Chinese and American AI Companies Rush to List, Crypto Waits in the Corner for Opportunities

marsbitPublished on 2026-04-03Last updated on 2026-04-03

Abstract

Chinese AI companies are rushing to IPOs at reasonable valuations, driven by a "common prosperity" policy to distribute wealth more broadly, while US AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic are expected to go public around late 2026 at valuations potentially 100x higher. This AI IPO wave is drawing significant investor attention and capital away from other sectors, including crypto, in the short term. As a result, crypto faces funding headwinds and price pressure. However, this downturn may create attractive early-stage investment opportunities in crypto by 2026, similar to the post-2018 cycle. Longer term, AI is expected to boost crypto adoption by improving user experience through AI frontends and enabling autonomous agent-to-agent commerce on blockchain networks.

Author: Connor Dempsey

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Guide: Connor Dempsey is a seasoned professional in the crypto industry, having worked at Circle, Messari, and Coinbase Ventures. He currently leads marketing at Crossmint. In this short commentary, he presents a viewpoint: under the logic of "common prosperity," China is pushing AI companies to go public quickly at reasonable valuations, while their American counterparts won't IPO until late 2026, by which time their valuations could be 100 times higher than those of Chinese companies. The wave of AI IPOs will continue to drain market funds, putting short-term pressure on crypto, but 2026 could be a good year for early-stage investments.

Main Text:

A wave of IPOs from Chinese AI companies is coming and will last for 1-2 years.

Moreover, their valuations are more attractive than those of their American counterparts.

Disclaimer: The following content is based on a conversation I had with an old friend familiar with the Chinese market (the Chinese market is largely a black box to me).

China's Logic

China is building AI as fast as the U.S. But China has stronger control over the private sector, and they are concerned about the wealth gap.

The logic is this: AI is a winner-takes-all game. The longer companies stay private, the more wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few founders and investors.

Chinese policy pressures high-growth AI companies to go public earlier, allowing ordinary investors to share in the prosperity.

MiniMax (AI video generation) and Zhipu (China's OpenAI) have already gone public. Moon's Dark Side (chatbots), Baichuan Intelligence (medical AI), and Baidu's Kunlun Chip are in the queue, with IPO valuations ranging from $2 billion to $7 billion, which is reasonable. DeepSeek is the only exception, claiming it will continue to raise private funding.

As a Westerner, I'm not taking China's side, but this logic makes sense. U.S. AI giants won't distribute equivalent levels of wealth to the public.

America's Pace

The U.S. also has a wave of AI IPOs coming, expected to start in late 2026 to early 2027. OpenAI, Anthropic, Databricks, Perplexity, and Elon Musk's xAI (merged with SpaceX) should go public within this window.

But by the time ordinary investors can buy in, the valuations of these companies could be 100 times higher than their Chinese counterparts.

OpenAI and Anthropic will likely be trillion-dollar companies at IPO. Databricks and xAI are already valued at over $100 billion.

AI is the Only Game in Town

No matter how it ultimately unfolds, the U.S.-China AI race will proceed at full speed and will likely suck the air out of every other tech sector, including crypto.

Why? Because AI is the most important technology of our lifetime. If you are a capital allocator, it's hard to look elsewhere right now. For example, if you have $1 million to deploy, you'll likely try to find a way to ride this AI wave.

As long as the AI IPO feast continues, crypto asset prices will likely remain under pressure.

Crypto venture capital has noticeably slowed down. I recently met an entrepreneur raising funds in the crypto space. His observation was: if you're not working on AI, most investors aren't interested.

The Silver Lining

Sentiment hitting the toilet and investors losing interest is nothing new for crypto. For example, after the ICO bubble burst in 2018, most of the investing public was indifferent to crypto for a full two years.

But if you were an early-stage investor during that time, you did very well. Seed rounds for Solana, Compound, and Uniswap were all done then. Circle's USDC (2018) was also built during that period.

I believe 2026 could be a similarly good year for those still deploying early-stage capital in crypto.

Meanwhile, U.S. crypto regulation is becoming clearer, and infrastructure for transforming financial markets through tokenization is being built.

Protocols like Hyperliquid are already spilling over into traditional markets, offering 24/7 crude oil futures trading when traditional markets are closed on weekends (see Syncracy's "The Great Perpification").

Although there are fewer crypto founders now, new and interesting companies are still launching. For example, Ryan Yi, with four years of venture capital and corporate development experience at Coinbase, founded Onchain Group, essentially an investment bank built for the token economy. Think traditional M&A, but with tokens as the assets and clients being the largest protocols in crypto.

AI is Crypto's Variable

While AI is sucking the air out of the room at the investment level, it will ultimately become the rocket fuel for crypto's utility.

Crypto has always had a user experience problem. Combining an AI front-end with a crypto back-end will suddenly make using crypto as easy as using Claude or ChatGPT. This will ultimately become a massive onboarding point for crypto assets and protocols.

AI Agents are also poised to become crypto's largest user base. Agent-to-agent commerce—millions of AI Agents transacting autonomously without human involvement—is one of the strongest use cases for stablecoins and blockchains. When you need millions of Agents creating wallets and transacting for fractions of a cent, traditional card networks would break. Crypto won't.

I bet the fusion of crypto and AI will be a big deal at maturity. It will also be one of the most remarkable phenomena in the history of this industry.

~CD

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the main difference between the IPO timelines and valuations of AI companies in China and the United States, as described in the article?

AChinese AI companies are being pushed to IPO earlier with reasonable valuations (e.g., $2-7 billion) to allow public investors to share in the wealth, while US AI companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are expected to IPO around late 2026 or early 2027 at valuations potentially 100 times higher, reaching trillions of dollars.

QHow does the article suggest the AI IPO boom will impact the cryptocurrency market in the short term?

AThe AI IPO boom is expected to draw capital away from other tech sectors, including cryptocurrency, putting downward pressure on crypto asset prices as investors focus on allocating funds to AI opportunities.

QAccording to the author, why might 2026 be a good year for early-stage investors in cryptocurrency?

AThe author compares 2026 to the post-2018 ICO bubble period, when investor disinterest and low sentiment created opportunities for early investors in projects like Solana, Compound, and Uniswap, suggesting that similar conditions could yield high returns for early crypto investments.

QWhat role does AI play in potentially improving cryptocurrency usability and adoption, as per the article?

AAI can enhance cryptocurrency usability by combining AI front-ends with crypto back-ends, making crypto as easy to use as AI tools like ChatGPT. Additionally, AI agents are expected to become major users of crypto, enabling autonomous transactions and commerce between agents, which is a strong use case for stablecoins and blockchain.

QWhat example does the article provide to illustrate cryptocurrency's infrastructure advancements impacting traditional markets?

AThe article mentions protocols like Hyperliquid, which are extending into traditional markets by offering 24/7 trading of assets like crude oil futures during times when traditional markets are closed, as highlighted in Syncracy's 'The Great Perpification'.

Related Reads

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手3h ago

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手3h ago

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit5h ago

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit5h ago

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手6h ago

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手6h ago

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit7h ago

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit7h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of AI (AI) are presented below.

活动图片