With AI, Investor Loyalty Is (Almost) Dead: At Least A Dozen OpenAI VCs Now Also Back Anthropic

AI Investor Loyalty Faces Unprecedented Test

What's happening to AI investor loyalty as top venture firms pour money into both OpenAI and Anthropic? Simply put, the traditional "founder-first" VC model is fracturing under the pressure of AI's astronomical valuations and winner-take-all stakes. Investors aren't abandoning principles—they're adapting to a market where missing the next breakthrough could cost billions. This shift raises urgent questions about conflicts of interest, strategic support, and whether startups can still trust their backers when rivals sit at the same cap table.

Credit: dane_mark / Getty Images

Why Venture Firms Are Hedging Their AI Bets

The numbers tell the story. OpenAI is finalizing a $100 billion funding round while Anthropic just closed a $30 billion raise. In this high-stakes environment, venture capital firms see diversification not as betrayal, but as survival. At least a dozen firms that backed OpenAI also participated in Anthropic's latest round, including Founders Fund, Iconiq, Insight Partners, and Sequoia Capital.
These aren't accidental overlaps. AI development requires unprecedented capital, and the window to influence the field's trajectory is narrowing. For institutional investors, backing multiple contenders maximizes exposure to whichever model ultimately dominates enterprise adoption, consumer applications, or regulatory approval. It's portfolio theory applied at blistering speed.
Still, the strategy creates tension. Startups raise venture capital not just for money, but for strategic guidance, introductions, and advocacy. When a firm holds stakes in direct competitors, founders may wonder: whose growth agenda truly comes first?

The BlackRock Dilemma Board Seats and Competing Stakes

One investment decision stands out for its complexity. Affiliated funds of BlackRock joined Anthropic's $30 billion raise even though BlackRock's senior managing director Adebayo Ogunlesi serves on OpenAI's board. This isn't a simple case of portfolio diversification—it's a governance tightrope.
BlackRock operates hundreds of fund types, from mutual funds to ETFs, each with distinct mandates. A public-market investor might hold shares in competing tech firms without controversy. But venture investing has traditionally demanded deeper alignment. When a firm's leadership sits on a startup's board, expectations of confidentiality, strategic prioritization, and competitive insulation intensify.
The situation reflects a broader evolution. As AI companies mature into quasi-public entities before IPO, the lines between public-market and venture investing blur. What was once a clear boundary—venture firms backing one horse per race—is becoming a multi-lane highway where capital flows to all credible contenders.

How Dual Investments Challenge The Founder Friendly Model

Venture capital built its reputation on being "founder-friendly." The promise wasn't just capital; it was partnership. Firms offered operational expertise, talent networks, and unwavering support against competitors. That model assumed loyalty was a strategic asset.
Today's AI landscape tests that assumption. When a VC holds positions in both OpenAI and Anthropic, where does their advocacy land during a talent poach, a patent dispute, or a pricing war? Founders may still receive excellent support, but the perception of divided allegiance can erode trust.
Some argue this is overblown. Professional investors manage conflicts through information barriers and clear communication. Others counter that AI's existential stakes—safety protocols, alignment research, deployment decisions—demand singular focus. The tension isn't just financial; it's philosophical.

What This Shift Means For AI Startup Competition

For emerging AI startups, the dual-investment trend sends mixed signals. On one hand, capital is abundant for credible teams with differentiated technology. On the other, the path to becoming a "category winner" narrows when incumbents share backers.
New entrants may need to rethink their fundraising strategy. Rather than relying solely on traditional VC partnerships, they might prioritize corporate venture arms, sovereign wealth funds, or strategic angels whose incentives align more tightly with a single mission. Alternatively, they could lean into niches where direct competition with OpenAI or Anthropic is minimal—vertical-specific models, edge deployment, or specialized safety tooling.
The competitive dynamics also affect talent. Engineers and researchers choosing between AI labs may weigh not just technical vision but investor stability. If a startup's backers are simultaneously funding its biggest rival, does that signal confidence in the ecosystem—or uncertainty about any single winner?

The Future Of Venture Capital In An AI Dominated Market

This moment may redefine venture capital's role in transformative technologies. AI isn't just another software category; it's infrastructure with societal-scale implications. The capital required to train frontier models, build safety frameworks, and navigate global regulation exceeds traditional VC capacity.
We may see a hybrid model emerge: venture firms leading early rounds while partnering with sovereign funds, corporate strategics, and public-market vehicles for later stages. Governance structures could evolve too, with clearer protocols for managing conflicts when firms invest across competing AI labs.
For founders, the lesson is pragmatic. Investor loyalty remains valuable, but it's no longer guaranteed. Diligence now includes asking: "Who else is in your AI portfolio, and how do you navigate conflicts?" For investors, the challenge is balancing financial returns with the trust that fuels innovation.

The AI race isn't slowing down. As valuations climb and competition intensifies, the industry must decide whether diversified betting strengthens the ecosystem—or fragments the partnerships that helped it thrive. One thing is certain: in the age of artificial intelligence, investor loyalty isn't dead, but it's being stress-tested like never before. The firms that navigate this tension with transparency and integrity will shape not just portfolio returns, but the trajectory of the technology itself.