A securities class action has been filed against Taboola.com Ltd. (“Taboola” or the “Company”) and certain of its officers on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Taboola securities between May 6, 2026 and August 4, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”), and were damaged thereby.

Taboola ordinary shares trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol TBLA.

According to the complaint, Taboola operates a platform that partners with websites, devices, and mobile apps to recommend editorial content and advertisements on the open web.

What Does the Taboola Securities Class Action Allege?

The action, Fortin v. Taboola.com Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-07170, was filed on August 21, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.

According to the complaint, during the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts concerning Taboola’s business, operations, and prospects. The complaint alleges that:

• Taboola was seeing an increase in low-quality publishers;
• As a result, the Company would need to take an aggressive approach to exiting low-quality publisher relationships, impacting earnings;
• As a result, the value of the Company’s publisher relationships was overstated; and
• Defendants’ positive statements about Taboola’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

The complaint further alleges that, on May 6, 2026, Taboola announced first-quarter 2026 financial results and supported its second-quarter and full-year 2026 guidance while emphasizing advertiser success, data, AI, and distribution.

What Happened to Taboola’s Stock Price?

According to the complaint, before the market opened on August 5, 2026, Taboola reported second-quarter 2026 revenue of $476.8 million, below its previously issued second-quarter revenue guidance of $492 million to $505 million. The complaint also alleges that Taboola reduced its full-year 2026 revenue guidance by $91 million at the midpoint, to $1.930 billion to $1.956 billion, and reduced expected full-year gross profit by $10 million at the midpoint, to $605 million to $615 million.

The complaint alleges that, during Taboola’s August 5, 2026 earnings call, CFO Stephen Walker stated that revenue was below guidance, in part, because the Company took a more aggressive approach to exiting publisher relationships that did not meet its standards for advertiser success. CEO Adam Singolda also discussed the Company’s decision to remove low-quality publishers that were not delivering value for advertisers.

Following these disclosures, the complaint alleges that Taboola’s share price fell $1.45, or 27.41%, to close at $3.84 per share on August 5, 2026, on unusually heavy trading volume.

Review the Taboola-Securities-Class-Action-Complaint

Taboola Investors Who Suffered Losses

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Taboola securities during the Class Period and suffered financial losses may complete Kehoe Law Firm’s confidential Stockholder Information Request Form or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq. for a free, no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 20, 2026. Investors have until October 20, 2026, to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. Investors do not need to serve as lead plaintiff to be eligible to share in any potential recovery.

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, and retirement-plan mismanagement. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

There is no cost or obligation to speak with the firm, and there are no upfront fees or litigation costs. We handle class action matters on a contingency-fee basis. Any attorneys’ fees or expenses sought in connection with a recovery are subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

A securities class action has been filed against GoDaddy Inc. (“GoDaddy” or the “Company”) and certain of its officers on behalf of all purchasers of GoDaddy common stock during the period from September 3, 2025 through February 24, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”) who were damaged thereby. 

GoDaddy common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol GDDY.

According to the complaint, GoDaddy is an American publicly traded internet domain registry, domain registrar, and web hosting company headquartered in Tempe, Arizona. The complaint alleges that GoDaddy primarily serves small and micro companies and targets small business owners and entrepreneurs, including customers seeking an all-in-one platform to build and manage an online presence.

What Does the GoDaddy Securities Class Action Allege?

The action, Johnson v. GoDaddy Inc., et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-07144, was filed on August 21, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

According to the complaint, during the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or omitted material information concerning GoDaddy’s customer-acquisition and go-to-market strategy. The complaint alleges that:

• GoDaddy introduced a heavily discounted promotional price of $4.99 for one-year dotcom domain contracts, significantly below the Company’s typical multi-year contracts, which ranged from $10 to $20 per year;
• The promotion allegedly contradicted Defendants’ representations that GoDaddy was focused on attracting “high-intent” customers who purchased more products and spent more money, including representations that the Company had “turned off” discounting at the front of its customer funnel;
• The shorter-term promotional contracts with smaller valuations were likely to, and allegedly did, negatively affect total bookings growth and average order size; and
• Defendants allegedly failed to disclose the promotion and its adverse effect on bookings while continuing to represent that GoDaddy’s high-intent customer strategy was working and that total bookings growth for 2025 was expected to be in line with revenue growth.

