Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Satellogic Is Tiny But Its Revenue Growth Is Hard to IgnorePlanet Labs PBC NYSE: PL held its 2026 annual meeting of stockholders virtually on July 9, with shareholders voting on three company proposals, according to the meeting transcript.

Get Planet Labs PBC alerts:

Will Marshall, co-founder, chairperson of the board and chief executive officer of Planet Labs, opened the meeting and said it was being conducted virtually as permitted under Delaware law, the company’s state of incorporation. Marshall noted that company officers were present, including Thomas Murphy, general counsel and corporate secretary, as well as representatives from KPMG LLP, the company’s independent registered public accounting firm.

MarketBeat Week in Review – 06/08 - 06/12Murphy said a quorum was present and declared the meeting duly convened for the transaction of business. He also introduced Francis Byrd, a representative of Broadridge Financial Services, who was appointed by the board to serve as inspector of election.

Shareholders Vote on Three Proposals Planet Labs shareholders considered three proposals at the meeting. The company recommended that stockholders vote in favor of each director nominee, as well as the second and third proposals.

Director elections: Shareholders voted on the re-election of Vijaya Gadde, General John W. Raymond and Scott Reese Jr. as Class II directors. Murphy said the directors elected at the meeting will serve until the 2029 annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. Auditor ratification: Shareholders voted on the ratification of the Audit Committee’s appointment of KPMG LLP as Planet Labs’ independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending January 31, 2027. Executive compensation: Shareholders voted on a non-binding advisory proposal to approve the compensation of the company’s named executive officers, commonly referred to as a “say on pay” vote. Preliminary Voting Results Announced 3 Stocks With Fresh Catalysts to Watch Before July 4After the polls closed, Murphy reported that the inspector of election had provided preliminary results. According to Murphy, there were sufficient votes in favor of all three director nominees, the ratification of KPMG LLP as the company’s independent registered public accounting firm, and the advisory approval of named executive officer compensation.

Murphy said the final vote tally will be published within four days in a current report on Form 8-K to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

No Stockholder Questions Submitted Following the formal business portion of the meeting, Marshall said the management team would answer questions submitted through the meeting’s question-and-answer portal. Murphy reported that there were no questions at that time.

Marshall then thanked attendees and adjourned the 2026 annual meeting. The operator concluded the meeting shortly afterward.

About Planet Labs PBC NYSE: PLPlanet Labs PBC is a public benefit corporation that operates one of the largest fleets of Earth-imaging satellites, providing high-frequency, high-resolution imagery and data analytics to a broad range of industries. The company's multi-spectral satellite constellation captures daily snapshots of the planet, enabling clients to monitor changes in agriculture, forestry, urban development, energy infrastructure and environmental conditions. Planet's imagery platform is designed to support timely decision-making by transforming raw satellite data into actionable insights for business and government users.

Founded in 2010 by former NASA scientists Will Marshall, Robbie Schingler and Chris Boshuizen, Planet Labs grew from a small startup into a key provider in the satellite imaging sector.

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Should You Invest $1,000 in Planet Labs PBC Right Now?Before you consider Planet Labs PBC, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Planet Labs PBC wasn't on the list.

While Planet Labs PBC currently has a Hold rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Enter your email address and we’ll send you MarketBeat’s list of ten stocks set to soar in Summer 2026, despite the threat of tariffs and what's happening in Iran. These ten stocks are incredibly resilient and are likely to thrive in any economic environment.

Get This Free Report

Mark Schoenberg, Chief Medical Officer, sold 10,000 ordinary shares of UroGen Pharma Ltd. (URGN 4.15%) on July 9, 2026, for a total value of $400,000, according to an SEC Form 4 filing.

