OpenAI vs Epic Games: employee equity compared
Secondary market prices, valuation trajectory, equity structure, and liquidity outlook for employees choosing between OpenAI and Epic Games.
OpenAI
Maker of ChatGPT, GPT-5, Sora and the OpenAI API.
IPO highly anticipated, likely 2026–2027 given massive scale. One of the most closely watched pre-IPO names in tech.
High-growth AI play; PPU (no exercise decision needed); fast-moving valuations reward timing
Epic Games
Creator of Fortnite (350M+ registered players) and Unreal Engine (the dominant real-time 3D platform used in films, architecture, and automotive visualisation).
IPO possible 2026–2028 as scale builds. No confirmed timeline; tender offers may provide interim liquidity.
Consumer brand with network effects; ISO/NSO options; IPO when unit economics proven
Key differences for employees
Equity structure
OpenAI grants PPU — a profit participation unit unique to OpenAI. No strike price, no AMT risk. You receive cash or shares at distribution events. Epic Games grants ISO/NSO with strike prices from $60–$85.
Secondary market premium
The secondary market is pricing OpenAI at a +0% premium over its last primary round ($852B → $853B). Epic Games trades at +3% over its last round ($31.5B → $32.4B). A higher secondary premium signals stronger investor demand and potentially better near-term liquidity for employees looking to sell.
Revenue and growth
OpenAI runs at $24B ARR, growing +60% YoY (fast). Epic Games runs at $5.5B ARR, growing +8% YoY. Revenue growth rate matters for equity because it drives the peer-multiple valuation — the method most correlated with exit multiples.
Liquidity timeline
OpenAI: IPO highly anticipated, likely 2026–2027 given massive scale. One of the most closely watched pre-IPO names in tech.
Epic Games: IPO possible 2026–2028 as scale builds. No confirmed timeline; tender offers may provide interim liquidity.
Calculate your specific grant
Enter your actual shares, equity type, and strike price. PrivatePulse calculates your personal equity value at both companies using 4 independent methods.