The complaint further alleges that, during investor presentations and earnings calls between September and December 2025, GoDaddy executives repeatedly emphasized the Company’s strategy of targeting higher-intent customers. Among other things, the complaint alleges that CFO Mark McCaffrey stated on September 3, 2025 that GoDaddy had made a “conscious decision” to “turn off discounting” because discounting attracted customers who came in for price and later churned. The complaint alleges that GoDaddy nevertheless instituted promotional discounts during the Class Period.

What Happened to GoDaddy’s Stock Price?

The complaint alleges that the truth was revealed after the market closed on February 24, 2026, when GoDaddy reported its fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial results. According to the complaint, total bookings growth decelerated to 5% in the fourth quarter of 2025, down from 9% in the prior quarter and below analyst estimates of 7%. Full-year 2025 total bookings growth came in at 7%, below Defendants’ previously stated expectation of 8%.

According to the complaint, during the associated earnings call, CEO Aman Bhutani disclosed that GoDaddy had introduced a promotional price for dotcom domains with a one-year term and that stronger-than-expected demand for the offer, together with the shift in contract-term mix, reduced upfront bookings and near-term revenue. The complaint further alleges that CFO Mark McCaffrey acknowledged that the annual promotional contracts affected bookings and reduced average order size at initiation.

Following these disclosures, GoDaddy’s stock price declined $13.18 per share, or more than 14%, from a closing price of $92.30 per share on February 24, 2026 to $79.12 per share on February 25, 2026, on heavier than usual volume.

Review the GoDaddy securities class action complaint.

GoDaddy Investors Who Suffered Losses

Investors who purchased GoDaddy common stock during the Class Period and suffered financial losses may complete Kehoe Law Firm’s confidential Stockholder Information Request Form or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq. for a free, no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.

GDDY investors who wish to seek appointment as lead plaintiff have until October 20, 2026 to move the Court. An investor’s ability to share in any potential recovery does not depend on serving as lead plaintiff.

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, and retirement-plan mismanagement. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

There is no cost or obligation to speak with the firm, and there are no upfront fees or litigation costs. We handle class action matters on a contingency-fee basis. Any attorneys’ fees or expenses sought in connection with a recovery are subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

A securities class action has been filed against Fractyl Health, Inc. (“Fractyl” or the “Company”) and certain of its officers on behalf of persons and entities, other than Defendants, that purchased or otherwise acquired Fractyl securities between January 13, 2025 and January 29, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).

Fractyl common stock trades on the Nasdaq Global Market under the ticker symbol GUTS.

According to the complaint, Fractyl is a metabolic therapeutics company that develops therapies for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity and is developing, among other things, the Revita DMR System (“Revita”).

What Does the Fractyl Health Securities Class Action Allege?

The action, Lorne v. Fractyl Health, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-07167, was filed on August 21, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

According to the complaint, during the Class Period Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

• Revita was less effective than Defendants had led investors to believe, and/or operational issues at one or more of the REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohort clinical sites compromised the integrity of its efficacy results;
• Accordingly, Revita’s clinical, regulatory, and commercial prospects were overstated, as was the REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohort’s ability to assess Revita’s efficacy; and
• As a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

The complaint further alleges that Fractyl touted Revita’s efficacy based on interim data from the REVEAL-1 and REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohorts. In September 2025, Fractyl announced three-month REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohort data and characterized the results as “groundbreaking,” “clinically and statistically significant,” and “striking,” while highlighting purported “clear evidence of Revita activity.”

What Happened to Fractyl’s Stock Price?