Transaction summaryMetricValueTransaction value$400,000Shares sold10,000Post-transaction shares (directly held)119,763Post-transaction value$4.82 millionKey questionsWhat was the mechanism for this transaction?
The sale was conducted under a pre-established Rule 10b5-1 trading plan adopted on August 15, 2025, which provides for automated execution and represents the concluding transaction of that plan's schedule.What is the scale of the insider's remaining direct investment?
Mark Schoenberg continues to hold 119,763 ordinary shares directly.What financial context does UroGen Pharma Ltd. present at this valuation?
The biotechnology company, which develops solutions for urothelial and specialty cancers, reported trailing 12-month revenue of $140.5 million and a net loss of $133.2 million.How does the current market capitalization compare to the transaction level?
The disposition occurred with the company's market capitalization at $2.0 billion, following a period of performance where shares were priced at $40.23 as of the July 9, 2026 market close.Company OverviewMetricValueShare Price (as of market close 2026-07-09)$40.23Market Capitalization$2.0 billionRevenue (TTM)$140.5 millionNet Income (TTM)-$133.2 millionCompany SnapshotUroGen Pharma develops and commercializes innovative solutions for urothelial and specialty cancers, with primary revenue sources including Zusduri, a sustained-release mitomycin formulation for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, and RTGel, a proprietary reverse thermal gelation hydrogel technology platform.The company operates a commercial-stage biotechnology business model focused on bringing novel therapeutic formulations to market, generating revenue through product sales while continuing to invest in research and development for pipeline expansion.UroGen's primary customers are urology and oncology specialists, with target markets encompassing patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer and other urothelial malignancies requiring adjuvant chemotherapy and specialized treatment modalities.UroGen Pharma is a commercial-stage biotechnology company with a $2 billion market capitalization, demonstrating significant growth momentum with a one-year stock appreciation of 191.31%. The company has achieved meaningful revenue scale at $140.5 million TTM while maintaining a focused pipeline strategy centered on proprietary drug delivery technologies for underserved oncology indications. UroGen's competitive advantage derives from its proprietary RTGel platform technology and its established commercial infrastructure for specialty cancer therapeutics, positioning the company as a differentiated player in the niche urothelial cancer treatment market.

What this transaction means for investorsFirst, it’s important to note that this was the final trade in a 10b5-1 plan Schoenberg set almost a year ago, so the timing was locked in long before Schoenberg could know how the firm was necessarily going to be performing. He still holds nearly 120,000 shares worth close to $4.8 million, and a chief medical officer keeping a stake that size while the company's newest drug is inflecting isn't sending any signal about the science.

The launch of Zusduri, UroGen’s new bladder cancer therapy, is what matters here, and it's going well. UroGen's first quarter revenue jumped 152% to $51 million, as a result of the launch, which brought in $29.2 million and more than doubled quarter over quarter after a permanent insurance billing code kicked in. CEO Liz Barrett called January's J-code "a major inflection point," and unique prescribers jumped to 256 from 102 in a single quarter. More recently, the firm announced that the FDA cleared its investigational new drug application for UGN-501, enabling a planned Phase 1 study in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. It’s expected to begin in the fourth quarter.

Jonathan Ponciano has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Meta Platforms (META +6.16%) just closed out quite an eventful week. Shares of the social media giant jumped about 6% on Friday alone as investors warm back up to CEO Mark Zuckerberg's aggressive artificial intelligence (AI) strategy.

The company has given them plenty to work with this year. Growth is accelerating, its new AI lab released its first model this spring, and capital spending guidance now tops $125 billion.

But let's zoom out for a second. How has the stock done over the long haul? Specifically, how much would $10,000 invested in Meta a decade ago be worth today?

Image source: Getty Images.

How the math works out In 2016, Meta -- then still called Facebook -- traded at an average price of about $116 per share. A $10,000 investment at that price would have bought about 86 shares. With the stock trading near $670 as of this writing, those shares would be worth roughly $57,600 today, a nearly sixfold gain.

And dividends sweeten the total a little. Meta initiated its first-ever dividend in early 2024 at $0.50 per share quarterly, and the quarterly payout now stands at $0.525 per share. Those 86 shares would have collected a bit over $400 in dividends so far, bringing the total value to about $58,000.

That works out to a compound annual growth rate of about 19%.

The engine hasn't slowed Of course, none of that return is available to anyone buying today. What matters now is whether the business that produced it is still performing.

