San Francisco’s latest technology boom is creating a new wave of multimillionaires before its two most prominent artificial-intelligence companies have completed initial public offerings. Employees of OpenAI and Anthropic are watching the estimated value of their private-company equity rise at a pace that has altered personal financial plans, real-estate purchasing power and the market for specialized wealth advice across the Bay Area.

The scale of the gains reflects the extraordinary appreciation of the companies themselves. Business Insider reported that an Anthropic employee who joined in 2024 with approximately $1.3 million of equity could see that grant valued at roughly $72 million after the company’s valuation rose from about $18 billion to $965 billion. The example, drawn from a midlevel technical employee, represents an increase of more than 5,000%, although the eventual proceeds would depend on vesting, dilution, taxes and the price at which shares could actually be sold.

Other employees have experienced similarly dramatic changes in their net worth. One former OpenAI worker who spent less than three years at the company held equity estimated at more than $50 million, according to Business Insider. Financial planners serving employees of both companies said some workers in nontechnical support positions had also accumulated net worths exceeding $10 million.

These fortunes remain predominantly equity-based rather than cash-based. OpenAI’s workforce was reported at about 5,000 employees, with an average equity grant of approximately $1.5 million. At Anthropic, compensation packages have combined unusually high salaries with substantial share awards designed to attract researchers and engineers from competing laboratories and established technology companies.

The structure has created a population of workers who may be wealthy on paper but continue to face substantial uncertainty. Private shares do not trade with the liquidity or transparent price discovery of securities listed on a public exchange. Valuations may be derived from financing rounds, employee transactions or limited secondary-market deals, each of which can reflect different rights, restrictions and investor expectations.

Anthropic shares have attracted exceptionally strong demand in private markets. Business Insider reported earlier in July that limited transactions had implied a valuation as high as $1.2 trillion, compared with the company’s $965 billion valuation in its latest financing round. Secondary-market specialists cautioned that transactions were scarce because few existing shareholders were willing or permitted to sell, making the higher valuation an imperfect measure of what all employee shares could command.

OpenAI has also generated renewed investor demand as its products, revenue expectations and prospective public-market debut attract attention. Together, OpenAI and Anthropic were estimated by Business Insider at a combined value of approximately $1.8 trillion. That valuation concentration is central to the new wealth cycle: a relatively small number of founders, early investors and employees hold economic interests in companies valued on a scale comparable with major public corporations.

The appreciation is beginning to produce real liquidity even before an IPO. Employees have accessed cash through company-sponsored tender offers, approved secondary sales and, in some instances, loans secured against private shares. These mechanisms differ from earlier Silicon Valley cycles, when employees often had to wait for a public offering and the expiration of post-IPO lockup periods before selling meaningful amounts of stock.

Early liquidity allows employees to purchase homes, pay taxes or reduce their exposure to a single company. It also introduces risk. Borrowing against private shares can amplify losses if the company’s valuation falls, if a lender reduces the collateral value or if restrictions prevent an employee from selling shares when a loan comes due. Secondary transactions may include transfer limitations, company approval requirements and complex special-purpose vehicles that separate the investor from the underlying stock.

For wealth advisers, the first priority is often concentration management. An employee with tens of millions of dollars in one private company may appear financially secure but remain highly exposed to company-specific events, regulatory changes, competitive pressures and shifts in investor sentiment. A delayed IPO, lower public valuation or broad retreat from AI-related assets could materially reduce the expected proceeds.

Advisers are therefore helping clients model several outcomes rather than treating the latest private valuation as guaranteed wealth. Those scenarios can include a successful listing at or above the most recent financing price, a public debut at a discount, further dilution from new capital raises, longer holding periods and restrictions on how quickly employees can sell after an IPO.

Tax planning is another central concern. Employees may owe taxes at different stages depending on the form of their equity, the timing of vesting and exercise decisions, and whether gains are treated as compensation or capital appreciation. California’s state income-tax rates make the potential liability particularly significant for workers realizing large gains while remaining residents of the state.

