I want to help you think through what this could really mean\u2014for your retirement account, and for the indexes you probably own without realizing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Companies Staying Private for Longer<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nSome of you may remember a time when the initial public offering (IPO) was how companies funded growth. During the dotcom years, firms got listed early, sometimes before they had meaningful revenue, let alone profits. At the peak in 1995-1996, nearly 700 companies a year<\/a> went public on U.S. exchanges, according to the IPO Initiative at the University of Florida. The median company was about six or seven years old at the time of its IPO.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThat world is gone. Private capital markets have deepened significantly over the past two decades, and venture capital has scaled up. Meanwhile, the regulatory burden on public companies has increased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Together, these forces have pushed companies toward staying private for longer. Annual IPO counts have fallen sharply from those mid-90s peaks, while the median age of companies the time of listing has roughly doubled, to around 12-14 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Number](\"data:image\/svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB3aWR0aD0iMSIgaGVpZ2h0PSIxIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvMjAwMC9zdmciPjwvc3ZnPg==\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nPast performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
We\u2019re seeing the consequences up close. SpaceX was founded in 2002. Anthropic was founded in 2021 but has grown faster than virtually any company in venture capital history. In other words, they\u2019re mature, scaled businesses, and they\u2019re coming to public markets only now, after private markets have funded years of growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For investors, this cuts both ways. On the one hand, the risk of early-stage companies is largely behind you. On the other hand, so is a large portion of the potential upside. The early believers in SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI have already made their fortunes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Numbers Are Hard to Ignore<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nLet\u2019s briefly take a look at what\u2019s actually on the table with SpaceX and Anthropic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
SpaceX is targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation in an IPO priced at $135 per share. It\u2019s aiming to raise $75 billion, the largest public offering in history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Before slamming this as unjustified, consider that SpaceX launched 83% of all mass sent into orbit last year.<\/a> Its Starlink satellite broadband service now has over 12 million paid subscribers. According to the company, Starlink\u2019s cumulative network capacity has grown from essentially zero in 2019 to over 600 terabits per second today,<\/a> with the sharpest acceleration coming in the last 18 months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\nPast performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
As for SpaceX\u2019s AI division, Goldman Sachs, the IPO\u2019s lead underwriter, is projecting that it will grow roughly 100-fold by 2030,<\/a> from $3.2 billion to $322 billion. I\u2019d treat that figure as aspirational rather than a forecast, but it tells you what the pitch is based on.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAnthropic\u2019s story may be even more remarkable in terms of velocity. The San Francisco-based company\u2019s annualized revenue was $4 billion last July, and by year-end, it was $9 billion. By May of this year, it crossed a jaw-dropping $47 billion.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nIts valuation, at $965 billion following its most recent round of funding, now exceeds OpenAI\u2019s $852 billion.<\/a> And according to Ramp, which tracks business payment data across tens of thousands of U.S. companies, Anthropic\u2019s Claude passed OpenAI\u2019s ChatGPT in business adoption<\/a> for the first time in April. Over 34% of businesses said they subscribed to Claude, compared to 32% for OpenAI. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\nPast Performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
So why is the company seeking to go public? Anthropic President Daniela Amodei put it bluntly<\/a> at a tech conference last week: training AI models is \u201ca very capital-intensive business,\u201d and public markets are \u201cvery well-suited\u201d to funding that kind of long-cycle investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Potential Index Problem<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nMost Americans who are saving for retirement are doing so through broad index funds. If you\u2019re reading this, you\u2019re likely one of them. These products are passive by design, meaning they own what the index tells them to own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That works mostly smoothly when companies enter the index gradually, at sizes that don\u2019t move the needle too much. SpaceX entering at $1.75 trillion is a different matter altogether.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Nasdaq responded by creating a \u201cfast entry\u201d pathway,<\/a> allowing companies that rank among the top 40 of its 100 constituents by market cap to get added sooner. Under that provision, SpaceX is expected to be in the Nasdaq 100 just 15 trading days<\/a> after its June 12 IPO. That means every fund tracking that index will be forced to buy SpaceX. And to fund those purchases, they will have to trim existing positions in Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia and the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe S&P 500 took a different path. S&P Dow Jones Indices announced it would not change its rules<\/a> to fast-track mega-cap IPOs. Under existing methodology, SpaceX doesn\u2019t qualify, as it hasn\u2019t been public for 12 months, and it reported a $4.28 billion loss in the first quarter of this year. That keeps the company out of the S&P 500 for at least a year.