What impresses me most is that ten years in, Meta's growth is accelerating, not fading. Revenue rose 22% in 2025 to $201.0 billion, and the growth rate stepped up through the year, from 24% year over year in the fourth quarter to 33% in the first quarter of 2026, when revenue hit $56.3 billion. The formula hasn't changed, either. The company sells more ads, at higher prices, across Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger. Ad impressions rose 19% year over year in the first quarter, the average price per ad rose 12%, and an average of 3.56 billion people used at least one of Meta's apps each day in March.

All that advertising produces enormous profits. Meta's first-quarter operating income rose 30% year over year to $22.9 billion. And shareholders are seeing plenty of the cash. The company spent over $26 billion on share repurchases in 2025, paid another approximately $5 billion in dividends and dividend equivalents, and still ended the year with more than $81 billion in cash and marketable securities.

And the company is spending like it believes the next decade holds more. Meta recently raised its 2026 guidance for capital expenditures to a range of $125 billion to $145 billion, much of it aimed at AI infrastructure. Its second-quarter outlook, meanwhile, calls for revenue of $58 billion to $61 billion.

"We had a milestone quarter with strong momentum across our apps and the release of our first model from Meta Superintelligence Labs," said Zuckerberg in the company's first-quarter earnings release.

That spending is also the market's biggest worry about the stock. If the AI investments don't pay off in continued growth, today's expense ramp could weigh on profits for years to come. This past week, at least, investors treated the spending as a positive.

Today's Change

(

6.16

%) $

38.92

Current Price

$

670.40

Should investors expect a repeat? Sure, the backtest is fun. But nobody should buy Meta stock expecting another 19% a year for a decade. The company is vastly larger today than it was in 2016, and growth can get harder with size. Additionally, competition for attention and ad dollars isn't easing, and regulators around the world continue to scrutinize the company.

But the stock's price doesn't demand a repeat, either. Shares trade at about 19 times forward earnings -- a reasonable multiple for a company that just grew revenue 33% year over year -- even accounting for the risks of a $125 billion-plus spending plan. That valuation multiple, of course, could come down if growth slows, but this multiple also hardly assumes another decade of dominance.

After all, the lesson of the decade-long backtest isn't that Meta was a once-in-a-generation bargain in 2016. It's that an enormously profitable business kept compounding while plenty of investors found reasons to sell along the way.

For long-term investors, I think Meta remains a solid holding today. I just wouldn't let a $58,000 backtest set my expectations for the next ten years.

TOPSHOT - The Netflix logo is displayed at the entrance to Netflix Albuquerque Studios film and television production studio lot in Albuquerque, New Mexico on October 13, 2023. (Photo by Patrick T. Fallon / AFP) (Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images)

AFP via Getty Images

When it comes to weekly news cycles, Netflix has just had a particularly bad one.

It began when Bloomberg’s Lucas Shaw wrote a piece arguing that Netflix’s subscriber engagement seems to decreasing, and that a number of shows recently returned for a second season to rapidly declining viewing numbers.

That piece set off a fire storm of industry hot takes and gleeful dunking on Netflix from people who believe the streamer has permanently damaged the economic model of Hollywood.

Then on Thursday, the Wall Street Journal published a piece reporting that Netflix executives, concerned about dropping subscriber engagement numbers, are exploring bundles with other streamers as well as what the story describes as “live channels” inside the Netflix app.

That story in particular was aggregated by every media reporter I saw, and many of them took the easy approach of arguing this was just another sign that Netflix was “reinventing the cable bundle,” or “becoming the next TikTok.”

And that argument seemed to be reinforced by recent deals made by the streamer to add a number of video podcasts to its service. “Netflix has lost its way,” critics argued. “It wants to be more like YouTube. It’s going to launch a free version of its service. It’s going to allow creators to upload video directly onto the platform.”

Sure, most of the stories are just based on speculation and a healthy misunderstanding of how Netflix’s business model really works. But why not speculate? Because in the world of hot takes, there is no real penalty for getting it wrong. However, if you somehow stumble across the truth, there’s money to be made hyping your insight.

This is not to say that every piece you’ve read about Netflix over the past week is wrong. But the reporters who actually understand the company and where it may be headed can probably be counted on not much more than one hand.

