Discover top fintech news and events!
Subscribe to FinTech Weekly's newsletter
Read by executives at JP Morgan, Coinbase, Blackrock, Klarna and more
As 2026 begins, U.S. capital markets are approaching a rare inflection point. On one side sits a potential wave of historic public listings led by SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic — three private technology companies whose combined valuations are approaching levels once reserved for entire sectors. On the other side are firms like Ripple, deliberately choosing to remain private despite ample investor demand and deep capital needs.
Taken together, these paths are not contradictory. They reveal a deeper structural shift underway in global finance: public markets are increasingly becoming the destination for companies building frontier infrastructure, while a growing number of mature, cash-rich technology firms are discovering they no longer need an IPO to scale.
A potential IPO cycle unlike any other
If SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic proceed toward public listings as widely expected, the scale would be unprecedented. Market estimates suggest combined valuations nearing $3 trillion, a figure that would rival the largest listing cycles in U.S. history. More importantly, it would mark a decisive pivot in what public markets are being asked to finance.
This is not another generation of consumer software or incremental SaaS platforms. These companies sit at the edge of long-duration technological transformation. SpaceX has built a vertically integrated orbital ecosystem, anchored by Starlink’s rapidly expanding satellite internet business and reinforced by its ambitions around Starship. OpenAI has become the commercial engine of the generative AI boom, pairing extraordinary revenue growth with a public benefit structure designed to navigate the ethical stakes of artificial general intelligence. Anthropic has taken a more measured route, prioritizing enterprise trust, safety, and partnerships that resonate with regulated industries.
For public investors, these listings would represent something new: direct exposure to technologies shaping not just markets, but geopolitics, labor, defense, and global infrastructure. The anticipated interest from mutual funds, pension managers, and ETFs reflects a recognition that these assets may become foundational components of long-term portfolios rather than speculative growth plays.
Liquidity as strategy, not necessity
What unites SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic is not simply their size, but the role public markets could play in their next phase. Capital access at this scale is less about survival and more about liquidity, signaling, and permanence. Public listings offer a way to distribute ownership more broadly, anchor valuations transparently, and provide exit paths for early stakeholders — all while funding investments that stretch across decades.
In that sense, 2026 may mark the moment when frontier industries such as advanced AI and space infrastructure formally cross into the financial mainstream. The symbolism matters. Once public, these companies will shape index construction, capital flows, and even how risk is defined across the technology sector.
Ripple’s counterpoint: strength through staying private
Against this backdrop, Ripple’s decision to again rule out an IPO offers a revealing contrast. Speaking publicly this week, Monica Long made clear that the company sees no strategic need to enter public markets. Following a $500 million private raise in late 2025 at a reported $40 billion valuation, Ripple appears to have achieved something that was rare even a decade ago: late-stage scale without liquidity pressure.
Ripple’s balance sheet strength has enabled a year of aggressive dealmaking, including acquisitions across prime brokerage, custody, treasury management, and stablecoin payments. Rather than using public markets to fund growth, Ripple is using private capital to consolidate an end-to-end enterprise digital asset stack — from payments and liquidity to custody and settlement.
This approach highlights a critical distinction. For Ripple, liquidity is already abundant, governance flexibility remains intact, and strategic execution is faster without the disclosure and quarterly pressures that come with public ownership. In other words, staying private is not a limitation — it is an advantage.
Two paths, one market reality
The divergence between these strategies underscores a broader truth about modern capital markets. IPOs are no longer a default milestone. They are a tool, chosen when public participation meaningfully enhances a company’s mission, scale, or legitimacy. For SpaceX and AI leaders like OpenAI and Anthropic, the sheer scope of their ambitions aligns naturally with public capital. For Ripple, whose strategy centers on infrastructure integration and product depth rather than capital intensity, remaining private preserves agility.
This is why the coming year feels so pivotal. 2026 is shaping up not simply as a banner year for listings, but as a moment when the rules around going public are being rewritten. Public markets are becoming arenas for funding civilization-scale systems, while private markets are increasingly capable of sustaining globally significant businesses on their own terms.
What investors should be watching next
As the year unfolds, attention will focus less on whether these companies list and more on what their choices signal. If the mega-IPOs proceed, they could trigger portfolio rebalancing across the technology sector, redirect capital flows, and redefine benchmarks. If more companies follow Ripple’s lead, it will further validate the rise of private markets as long-term homes for scaled innovation.
Either way, the message is clear. The line between public and private is no longer about maturity. It is about strategy. And in 2026, that strategic divide may reshape how innovation is financed for the next generation.
