OpenAI’s annualized revenue is reportedly $50 billion, not $70 billion

Reporting based on information shared with investors puts OpenAI’s annualized revenue at about $50 billion, not the roughly $70 billion figure circulated earlier. That lowers the reported run rate by about $20 billion.

The gap stems from how cloud-partner sales were counted for a comparison with Anthropic, rather than a disclosed $20 billion change in OpenAI’s underlying business. The earlier comparison included partner sales on a gross basis to make the two companies’ figures more directly comparable. OpenAI ordinarily records only its own share of certain partner transactions.

Annualized revenue projects sales from a shorter period across a year, so it is a run-rate estimate rather than revenue recognized over a completed 12-month fiscal period. The $50 billion figure was reported from investor information and was not presented in the opened evidence as an audited OpenAI financial statement. By comparison, SEC investor guidance says public-company annual reports include audited annual financial statements.

This accounting distinction is commonly called gross-versus-net presentation. FASB’s Topic 606 implementation guidance says a company acting as principal records revenue on a gross basis when it controls the specified good or service before transferring it to the customer. An agent that arranges for another party to provide the good or service records the net amount it retains.

In the example described in the reporting, Anthropic’s approach can count the full $100 paid by a customer through a cloud provider as revenue, then record the provider’s cut as an expense. OpenAI’s method counts only its own share of certain partner sales. The same customer payment can therefore produce materially different top-line figures.

The reporting said both approaches comply with generally accepted accounting principles, depending on factors including control of the customer relationship and responsibility for delivery. The underlying cloud contracts and calculation materials were not available, so those judgments and the precise $50 billion calculation could not be independently tested.