#AnthropicPicksNasdaqForIPO
This is one of those headlines where I think it is important to separate what is actually confirmed from what the market is already pricing in.
Anthropic has reportedly selected Nasdaq for its potential IPO, according to Reuters, citing a Business Insider report and a person familiar with the company's plans. That is a meaningful step because Anthropic is moving closer to becoming a public company, but it does not mean the IPO is officially priced or that every number circulating online is confirmed.
Anthropic, the company behind Claude, confidentially filed for a U.S. IPO in June. Reuters has since reported that the company is looking toward a potential launch around October, with marketing expected to begin no earlier than mid-October. The exact listing date is still not locked in publicly.
Now comes the part that has really caught the market's attention:
Valuation.
Reports and investor discussions have pushed possible IPO valuations toward the $2 trillion area. But I would not call $2T an official Anthropic valuation today. It is an estimate being discussed around the potential offering, not a final IPO price.
That distinction matters.
Anthropic's last major private valuation was reported around $965 billion following its May 2026 financing, meaning a potential $2T public-market valuation would represent a huge step higher.
And this is where the story becomes bigger than Anthropic itself.
The market is effectively trying to answer one question:
How much are investors actually willing to pay for the next generation of AI companies?
If Anthropic can successfully approach a valuation close to $2T, it would provide another major data point for the private AI market. It could also influence how investors think about other giant unlisted technology companies and the valuations attached to them.
SpaceX is an obvious comparison.
SpaceX's enormous public-market debut has already given investors another reference point for how much capital markets are willing to assign to companies sitting at the intersection of technology, AI and infrastructure. The comparison is not perfect because SpaceX and Anthropic have completely different businesses, but the psychological effect on the market is interesting.
Private-market valuations are no longer happening in isolation.
Every major IPO gives investors another benchmark.
And that is why I think the Nasdaq decision itself is less important than what comes next.
The real test will be Anthropic's public filing, its financial numbers, the actual IPO price range, investor demand and — most importantly — whether public-market investors accept the valuation being discussed privately.
There is also another risk that the market cannot ignore.
AI valuations have become extremely sensitive to expectations. If revenue growth, AI infrastructure spending or future profitability fail to justify the valuation investors are expecting, the same excitement that pushes a private company higher can work in reverse once the stock becomes publicly traded.
So I am not looking at this headline as:
“Anthropic is officially worth $2 trillion.”
I am looking at it as:
Anthropic is moving closer to the public market, Nasdaq is reportedly the destination, and investors are now preparing for one of the biggest valuation tests of the AI boom.
The next numbers that really matter are the public filing, IPO price range and actual investor demand.
Until those arrive, the $2T figure should be treated as a market expectation/reporting point — not a confirmed final valuation.
That distinction is where the real story is.
#GateMeme #GateTrenchesZeroGas #GateLaunchesTrenchesWith0GasFee #AppleEvent @GateSquare @Gate_Square
$NAS100 ‌

#GateTop4MainstreamCEX
I keep seeing people focus on the “No. 4” part of Gate’s August ranking.
Personally, I’m more interested in what happened before Gate got there — and whether the numbers are strong enough to push it toward No. 3 next.
The August data shared by BlockBeats shows Gate doing roughly $40B in spot volume and $285B in derivatives volume. That is not a small number, especially when you consider how competitive the CEX market has become.
But volume by itself doesn’t convince me.
What I want to see is whether the activity is being supported by actual capital flows, users, liquidity and product growth.
And that’s where Gate’s recent numbers get interesting.
Gate’s August transparency report shows $8.215B in total reserves and a 127% overall reserve ratio as of August 19. It also reported around $308.1M in 30-day net inflows, which Gate said placed it second among major exchanges.
For me, that matters more than simply saying “Gate is No. 4.”
Then look at the user side.
Gate has now passed 60 million registered users, while its ecosystem has expanded to more than 5,000 digital assets and 12,800 stocks and ETFs. It is clearly moving beyond being just another crypto spot and futures platform and trying to build a much broader trading ecosystem.
But the part I’m watching most closely is derivatives.
Gate’s RWA perpetual volume reached approximately $64.7B in August, up 158% month over month. Its market share increased from 5.32% in July to 12.6%, putting Gate in the Top 3 for RWA perpetual trading.
That’s the kind of growth I pay attention to.
Because if Gate can keep gaining ground in newer markets while maintaining strong spot and derivatives activity, then the No. 4 ranking starts looking less like a ceiling and more like a stepping stone.
There’s another number I like even more from the transparency report: Gate’s Event Contract trading volume increased 286.09% month over month, while Perp DEX API trading volume increased 134%. Those are very different products, but together they show that the platform is trying to expand activity across multiple trading segments rather than relying on one market.
And this is where my personal view comes in.
I don’t think Gate needs to chase No. 3 just for the ranking.
If I’m using a platform for actual trading, I care about things like liquidity, execution, market depth, product choice, risk controls and whether the platform keeps improving when market conditions get difficult.
A ranking is the result.
The underlying infrastructure is what creates the ranking.
So where do I think Gate should be heading?
No. 4 → No. 3 → No. 2.
But I would rather see Gate take the slower route and make the growth sustainable than jump one position and lose momentum later.
The next test, in my opinion, is simple:
Can Gate continue attracting capital?
Can it keep growing derivatives volume without relying on temporary spikes?
Can it turn 60M+ users into deeper and more consistent trading activity?
And can its expansion into RWA, stocks and other asset classes create another source of long-term volume?
If the answer to those questions keeps being yes, then I don’t think No. 3 is an unrealistic target anymore.
In fact, the more interesting conversation might eventually become whether Gate can challenge the exchanges above No. 3.
But I’m not going to get ahead of the data.
Right now, I see a platform sitting at No. 4 with several growth indicators moving in the right direction.
So my target is straightforward:
No. 4 is where Gate is today.
No. 3 is where I want to see it next.
And after that, let the numbers decide how high it can go.
That’s the part I’ll be watching.
#GateMeme #GateTrenchesZeroGas #AppleEvent @GateSquare @Gate_Square