The timing of a liquidity event can affect estimated-tax payments, charitable contributions, trust structures and the amount available for reinvestment. Employees considering relocation also face complicated residency rules and should not assume that moving shortly before a sale automatically eliminates California tax exposure. Financial advisers increasingly work alongside tax attorneys and accountants to document decisions before a transaction occurs.

Diversification plans among the new AI-rich appear relatively conservative. Advisers cited by Business Insider said some clients intended to sell portions of their holdings and move proceeds into broad index funds rather than luxury goods. Others were evaluating early retirement, reflecting the demanding work schedules and competitive pressure inside frontier AI laboratories.

Startup investing is also expected to absorb part of the wealth. Employees with technical expertise, industry networks and large portfolios may become angel investors or form new companies, potentially extending the AI boom into another generation of startups. That pattern has historically helped Silicon Valley recycle wealth, with employees of successful technology companies later becoming founders, venture investors and early backers of new businesses.

Philanthropy may receive a smaller immediate share of the proceeds than some observers expect. Anthropic offers an employee program that can match donations of a portion of equity, and some employees have connections to the effective-altruism movement. Advisers nevertheless reported that many clients were prioritizing diversification, retirement or startup investment rather than making large, immediate charitable commitments.

For employees who do pursue philanthropy, donor-advised funds and charitable trusts may provide a way to contribute appreciated shares while potentially reducing capital-gains exposure. Such arrangements require company approval and careful valuation, particularly when the donated asset is restricted private stock. A charitable vehicle may also hold assets for years before grants reach operating nonprofits, meaning the tax benefit and the ultimate community impact can occur on different timelines.

The most visible destination for the new wealth is San Francisco real estate. Axios, citing a Redfin analysis, estimated that current and former OpenAI employees could collectively hold about $135 billion in post-tax equity after a public offering. Anthropic employees could hold another $63 billion. Combined, that purchasing power would equal approximately 29% of the estimated $692 billion value of all homes in the San Francisco metropolitan area.

The calculation is theoretical and does not suggest employees will attempt to buy nearly one-third of the region’s housing. It nevertheless illustrates the potential scale of wealth concentrated in a relatively small workforce. Even a modest allocation of eventual proceeds toward property could influence prices in neighborhoods with limited inventory, particularly at the upper end of the market.

Some buyers have already used proceeds from secondary sales and tender offers to enter the housing market. Real-estate agents have reported intense competition for desirable properties, with certain homes selling substantially above their asking prices. Sellers have occasionally advertised a willingness to consider pre-IPO shares as part of a transaction, although legal, valuation and transfer restrictions make such arrangements rare.

The impact extends beyond luxury property. When high-income buyers compete for a restricted supply of homes, existing owners may benefit from appreciation while prospective buyers face higher down-payment requirements and larger mortgages. Rising purchase prices can also influence rents as landlords reassess the value of their properties and as households unable to buy remain in the rental market.

Business Insider reported that San Francisco’s median single-family home price had reached approximately $2 million. The publication also cited data indicating that rents had risen 21% over the preceding year. Some real-estate professionals attributed part of the increase to a broader post-pandemic recovery rather than AI wealth alone, but the expectation of future liquidity has become an increasingly important influence on buyer behavior.

The uneven distribution of gains distinguishes the current period from earlier technology expansions. OpenAI and Anthropic are hiring, leasing offices and paying exceptional compensation, but the broader technology labor market has remained weaker. San Francisco’s city economist told Business Insider that local technology job listings were about 40% below pre-pandemic levels and that the city had lost roughly 40,000 jobs over the previous three years.

That divergence is dividing technology workers into sharply different financial groups. Employees building the most valuable AI systems can receive compensation packages worth tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, while workers in adjacent software, media and technology functions contend with layoffs, reduced hiring and declining equity values. Professionals earning salaries that were once considered exceptional may find their purchasing power falling relative to colleagues holding frontier-AI shares.

