The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired monday.com Ltd. (“monday.com” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MNDY) common stock between September 17, 2025, to February 6, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”). monday.com investors have until May 11, 2026 to file a lead plaintiff motion.

What Happened?

On November 10, 2025, monday.com released its third quarter 2025 financial results, reporting, among other things, revenue of $316.9 million for the third quarter, but that the Company expected only a comparatively modest increase to revenue in the fourth quarter. Despite this, the Company maintained it was “going to be $1.8 billion by fiscal year ’27.”

On this news, monday.com’s stock price fell $23.38, or 12.3%, to close at $166.21 per share on November 10, 2025, thereby injuring investors.

Then, on February 9, 2026, monday.com released its fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial results, revealing the Company was rescinding its $1.8 billion 2027 revenue target, and was, in fact, guiding for a significant deceleration of top line growth in 2026.

On this news, monday.com’s stock price fell $20.37, or 20.8%, to close at $77.63 per share on February 9, 2026, thereby injuring investors further.

What Is The Lawsuit About?

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the Company was seeing new customer growth decelerating, weaker expansion within existing accounts and longer enterprise sales cycles, making monday’s $1.8 billion 2027 target increasingly unlikely to be met; (2) Defendants misled investors by providing the public with materially flawed statements of confidence and growth projections which did not account for these variables; and (3) as a result, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.