keeps four kinds of points apart (primary rounds, tender offers, secondary sales and reported talks, the last drawn hollow and never counted as closed). All six of Anthropic's points are primary rounds. The line joining them is a drawing aid; the points are the data, and between two points the chart knows nothing.
2. The six marks, in order
May 2023, Series C, $4.1B. Anthropic did not disclose a Series C valuation; $4.1B is the figure reported by CNBC and The Information. March 2024, the Amazon strategic investment, $18.4B, as reported by Bloomberg. March 2025, Series E, $61.5B, announced by Anthropic itself. September 2025, Series F, $183B, announced by Anthropic. February 2026, Series G, $380B, announced by Anthropic. May 2026, Series H, $965B, as reported by Bloomberg, and labelled in the tool as the company's last private mark.
Read the spacing, not just the sizes. The first three points span almost two years; the last three arrive inside eight months, $183B, $380B and $965B between September 2025 and May 2026. End to end, the reported mark multiplied about 235 times in three years. The latest step, Series G to Series H, is 2.54x. The biggest single step is the first one: 4.49x, from the Series C to the Amazon strategic investment.
3. The revenue line changed its source
The head-to-head, on the only scoreboard private AI publishes
Claude vs ChatGPT got the priced treatment on this blog first; this is the other pairing readers ask for, the answer engine against the incumbent. Perplexity and ChatGPT overlap as products, a question typed either place gets an answer, but as companies they sit at opposite ends of the Tickerless board's scale, and the board's figures (12 private AI companies, compiled October 2026 from press-reported points) let the comparison be priced instead of vibes-based.
The two scoreboards
| OpenAI (ChatGPT) | Perplexity | |
|---|---|---|
| Latest reported mark | $840B | $30B |
| Mark basis | February 2026 funding round | August 2026 round, reported to be in talks |
| Reported revenue (annualized) | $20B (December 2025) | $200M |
| Mark as a multiple of revenue | 42x | 150x |
| Board rank by mark, of 12 | 2nd (Anthropic leads at $965B) | 6th |
Two gaps, two meanings. The valuation gap, 28x, is what private-market investors currently pay for the difference between the category owner and its best-known challenger. The revenue gap, 100x, is what customers currently pay. Perplexity's mark works out to 150 times its reported revenue; OpenAI's to 42 times. Neither multiple is a price in any traded sense, but the spread between them is the market saying Perplexity's price is mostly a growth claim, while OpenAI's is mostly a business.
The caveats that travel with the numbers
Perplexity's $30 billion point is its softest figure on the board: an August 2026 round reported to be in talks, not a close, so treat the mark as provisional in a way OpenAI's closed February 2026 round is not. Both revenue points are company-reported snapshots, Perplexity's $200 million annualized and OpenAI's $20 billion reported for December 2025, taken at different moments in fast-moving years. And a private mark is the last price a small pool of investors agreed on, not a quote; Anthropic's S-1 filing in October 2026 is the reminder that these numbers only become real at an IPO. The full lines for both companies, every dated point with its source, are in Tickers for the Tickerless, and the Claude pairing is priced in Claude vs ChatGPT, Priced. Sources: the modeled form is GoodDay's head-to-head comparisons, pair shifted because this blog already holds the Claude pairing; all figures are the board's recorded points, as captioned.