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 224

No printed folio visible · Image transcription

View on the SEC
Read the page text
[Embedded graphic 1 — OCR text]
© Jane Street

Customer since 2023

Frontier intelligence a trading

firm can trust

Results

Claude Fable 5.1 performance
over Fable 5 via Jane Street’s
internal agentic coding eval

+32%

~ Time to migrate large
1 week codebase with Claude Fable,
down from months
Background

Jane Street is a global trading firm whose edge depends on
the quality and speed of its quantitative research. It builds
the models, strategies, and systems that price and tradea
wide range of financial instruments. For years, its
developers struggled to build Al agents that could complete
research tasks on their own across large datasets. Early
attempts were frustrating and inconsistent.

Impact

That changed as models became more capable and reliable.
When Jane Street adopted Claude 3.7 Sonnet, it saw a step-
change in how its agents performed on long, multi-step
tasks. Agents could carry a task from start to finish without
stopping partway through or needing rework. With each
successive model generation, AI adoption accelerated
across the firm, and teams built AI into their daily work in
research, engineering, and design. Claude is now deployed
nearly wall-to-wall across the organization.

The payoff is higher research throughput. Researchers now
supervise teams of agents that analyze code, monitor
training runs, and process results. Experiments that once
needed constant supervision now run on their own over a
weekend. One researcher estimates completing about 50%
more analysis than they did a year ago; the effect is more
studies, tested faster.

Claude Fable enables agents to take on longer, multi-step
tasks. A researcher also used it to refactor a large Python
application that he built, organizing the sprawling code into
aclean structure. He then migrated the codebase to a more
robust language in about a week. Similar work would
normally have taken a team months to complete. For a firm

“We've always had more ideas than
we've had the bandwidth to execute
on. Agents like Claude have
dramatically improved our velocity,
multiplying the impact each person
can have.”

Craig Falls, Head of Quantitative Research at Jane
Street Capital

whose edge depends on research speed, Fable has cut the
time it takes to run experiments and test new financial tools.

For Jane Street, what sets Fable apart is “research taste”—
the judgment to pursue reasonable strategies and produce
thoughtful work. Its agents check their own work, take on
more complex projects, and stay focused on long-term
goals. As their results become more reliable, Jane Street is
bringing agents deeper into its research. Use has spread well
beyond the research teams. Designers now often write
production-ready code for features and hand it directly to
developers to merge.

Jane Street has watched model capability climb quickly on
its internal evaluations, which grade an agent’s work on
quality, accuracy, and trustworthiness against work its own
engineers have already done. Models that once passed just
1% of those tests eventually outgrew them, so Jane Street
built a harder agentic coding evaluation. On it, Claude Fable
5.1 improved on Fable 5’s score by 32%. “In internal
benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 solves more of our coding
problems than Fable 5 or Opus 5, and achieves state of the
art on trading intuition,” said Craig Falls, Head of
Quantitative Research at Jane Street. “While prior models
became hard to follow the longer they worked, Fable 5.1
remains readable over long, multi-step tasks.”

This page includes text transcribed from an image. 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.