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe broader point I\u2019m making is that these massive listings create structural dislocations that are otherwise invisible to most investors. Capital will be reallocated to fund new positions. Rebalancing trades will move prices. And when lockup periods expire\u2014typically 120 to 180 days after the IPO, though SpaceX may follow a staggered approach<\/a>\u2014there will be additional selling pressure as insiders access liquidity.<\/p>\n\n\n\nNone of this makes these IPOs inherently bad investments. It just means the post-IPO price action will be more complex than a simple \u201cup or down\u201d read on the company\u2019s fundamentals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What History Says About IPO Returns<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nI don\u2019t want to dissuade you from buying SpaceX or Anthropic when they list. But I\u2019ve witnessed a lot of IPO cycles over my decadeslong career, and there are some risks you should be aware of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Thomas Shipp, LPL Financial\u2019s Head of Equity Research, looked at roughly 1,500 IPOs from April 1995 through April 2025 on the NYSE and Nasdaq and found that the average one-year return from the first day\u2019s close was 10.5%. That sounds decent until you account for the extreme skew in that number. When Shipp stripped out the occasional extraordinary winner, the median return fell to negative 4.7%.<\/a> Not only that, but around 60% of the companies in Shipp\u2019s sample delivered zero or negative returns over the three years following their IPO. Only around 40% outperformed the S&P 500 in year one.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlso consider that the companies bringing these IPOs to market, and the investment banks underwriting them, have every incentive to price them at the upper bound of what investors will pay. The runway for publicly-funded growth has to justify the valuation already baked in the price.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For SpaceX specifically, that means believing not just in Starlink\u2019s subscriber trajectory\u2014which is genuinely impressive\u2014but also in technologies that don\u2019t exist yet, such as orbital data centers and Mars colonization. I look forward to seeing Elon Musk execute on two these fronts, but for now, the timeline is up in the air.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we\u2019re living through is a once-in-a-generation transfer of private market wealth into public markets. The companies that have defined the last decade of technological progress\u2014satellite communications, artificial intelligence, space infrastructure\u2014are finally arriving on exchanges where ordinary investors can own them. If you\u2019re thinking of participating, I hope you approach them the way you would any concentrated, high-conviction bet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
—<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That world is gone. Private capital markets have deepened significantly over the past two decades, and venture capital has scaled up. Meanwhile, the regulatory burden on public companies has increased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Together, these forces have pushed companies toward staying private for longer. Annual IPO counts have fallen sharply from those mid-90s peaks, while the median age of companies the time of listing has roughly doubled, to around 12-14 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Past performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019re seeing the consequences up close. SpaceX was founded in 2002. Anthropic was founded in 2021 but has grown faster than virtually any company in venture capital history. In other words, they\u2019re mature, scaled businesses, and they\u2019re coming to public markets only now, after private markets have funded years of growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For investors, this cuts both ways. On the one hand, the risk of early-stage companies is largely behind you. On the other hand, so is a large portion of the potential upside. The early believers in SpaceX, Anthropic and OpenAI have already made their fortunes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s briefly take a look at what\u2019s actually on the table with SpaceX and Anthropic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n SpaceX is targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation in an IPO priced at $135 per share. It\u2019s aiming to raise $75 billion, the largest public offering in history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before slamming this as unjustified, consider that SpaceX launched 83% of all mass sent into orbit last year.<\/a> Its Starlink satellite broadband service now has over 12 million paid subscribers. According to the company, Starlink\u2019s cumulative network capacity has grown from essentially zero in 2019 to over 600 terabits per second today,<\/a> with the sharpest acceleration coming in the last 18 months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Past performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As for SpaceX\u2019s AI division, Goldman Sachs, the IPO\u2019s lead underwriter, is projecting that it will grow roughly 100-fold by 2030,<\/a> from $3.2 billion to $322 billion. I\u2019d treat that figure as aspirational rather than a forecast, but it tells you what the pitch is based on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Anthropic\u2019s story may be even more remarkable in terms of velocity. The San Francisco-based company\u2019s annualized revenue was $4 billion last July, and by year-end, it was $9 billion. By May of this year, it crossed a jaw-dropping $47 billion.