The complaint alleges that the truth began to emerge on January 29, 2026, when Fractyl announced six-month data from the REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohort. Fractyl reported that Revita-treated patients experienced 4.5% weight regain versus 7.5% in the sham arm at six months, which the complaint alleges represented a significantly more modest efficacy result than previously disclosed results and fell short of investor expectations. Fractyl also stated that the Midpoint Cohort was not designed to be sufficiently powered for efficacy analysis.

According to the complaint, during an investor and analyst call that day, Fractyl CEO Harith Rajagopalan indicated that issues at one REMAIN-1 Midpoint Cohort study site, which had higher-than-expected regain across both arms, were at least partly responsible for the disappointing six-month efficacy results.

Following these disclosures, Fractyl’s stock price fell $1.245 per share, or 68.03%, to close at $0.585 per share on January 29, 2026.

The complaint further alleges that, following the release of Canaccord Genuity and Morgan Stanley reports addressing the site-specific issue and the six-month results, Fractyl’s stock price fell an additional $0.125 per share, or 21.37%, to close at $0.46 per share on January 30, 2026.

Review the Fractyl Health securities class action complaint.

Fractyl Investors Who Suffered Losses

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Fractyl securities during the Class Period and suffered losses may complete Kehoe Law Firm’s confidential Stockholder Information Request Form or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq. for a free, no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.

GUTS investors who wish to seek appointment as lead plaintiff have until October 20, 2026 to move the Court. An investor’s ability to share in any potential recovery does not depend on serving as lead plaintiff.

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, and retirement-plan mismanagement. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

There is no cost or obligation to speak with the firm, and there are no upfront fees or litigation costs. We handle class action matters on a contingency-fee basis. Any attorneys’ fees or expenses sought in connection with a recovery are subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

A securities class action was filed against Aevex Corp. (“Aevex” or the “Company”) and other defendants on behalf of persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Aevex Class A common stock between April 17, 2026 and June 4, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”).

The complaint also asserts claims on behalf of a sub-class of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Aevex Class A common stock pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with Aevex’s April 17, 2026 initial public offering (“IPO”).

Aevex Class A common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol AVEX.

According to the complaint, Aevex is a military technology contractor that designs and manufactures unmanned aerial and surface vehicles and provides AI-enabled intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance services.

What Does the Aevex Securities Class Action Allege?

The action, Rosenberg v. Aevex Corp., et al., Case No. 3:26-cv-04779-TWR-SBC, was filed on August 20, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint asserts claims under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

According to the complaint, Aevex’s IPO offering documents stated that Aevex’s controlling private equity owner would be subject to a 180-day “lock-up” restricting the sale of Aevex Class A common stock, subject to limited exceptions and potential early release by the underwriters.

The complaint alleges that the IPO offering documents were materially false and/or misleading because they conveyed a commitment to the 180-day lock-up while allegedly concealing a pre-arranged plan to waive the lock-up early and conduct a secondary public offering (“SPO”) shortly after the IPO.

The complaint alleges that, after the market closed on June 1, 2026, Aevex filed a registration statement announcing an SPO of eight million shares of Class A common stock. According to the complaint, the SPO documents disclosed that the lock-up restrictions had been waived to permit the sale of the controlling owner’s Aevex holdings. The complaint alleges that the SPO generated $207.9 million in net proceeds for Aevex’s controlling private equity owner, while the Company received no net proceeds from the SPO.

According to the complaint: “[i]n reaction to the after-market filing of the June 1, 2026 registration statement, on June 2, 2026, Aevex’s Class A common stock fell approximately 16% against the prior day’s closing price, wiping out over $700 million in market capitalization. And in response to the pre-market filing of the final prospectus on June 5, 2026, Aevex’s common stock fell a further 7% that day, erasing about $200 million more in market capitalization.” (Emphasis added.)

Review the Aevex securities class action complaint. 

Aevex Investors: Contact Kehoe Law Firm

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Aevex Class A common stock during the Class Period or pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with Aevex’s April 17, 2026 initial public offering (“IPO”) may complete Kehoe Law Firm’s confidential Stockholder Information Request Form or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq. for a free, no-obligation evaluation of potential legal claims.