Part of the blame for this confusion lies on Netflix’s executives, who have never been willing to sit down and provide a look at the company’s strategy. Their interviews tend to be long on vague assurances they’re just following the dictates of their subscriber base. The problem is that in the absence of substantive conversations, the vacuum is filled with a lot of often ill-informed speculation. And it’s especially a bad strategic when you are talking (or not talking) about a company whose stock price has been inextricably linked to its story.

I’ve been covering Netflix since it was a one-DVD warehouse company based in the S.F. Bay area. I’ve been able to nurture a number of sources inside its executive ranks over the years and there are people there I speak with off the record maybe once a month. And while my newsletter letter TooMuchTV tends to punch above its weight when it comes to reporting on the media and the streaming industry, if Netflix executives are speaking with me, they’re certainly speaking to other reporters.

MORE FOR YOU

And yet, I haven’t seen anyone making the argument that much of what you’ve read about Netflix this week is wrong. And that while the company faces some real industry headwinds and challenges as it battles competition in the marketplace, it also has a good story to tell. If anyone in the company was willing to talk about it publicly.

What Netflix Executives Aren’t Telling You
First, Netflix executives will note that while engagement has dipped as has been reported, there are a couple of important caveats to the story. First, engagement issues are very much a problem across the streaming industry and the problem is primarily limited to more mature markets - North America, the UK, Western Europe and some parts of Asia.

Their working theory seems to be the engagement problems are primarily driven by two factors: competition from other non-SVOD platforms as well as the fact that in mature markets, every SVOD is hitting its natural ceiling for market growth. “Our ceiling might be different than Paramount+, as an example,” one Netflix executive shared with me this week. “But at some point, you’re reached all the people likely to subscribe to your service without some substantial discount.”

The other challenge comes from all the other choices for screentime: social media, YouTube, TikTok, gaming, FAST channels, etc. And this is reason that is driving many of Netflix’s recent decisions regarding video podcasts and licensing lifestyle content.

I haven’t seen any indication that bingeing has any substantial impact on engagement. If you examine ratings numbers on the original programs that are released on other SVOD platforms, a weekly or binge release decision doesn’t seem to have much of an impact. Unless it’s a half-hour show that is released weekly and in that case, not releasing multiple episodes seems to negatively impact viewing numbers.

In the end, what seems to matter is not the frequency in which the episodes are released. It comes down to quality and the amount of marketing available for the title.

The Impact Of Netflix PR On Second Season SlumpsIn fact, I would argue that marketing and PR has had a substantial impact on the second season performance of Netflix shows.

Netflix very famously doesn’t have a lot of faith in the traditional press to move the viewing needle on its programs. Executives there have a lot of faith in the ability of the Netflix algorithm and its UI to drive interest and help content discovery. It relies heavily on its inhouse entertainment web site Tudum.com for press coverage. And it generally embargoes reviews in most cases until the day the program premieres.

And while that approach works reasonably well on new titles (although it doesn’t help titles that are a lower priority), it doesn’t seem to work nearly as well on follow-up seasons. Marketing for returning seasons isn’t about introducing a show, it’s about reminding viewers that it’s coming and why they enjoyed it the first time around. And that requires a very different subset of promotional skills.

The Truth About Netflix And FAST Channels
Which brings me to Netflix adding “live” channels.

It was mentioned as part of the Wall Street Journal story, and a number of reporters jumped immediately to “Netflix wants to turn into Pluto or Tubi.” Which is a serious misread of the situation.

The WSJ piece mentioned live channels, but didn’t really specify what that would look like. But one thing that is almost certain is that it won’t include Netflix becoming the new home for the 24/7 UFO Mysteries FAST channel.

When Netflix talks about live channels, they are talking about curated channels that feature programming already on Netflix. And this is an idea they have been circling around for years.

A look at Netflix Direct

Netflix, 2020

In 2020, Netflix briefly launched Netflix Direct in France, which was a series of curated live channels that focused on current Netflix originals. And more than 18 months ago, a couple of Netflix engineers walked me through an early Alpha build of a Netflix interface that included a similar approach.

While it’s not clear that Netflix executives have made a final decision of the approach, that is my hunch on what will be rolled out in North America. A series of curated 24/7 live channels focusing on current Netflix programming. And along those lines, I have heard that in recent months, Netflix has been nailing down the rights to stream licensed titles in their own exclusive 24/7 live channels on Netflix.