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Its valuation, at $965 billion following its most recent round of funding, now exceeds OpenAI\u2019s $852 billion.<\/a> And according to Ramp, which tracks business payment data across tens of thousands of U.S. companies, Anthropic\u2019s Claude passed OpenAI\u2019s ChatGPT in business adoption<\/a> for the first time in April. Over 34% of businesses said they subscribed to Claude, compared to 32% for OpenAI. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Past Performance is not indicative of future results. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So why is the company seeking to go public? Anthropic President Daniela Amodei put it bluntly<\/a> at a tech conference last week: training AI models is \u201ca very capital-intensive business,\u201d and public markets are \u201cvery well-suited\u201d to funding that kind of long-cycle investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Most Americans who are saving for retirement are doing so through broad index funds. If you\u2019re reading this, you\u2019re likely one of them. These products are passive by design, meaning they own what the index tells them to own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That works mostly smoothly when companies enter the index gradually, at sizes that don\u2019t move the needle too much. SpaceX entering at $1.75 trillion is a different matter altogether.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Nasdaq responded by creating a \u201cfast entry\u201d pathway,<\/a> allowing companies that rank among the top 40 of its 100 constituents by market cap to get added sooner. Under that provision, SpaceX is expected to be in the Nasdaq 100 just 15 trading days<\/a> after its June 12 IPO. That means every fund tracking that index will be forced to buy SpaceX. And to fund those purchases, they will have to trim existing positions in Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia and the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The S&P 500 took a different path. S&P Dow Jones Indices announced it would not change its rules<\/a> to fast-track mega-cap IPOs. Under existing methodology, SpaceX doesn\u2019t qualify, as it hasn\u2019t been public for 12 months, and it reported a $4.28 billion loss in the first quarter of this year. That keeps the company out of the S&P 500 for at least a year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The broader point I\u2019m making is that these massive listings create structural dislocations that are otherwise invisible to most investors. Capital will be reallocated to fund new positions. Rebalancing trades will move prices. And when lockup periods expire\u2014typically 120 to 180 days after the IPO, though SpaceX may follow a staggered approach<\/a>\u2014there will be additional selling pressure as insiders access liquidity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n None of this makes these IPOs inherently bad investments. It just means the post-IPO price action will be more complex than a simple \u201cup or down\u201d read on the company\u2019s fundamentals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don\u2019t want to dissuade you from buying SpaceX or Anthropic when they list. But I\u2019ve witnessed a lot of IPO cycles over my decadeslong career, and there are some risks you should be aware of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thomas Shipp, LPL Financial\u2019s Head of Equity Research, looked at roughly 1,500 IPOs from April 1995 through April 2025 on the NYSE and Nasdaq and found that the average one-year return from the first day\u2019s close was 10.5%. That sounds decent until you account for the extreme skew in that number. When Shipp stripped out the occasional extraordinary winner, the median return fell to negative 4.7%.<\/a> Not only that, but around 60% of the companies in Shipp\u2019s sample delivered zero or negative returns over the three years following their IPO. Only around 40% outperformed the S&P 500 in year one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Also consider that the companies bringing these IPOs to market, and the investment banks underwriting them, have every incentive to price them at the upper bound of what investors will pay. The runway for publicly-funded growth has to justify the valuation already baked in the price.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For SpaceX specifically, that means believing not just in Starlink\u2019s subscriber trajectory\u2014which is genuinely impressive\u2014but also in technologies that don\u2019t exist yet, such as orbital data centers and Mars colonization. I look forward to seeing Elon Musk execute on two these fronts, but for now, the timeline is up in the air.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we\u2019re living through is a once-in-a-generation transfer of private market wealth into public markets. The companies that have defined the last decade of technological progress\u2014satellite communications, artificial intelligence, space infrastructure\u2014are finally arriving on exchanges where ordinary investors can own them. If you\u2019re thinking of participating, I hope you approach them the way you would any concentrated, high-conviction bet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n —<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Number](\"https:\/\/www.usfunds.com\/app\/uploads\/2026\/06\/COMM-number-of-ipos-has-fallen-06052026.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe Numbers Are Hard to Ignore<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"Starlink](\"https:\/\/www.usfunds.com\/app\/uploads\/2026\/06\/COMM-starlink-capacity-06052026.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Anthropic's](\"https:\/\/www.usfunds.com\/app\/uploads\/2026\/06\/COMM-claude-higher-adoption-06052026.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe Potential Index Problem<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What History Says About IPO Returns<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n