The problem with your reasoning is that something can be a good investment and not have the growth trajectory of Amazon. You can't pick the (more or less) maximum growth example and then say anything less is a bad investment. Anthropic doesnt need a 3000x return. They need to beat alternative uses of that money.

Your argument that it's overvalued isn't really tethered to anything. It's about as whimsicle as the people saying "well it's worth any price because AI is the future." Of course the price matters.

Here is some way to start thinking about it. A lot of mature companies trade at 20-25x times earnings. So $2T needs roughly $80–100B a year in profit eventually. At 25–30% net margin, it means about $300–400B in revenue (something like Microsoft). Or 20%/450B (Google) or 10%/800B (Amazon). Anthropic is still growing rapidly. And intuitively i don't think it's crazy to suggest they may look like one of the current big tech companies in the future.

>Regardless of anything else that valuation is basically saying all their growth has been captured, unless they literally take over

Absolutely not. Not even close to true. They dont even need to become the biggest company.