The early success of Netflix’s deal in France to stream live and on-demand content from broadcaster TF-1 points to another possibility for Netflix in the U.S. The big challenge here is that it’s not clear if any broadcaster would be interested in cutting such a deal.

Which is one reason I think you are seeing speculation that Netflix might somehow bundle with Peacock. A platform bundle is unlikely - Netflix has notoriously shied away from bundles other than in some telecom deals. In large part because a bundle inherently means less money per subscriber for Netflix.

But what is more likely is a scenario in which Netflix adds Peacock-branded on-demand content from Peacock, along with some live channels that are essentially 24/7 ad-free streams of Peacock content on Netflix.

Netflix Is Not Becoming ‘The Next YouTube’
I’ve seen a lot of comments arguing that by leaning hard into video podcasts, Netflix is trying to somehow become the next YouTube. A point of view that misunderstands both YouTube and Netflix.

Yes, it’s true that one of the reasons why Netflix is licensing video podcasts is because it wants to boost engagement as well as tap into the younger audiences of various creators.

But Netflix is also taking advantage of several YouTube weaknesses. Big-time creators make a lot of money from YouTube, but also are unhappy with the advertising revenue at the company. CPM has been dropping for many streamers, and that is in part due to the fact that advertisers continue to be wary about paying top money to advertise on a platform that contains so much filler and possible problematic programming.

Netflix can offer creators what YouTube can’t - a guaranteed paycheck along with a safe and curated environment. The streamer has been willing to work on the terms of deals - offering everything from a pure licensing deal to exclusive partnerships.

In a sense, Netflix is becoming a premium YouTube for top creators. And while other streamers are experimenting with similar content, Netflix’s UI provides the best presentation now available for the podcasts.

The 23-Episode TV Season Conundrum
Anytime the subject of streaming television comes up in Hollywood, the topic of shortened streaming TV seasons comes up. There are mentions of the golden days of Hollywood when 23-epiosode seasons were the norm and it was still possible to have a middle-class career was a Hollywood creative.

And those expanded seasons had the added benefit of making Hollywood’s programming more popular overseas. Having hundreds of episodes of TV shows available for licensing is an immensely powerful selling point.

But what people in the industry tend to memory hole is that even in the glory days of broadcast television, the 23-episode season was on outlier in the television industry. It was only financially feasible in the United States, where a unique set of constraints - including a massively profitable cable TV bundle - made those long seasons possible.

Nearly every other country has always relied primarily on 8-12 episode seasons for scripted television. And while I agree that those extended seasons here had creative value and boosted the income of Hollywood’s creatives. I don’t see how those golden days can ever return.

No, Netflix Is Not 'Reinventing The Cable TV BundleFinally, I’ve read a number of pieces this week that argue that Netflix is “reinventing the cable TV bundle” or “rediscovering the successful TV model it broke in the first place.”

Netflix gets blamed for a lot of the problems in Hollywood and certainly its success hasn’t been helpful. But the cable TV bundle was only financially successful because it was a near monopoly. If you wanted cable TV, you likely only had two choices. Whatever cable company owned the local cable TV monopoly, or satellite television.

That monopoly allowed media companies and networks to regularly raise their carriage prices and local affiliates to boost their retransmission fees. All of that was passed along to cable TV customers. Yes, it was a great deal for Hollywood and for the media companies. But once the internet came along and other options were available, it was doomed to slowly fade away.

Netflix didn’t severely wound Hollywood. Greed was a large part of it, along with the growth of the internet and the shift of production to parts of the world that now include the deadly mix of world class production facilities and non-union production crews.

I have my own problems with Netflix and it is certainly not the perfect company. But if you’re going to complain about the company, at least complain about the right things.

Equities rose last week, shrugging off the President Donald Trump’s declaration that the cease-fire with Iran is “over.” The S&P 500 index gained 1.2% while the Nasdaq Composite jumped 1.7%. Wall Street probably looked through the end of the cease-fire as the U.S. also said that it was continuing talks with Iran.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

© BMPhotolab / Shutterstock.com

PepsiCo (NASDAQ: PEP | PEP Price Prediction) and Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG) both just handed investors fresh earnings, and the businesses behind the tickers are steering in noticeably different directions.