The effect on private wealth management is likely to be substantial. Newly wealthy employees need services that traditional mass-affluent platforms may not be equipped to provide, including private-share valuation, pre-IPO planning, concentrated-stock management, lending, estate structures and coordinated legal advice. Independent registered investment advisers, multifamily offices and private banks are competing to establish relationships before the largest liquidity events occur.

The client profile differs from that of many established wealthy families. AI employees are often relatively young, may be purchasing their first home and can have limited experience managing large portfolios. Their wealth may be tied to employment agreements and restricted securities rather than diversified operating businesses or inherited assets. Advisers must therefore balance long-term planning with the possibility that the headline valuation will change before shares become fully liquid.

Private banks may offer credit lines based on anticipated wealth, but employees should examine how collateral is valued and what happens if the company’s shares decline. Loans can help avoid an early sale or cover taxes, yet they can also turn an illiquid asset into an immediate financial obligation. Conservative planning generally treats borrowing capacity as conditional rather than equivalent to cash.

Estate planning has also become relevant for employees whose net worth rose faster than they expected. Transferring private shares to trusts before another valuation increase may reduce future estate-tax exposure, but the strategy involves appraisal requirements, transfer restrictions and the risk of giving away an asset that later loses value. Decisions made under assumptions of continued appreciation can become difficult to reverse.

San Francisco’s municipal finances may receive less direct benefit than the scale of wealth suggests. California can collect income and capital-gains taxes when employees sell shares, but San Francisco does not directly tax individual wealth. The city relies heavily on business taxes, which generate about $1.5 billion annually, according to figures cited by Business Insider.

A previous proposal to increase local taxes on stock-based compensation during the 2019 IPO cycle was withdrawn after opposition from the business community. City officials now face a different policy environment: San Francisco is attempting to retain employers and reduce office vacancies while also responding to housing affordability, displacement and public-service needs.

Private philanthropy may provide one avenue for the wealth to benefit the broader city. San Francisco has a history of wealthy technology executives funding schools, homelessness programs, public safety initiatives and neighborhood development. A larger population of AI multimillionaires could expand that donor base, although voluntary giving is unlikely to substitute fully for public policy or affordable-housing investment.

The political influence of the new wealth could be as important as its economic impact. Thousands of employees with substantial assets may become major donors, property owners and investors. Their preferences on taxation, housing development, public safety, AI regulation and transportation could shape local elections and policy debates, particularly if the city’s population becomes more concentrated among high earners.

The eventual outcome depends heavily on whether current valuations can be sustained. Public investors apply different standards from private-market buyers, including scrutiny of revenue quality, operating losses, capital expenditure, competitive durability and governance. An IPO could validate private valuations, exceed them or reset them substantially lower.

Employees also face lockup periods and the possibility that a large supply of shares will reach the market after a listing. Even when a company debuts successfully, early shareholders may not be able to sell immediately. By the time restrictions expire, market conditions and the company’s stock price may have changed significantly.

Those limitations do not erase the wealth already created through approved sales, nor do they diminish the purchasing power of employees who have diversified part of their holdings. They do, however, make a distinction between estimated net worth and durable, after-tax wealth. For many employees, the central financial task will be converting a concentrated private stake into a resilient portfolio without taking unnecessary tax, credit or timing risks.

San Francisco has repeatedly been transformed by sudden wealth, from the Gold Rush to the dot-com boom and the public listings of major internet platforms. The AI cycle is distinctive because the gains are being generated at extraordinary scale inside a small number of private companies. That concentration increases the potential effect on housing, investing and local inequality while leaving the city unusually exposed to the fortunes of two businesses.

For the wealth industry, OpenAI and Anthropic employees represent one of the most important emerging client groups in the United States. For San Francisco, they represent both a source of renewed investment and a test of whether a city can absorb a rapid increase in private wealth without placing housing and economic participation further beyond the reach of residents outside the sector.