The paper trail

Small print.
Wide open.

A clear path from a claim to the page it came from. Here’s the filing, the research, and how we read it.

The documentS–1Anthropic, PBC26 OCT 2026 · 421 PP.
01The original SEC filingThe authoritative source, in your browser.SEC · HTML 02Download the saved filingThe complete 421-page document, optimized for downloading.PDF · 46 MB 03Download the full researchFindings, customer examples, calculations, and source references.Markdown

Page by page

Go straight to the source.

Page references count physical pages in the saved PDF, starting at 1. The printed filing number is shown separately when available.

Enter a page from 1 to 421. No PDF download needed.

From the filing

PDF page 200

Printed filing page 189 · Extracted page text

View on the SEC
Read the page text
Table of Contents

We  have  built  our  models,  platform,  and  applications  for  usefulness  in  production  environments  instead  of 
benchmark performance. This distinction matters, as many AI systems prove difficult to implement and fail to 
deliver  the  expected  value  in  complex  enterprise  environments,  where  governance  and  security  concerns 
remain among the top barriers to adoption. 

Our applications, such as Claude Code and Claude Cowork, multiply the impact of employees. Over time, our 
applications  have  become  more  capable  and  are  now  frequently  being  used  to  conduct  long-running 
autonomous work alongside employees. Organizations also integrate Claude as the intelligence that powers and 
transforms  internal  business  processes.  In  addition,  our  Claude  Platform  is  used  as  the  foundation  for 
enterprises building AI-native products.

As enterprise customers integrate Claude into increasingly complex workflows, they surface the use cases and 
requirements that shape our roadmap. They also provide feedback that allows us to continuously improve our 
models, platform, and applications as well as develop new solutions to advance their AI adoption. 

With each model and product advancement, Claude is able to address more valuable use cases, deepening its 
impact for existing customers while lowering the adoption threshold for new ones. When a model crosses the 
capability,  reliability,  and  trust  threshold  required  for  a  category  of  work,  adoption  in  that  category  generally 
moves quickly from experimentation into production. Coding was the first such category: within roughly a year, 
Claude progressed from suggesting individual lines of code to operating fleets of agents working autonomously 
across  production  codebases.  Cybersecurity  is  following  a  similar  curve,  with  Claude’s  performance  on 
ExploitBench,  a  benchmark  developed  by  Carnegie  Mellon  researchers  that  evaluates  AI  models’  ability  to 
exploit software vulnerabilities, increasing from 40% with Opus 4.8, to 78% with Claude Mythos 5, and to 91% 
with Opus 5.5 over a period of approximately four months. Cyberdefenders are now identifying and patching 
vulnerabilities  at  scale.  We  expect  these  improvements  in  model  capabilities  to  unlock  additional  use  cases. 
Claude  Security  and  our  recently  launched  OSS  Scanner  are  early  examples,  providing  the  ability  to  scan 
codebases on a continuous basis and propose fixes before attackers find vulnerabilities.

Claude as a Virtual Collaborator

We  believe  we  have  reached  an  inflection  point  where  AI  systems  can  function  as  genuine  collaborators  in 
professional work. They quickly complete substantive tasks that might otherwise occupy a skilled professional 
for several hours, a full day, or longer. AI systems are also becoming increasingly capable of performing tasks 
that were previously too difficult or costly to complete or surfacing original insights and analyses.

We refer to these AI systems that work alongside humans to perform complex, multi-step work at professional 
levels  as  Virtual  Collaborators.  Virtual  Collaborators  carry  the  access  rights,  system  connections,  and  context 
that  their  organizations  grant  them,  which  allows  them  to  function  more  accurately  and  reliably.  They  can 
navigate  and  use  internal  tools  and  execute  workflows  that  span  multiple  steps  that  require  sustained 
reasoning.  Virtual  Collaborators  are  AI  designed  to  be  embedded  where  work  gets  done,  and  our  aim  is  to 

189

Text is provided for reference. Check the original for tables, images, and exact formatting.

Find a section 16 starting points

Section links may begin before the exact paragraph cited in a finding. PDF numbers below use physical pages.

  1. Founders’ letterp. 3SEC
  2. Defined termsp. 12SEC
  3. Prospectus summaryp. 16SEC
  4. Risk factorsp. 38SEC
  5. Management’s discussion & analysisp. 144SEC
  6. Businessp. 190SEC
  7. Governancep. 254SEC
  8. Executive compensationp. 275SEC
  9. Related-person transactionsp. 293SEC
  10. Principal & selling stockholdersp. 299SEC
  11. Capital-stock rightsp. 303SEC
  12. Shares eligible for future salep. 318SEC
  13. Underwritingp. 327SEC
  14. Auditor change & expertsp. 345SEC
  15. Financial statements & notesp. 347SEC
  16. Part II & exhibit indexp. 413SEC

How this was made

Read in full.
Kept in context.

A snapshot of the filing dated , rather than a live record of later events.

3primary reviewers
421pages reviewed
43image instances checked

The review

Three primary reviewers read non-overlapping ranges of the complete main filing. All 43 embedded image instances were transcribed and visually reviewed, including the founders’ letter, charts, and customer case studies. Financial tables were also checked visually for dates, units, and column alignment.

A separate reviewer checked the draft’s calculations, accounting interpretations, and customer qualifications. An additional check covered the later merged findings. The result is 62 findings and 21 customer examples.

The boundary

Companion contracts and other exhibits named in the filing’s index are separate documents and were not independently reviewed. Customer outcomes, technical benchmarks, forecasts, and scientific priority claims remain attributed company or customer disclosures.

The numbers

Dollar figures are U.S. dollars. H1 means the six months ended June 30; Q2 means the three months ended June 30. The 2026 interim financial statements are unaudited. Our calculations show their inputs and are labeled separately from reported values.

Blank fields stay undisclosed. Figures with different periods, conditions, or potentially overlapping scopes are kept separate. An earlier tender price is not an IPO price.

What the evidence labels mean
Reported in filing
A company disclosure, with the period and accounting basis retained.
Company estimate / company claim
An estimate or assertion attributed to the company, with its uncertainty preserved.
Our calculation
A derived figure using cited inputs. It is not a separately reported company metric.
Customer example
A selected case study, with its measurement limits. It is not representative ROI.
Proposed / conditional
A status qualifier for an arrangement that is not yet effective or depends on stated conditions.

About updates. This edition is tied to the October 26, 2026 filing. Any later revision should identify its new source date and preserve the basis of earlier claims.

The footnotes are only the beginning.Explore the findings Read the story
The original, in context

Open the footnote.

A closer look at the filing

Anthropic · Form S-1PDF 1

Opening page 1…

Filed October 26, 2026. PDF is approximately 46 MB and opens only when requested. Section links may precede the exact cited paragraph.