Pepsi posted Q2 2026 results on July 8 with international momentum leading the way. P&G’s fiscal Q3 earnings report landed in late April, driven by Beauty. Both beat, both reaffirmed guidance, and both are wrestling with tariffs.

Snacks Wobble at Pepsi. Beauty Powers P&G. Pepsi delivered core EPS of $2.20 on $24.18 billion in revenue, up 6.4% year over year. The tell was geography. Latin America Foods jumped 15%, EMEA rose 10%, and Asia Pacific Foods climbed 12%, while PepsiCo Foods North America slipped 2% on lower effective net pricing.

That is a real business problem for Frito-Lay economics at home, even as CEO Ramon Laguarta pointed to “the highest rate [of global organic volume growth] since 2022”.

P&G’s story was different in texture. Net sales of $21.24 billion grew 7.4%, with Beauty up 7% organically on Hair Care, Skin Care, and Olay premiumization. Every one of the five segments grew. Core EPS came in at $1.59, beating the $1.5552 consensus. New CEO Shailesh Jejurikar framed it plainly: “broad-based growth across product categories and regions.”

Business Driver PepsiCo P&G Main Growth Engine International beverages and foods Beauty and premium innovation Soft Spot PFNA (-2%) Fabric & Home Care organic (+3%) Margin Move Core margin -40 bps Core gross margin -100 bps Functional Beverages vs. Premium Skin Care Laguarta wants Pepsi’s portfolio pulled toward “functional benefits such as hydration, protein and fiber, energy and zero sugar beverage varieties“, alongside affordability initiatives to shore up domestic snacks.

Jejurikar is doing something bolder on the cost side. P&G announced a plan to cut up to 7,000 non-manufacturing roles by end of FY2027 while pushing innovation-based pricing in Oral Care and Skin Care.

_________________________________

What's Your Number...?Here's a question most people 5y from retirement can't answer: at your current savings rate, how much do you need, and how long will it actually last? A good advisor can put a date on that in a single meeting. SmartAsset's free quiz matches you with up to three fiduciary advisors serving your area, so you can get YOUR retirement number now (sponsor)

__________________________________________

Both companies get hit by tariffs. P&G quantified the pain at roughly $400 million after-tax and now expects results toward the lower end of its FY26 EPS range of $6.83 to $7.09. Pepsi, by contrast, reaffirmed core constant currency EPS growth of 4% to 6% and $8.9 billion in total shareholder returns.

The Next Test Is Domestic Snack Pricing and Tariff Absorption I want to see whether Pepsi can stop the pricing bleed in Frito-Lay without gutting margin, and whether poppi, Gatorade, and the zero sugar push can keep offsetting soft PFNA.

For P&G, the tell will be Beauty holding a 7% organic pace while restructuring hits and tariff costs stay sticky. The 70th consecutive dividend increase and Pepsi’s 54th look secure; the unit economics behind them are the open question.

Why I Lean P&G for Quality, Pepsi for the Rebound Trade If I want the cleaner operating story right now, I lean toward P&G. Every segment grew, Beauty is doing real premium work, and Jejurikar’s cost plan gives me a lever if tariffs stay elevated. The stock reflects it: PG is up 3.95% year to date, while PEP sits down 2.08%.

If I want more upside variance, Pepsi is the more interesting file. A forward P/E of 17 and 3.92% dividend yield pay me to wait while PFNA stabilizes. I would not chase either aggressively until I see two more quarters of margin direction. That is the read.

If You’ve Been Thinking About Retirement, Pay Attention (sponsor) Retirement planning doesn’t have to feel overwhelming. The key is finding expert guidance, and SmartAsset’s simple quiz makes it easier than ever for you to connect with a vetted financial advisor. Here’s how:

Answer a Few Simple Questions. 