AVEX investors who wish to seek appointment as lead plaintiff have until October 19, 2026 to move the Court. An investor’s ability to share in any potential recovery does not depend on serving as lead plaintiff.

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, and retirement-plan mismanagement. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

There is no cost or obligation to speak with the firm, and there are no upfront fees or litigation costs. We handle class action matters on a contingency-fee basis. Any attorneys’ fees or expenses sought in connection with a recovery are subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]

A securities class action has been filed against Innventure, Inc. (“Innventure” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: INV) and certain of its officers on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Innventure securities between November 17, 2025 and August 13, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

The action, Labed v. Innventure, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-07377, was filed on August 28, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Innventure securities during the Class Period and suffered a loss, you are encouraged to contact the firm to discuss your rights without cost or obligation.

What Does the Innventure Securities Class Action Allege?

The complaint alleges that defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts concerning Innventure’s business, operations, and prospects, including statements relating to Accelsius Holdings LLC (“Accelsius”), Innventure’s subsidiary focused on two-phase, direct-to-chip liquid cooling solutions.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose that:

• Accelsius’s alleged transformative deal with DarkNX was unlikely to come to fruition, because there was allegedly no evidence of DarkNX constructing or facilitating a large-scale AI data center;
• As a result, Innventure’s stated 2026 revenue and cash-flow targets for Accelsius were overstated; and
• As a result of the foregoing, defendants’ positive statements about Innventure’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

The DarkNX Agreement and May 2026 Report

According to the complaint, Innventure announced on November 17, 2025 that Accelsius had entered into an agreement under which DarkNX would deploy Accelsius’s NeuCool technology across a new 300MW AI data center campus in Ontario, Canada. The complaint alleges that Innventure subsequently cited the DarkNX agreement in connection with Accelsius’s expected growth, bookings, revenue generation, and anticipated cash-flow positivity.

The complaint alleges that on May 28, 2026, Morpheus Research published a report questioning the DarkNX project and alleging there was “zero evidence this project exists or that DarkNX has the team or funding to even contemplate such a project.”

According to the complaint, Innventure’s stock price fell $0.54 per share, or 8.42%, to close at $5.87 per share on May 28, 2026.

August 2026 Disclosures and 55% Stock Price Decline

On August 13, 2026, Innventure reported second-quarter 2026 results and suspended its previously communicated expectations regarding Accelsius’s 2026 revenue and cash-flow targets.

Innventure’s August 13, 2026 Form 10-Q disclosed that “the deployment site identified in the DarkNX purchase order is no longer available. Accelsius has removed the DarkNX project from its internal bookings.”

According to the complaint, Innventure’s stock price then fell $1.98 per share, or 55%, to close at $1.62 per share on August 14, 2026, on unusually heavy trading volume.

Review the Innventure Securities Class Action Complaint.

Innventure Investors: Contact Kehoe Law Firm

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Innventure securities during the Class Period and suffered financial losses are encouraged to complete Kehoe Law Firm’s Stockholder Information Request Form or send us a message to discuss their legal rights.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation, contact: 

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 27, 2026. Investors who wish to seek appointment as lead plaintiff must do so by October 27, 2026. Investors do not need to seek appointment as lead plaintiff to remain potential members of the proposed class or to be eligible to share in any potential recovery.

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a nationally recognized, plaintiff-side class action law firm representing investors and consumers in matters involving securities fraud, corporate misconduct, mergers and acquisitions, antitrust violations, whistleblower claims, data breaches, consumer fraud, employment law violations, and retirement-plan mismanagement. Its attorneys have served as lead or co-lead counsel in major securities cases, recovering more than $10 billion for institutional and individual investors.

There is no cost or obligation to speak with the firm, and there are no upfront fees or litigation costs. We handle class action matters on a contingency-fee basis. Any attorneys’ fees or expenses sought in connection with a recovery are subject to court approval.

PHONE

Tel: 215-792-6676

EMAIL

[email protected]