Anthropic told investors that quarterly revenue rose nearly 50% to $16.8 billion, according to Financial Times reporting highlighted by Simon Willison on October 15, 2026. The FT presented the figures as coming ahead of an initial public offering, citing people familiar with the matter.
The report concerned an investor event held on Wednesday. Willison also highlighted first-quarter revenue of about $4.8 billion for January through March, providing an earlier reference point for the company’s reported financial performance during 2026.
Computing costs and adjusted margins
For the third quarter, Anthropic reportedly generated $1.70 in revenue for every $1 spent on computing power. That ratio compares revenue with computing expenditure specifically; it does not establish how much remained after all company expenses.
Willison also cited an adjusted operating margin of 11%, excluding stock-based compensation. That exclusion is part of the reported measure, which should not be interpreted as a net profit margin.
He observed that Anthropic appeared to be moving away from emphasizing annualized run-rate revenue in these investor communications. The quarterly figures describe revenue over individual reporting periods, rather than an extrapolation of a revenue pace across a full year.
Reported restrictions on model distillation
The FT also reported that Anthropic had restricted model distillation by rival AI laboratories. In this context, distillation involves training models using outputs from more advanced models. Heavy use of those models can generate substantial spending by the laboratories accessing them.
According to an FT passage quoted by Willison, four people with direct knowledge said Anthropic told investors that distillation accounted for 5% to 7% of revenue. They also said the company had cut it back “materially” in the third quarter. The period covered by that revenue share was unspecified.
Willison offered a conditional calculation to illustrate the potential scale of that activity: if distillation represented 5% of second-quarter revenue, rival laboratories would have spent more than $500 million during that quarter. This was his estimate based on an assumed revenue share, rather than a disclosed spending total. It did not establish how much any individual laboratory had spent.