Get Matched with Vetted Advisors 

Choose Your  Fit 

Why wait? Start building the retirement you’ve always dreamed of. Get started today! (sponsor)  

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of Class A or Class C common stock of Zillow Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZG) (NASDAQ: Z) between February 11, 2025 and May 7, 2026, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important August 10, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline in the securities class action first filed by the Firm.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Zillow common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Zillow class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/zillow-group-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 10, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered billions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Zillow's agreement with Redfin Corporation was not a "partnership," but rather an acquisition of Redfin's business; (2) as a result of the Redfin Agreement, Zillow faced a materially heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny and liability under federal antitrust laws; (3) upon the filing of an antitrust lawsuit, Zillow continued to downplay its legal exposure; and (4) as a result, defendants' statements about Zillow's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Zillow class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/zillow-group-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm or on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304844

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Zoetis Inc. (NYSE: ZTS) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Zoetis securities between January 14, 2025 and May 6, 2026, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: bgandg.com/ZTS.

Zoetis Case Details

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements concerning the growth, competitive positioning, market share, and veterinarian adoption of key products within the Companion Animal segment while failing to disclose that:

veterinarian prescription growth and adoption of Zoetis' Librela, a canine pain treatment, were sharply weakening as clinicians became more cautious following FDA safety warnings concerning serious neurological complications in dogs; Zoetis' Simparica Trio was losing significant market share to a lower-priced competing canine parasiticide with broader indicated use in a slowing overall market; and Zoetis' dermatology products, Apoquel and Cytopoint, were losing substantial market share to a newly launched competing canine treatment.What's Next for Zoetis Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm's site: bgandg.com/ZTS, or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Zoetis you have until July 27, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Zoetis Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys' fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Zoetis Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/299402

Source: Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Marvell Technology has become one of the loudest AI infrastructure stories of the past twelve months, and the numbers back it up. Marvell Technology (NASDAQ:MRVL | MRVL Price Prediction) shares are up 186.61% year to date as custom XPU silicon, 800G/1.6T optics, and 51.2T Ethernet switches ride the hyperscaler capex wave.

CEO Matt Murphy told investors the company is seeing “exceptional AI-related bookings” and just raised the fiscal 2027 and 2028 outlook. The question I want to answer is simple. Can this stock hit $400 by 2027?

What’s Holding Marvell Back Right Now Despite the parabolic YTD move, shares have cooled off. Marvell is down 8.85% in the last month and 0.82% on the week, sitting 24% below the 52-week high of $329.88.

The pullback lines up with two real concerns. First, customer concentration risk is real. Data center now accounts for 76% of revenue, and hyperscaler vertical integration is a genuine overhang.

Second, a beta of 2.197 means every macro wobble hits harder here than in a broad index. Add in net insider selling across 129 recent transactions, and the profit-taking narrative writes itself. I do not think that changes the multi-year thesis, but it explains why the tape looks tired.

Wall Street Sees 4% Upside. Our Model Says 16% Consensus analyst target is $252.26, which is essentially where the stock trades today. The rating breakdown is heavily bullish: 7 Strong Buys, 31 Buys, 5 Holds, and 1 Strong Sell, an 86% bullish share. Our own base case is $282.97 with 90% confidence, implying 16.32% upside, and the bull case runs to $351.97.

The sell side is likely behind the curve. Analysts anchored their targets before management raised the fiscal 2028 outlook. If bookings acceleration is real, the current consensus is a lagging indicator. That is the gap I am trying to price.

The Path to $400 Per Share Reaching $400 from today’s price of $243.27 would require a gain of 64.4%. With forward EPS of $4.36, a price of $400 implies a forward P/E of 92x. Our base case of $282.97 already implies 80x, meaning the bold target requires roughly 12x of additional multiple expansion.

Act now: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just named his top 10 AI stocks — and Marvell Technology didn't make the cut. Grab the names FREE today.

Is that achievable? The forward P/E compression story only works if EPS growth outruns expectations. Q1 FY2027 revenue grew 27.6% YoY to $2.418 billion, and Q2 is guided to $2.70 billion, roughly 35% YoY. Free cash flow jumped 126.8% to $483.1 million.

Murphy said flatly, “We expect revenue growth to continue accelerating each quarter throughout fiscal 2027.” The Celestial AI and XConn deals close the interconnect gap, and the 247Factor adjustment of 1.104, driven by 1.15 sector momentum and 86% analyst bullishness, tells you the setup is aligned. The main risk is a hyperscaler pausing custom silicon orders.

Where Marvell Trades Today vs Its Earnings Power At $243.27 against forward EPS of $4.36, Marvell trades at roughly 56x forward earnings. That is a premium multiple, priced for durable AI capex growth.

The stock sits between the 52-week low of $61.32 and high of $329.88, and the 10-year return of 2,517.21% shows what compounding at AI-adjacent margins can do. Fiscal 2026 non-GAAP EPS grew 81% to $2.84. If that operating leverage continues, today’s multiple compresses fast.

Is $400 Realistic? Here’s My Take My read: $400 by 2027 is a stretch, but it is not a fantasy.

It requires a 64.4% gain, driven by three things going right: fiscal 2028 guidance rising again on custom XPU wins, gross margin holding near 59%, and no hyperscaler pulling in-house. What would derail it is a broader semiconductor spending pause. Returns at this level shouldn’t be expected every year, but we’ve outlined the blueprint for how Marvell could reach $400 in 2027.

Act now: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just named his top 10 AI stocks — and Marvell Technology didn't make the cut. Grab the names FREE today.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

NEW YORK, July 12, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Verra Mobility Corporation (NASDAQ: VRRM) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Verra securities between February 24, 2026 and May 26, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: bgandg.com/VRRM.

Verra Case Details

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

Defendants misrepresented the nature and stability of Verra’s relationship with Avis Budget Group (“Avis”), including the likelihood of securing a contract extension; Defendants downplayed the risk that major rental car companies, including Avis, could replace Verra’s services with in-house solutions or alternative third-party providers; and as a result, Defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. What's Next for Verra Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm’s site: bgandg.com/VRRM. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Verra you have until August 4, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Verra Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys’ fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Verra Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Contact Info

Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or Nathan Miller
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
917-590-0911 | [email protected]

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Element Solutions Forming Flat Base After Q2 Earnings Solstice Advanced Materials said it has agreed to acquire Element Solutions NYSE: ESI in a cash-and-stock transaction valued at approximately $14.5 billion, including the assumption of net debt, as the companies outlined plans to create a larger advanced materials platform with a heavier focus on electronics, data centers and related thermal management applications.

Get Element Solutions alerts:

Under the agreement, Element Solutions shareholders will receive $10 in cash and 0.5 shares of Solstice common stock for each Element Solutions share. Solstice President and CEO David Sewell said the offer represented a 15% premium to Element Solutions’ closing share price on Friday. Upon closing, Element Solutions shareholders are expected to own approximately 44% of the combined company.

The transaction is expected to close in the first half of 2027, subject to approvals from both companies’ shareholders, regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions. The combined company will operate as Solstice, with Sewell serving as CEO. Element Solutions CEO Ben Gliklich is expected to join Solstice’s board, along with two other designees from Element Solutions’ board, subject to standard governance procedures.

Companies Emphasize Electronics and Data Center Growth Sewell said the deal accelerates Solstice’s strategy as an independent company and creates what he described as a global advanced materials leader with expected combined 2025 net sales of approximately $6.8 billion and adjusted EBITDA of $1.7 billion. He said the combined company would have leading positions across end markets and more than 8,300 patents and pending applications.

Solstice executives framed the acquisition around the growth of advanced computing, artificial intelligence and data centers, particularly the need for materials used in semiconductor fabrication, advanced packaging, assembly and thermal management.

“We believe this combination creates an unmatched electronic materials platform,” Sewell said, adding that the portfolios are “highly complementary” across semiconductor fabrication, packaging, assembly and thermal management.

Gliklich said Element Solutions has been positioning its businesses toward faster-growing, higher-value customers and markets. He noted that Element Solutions generates just over 70% of its revenue from electronics, with about 75% of electronics sales coming from business-to-business markets. He also said more than 20% of Element Solutions’ sales come from the data center market and that percentage is growing.

Gliklich said the deal combines Solstice’s expertise in synthesis and engineering with Element Solutions’ expertise in formulation, process chemistry and applications development. He said the combination should help accelerate innovation and time to market.

Synergies and Financial Targets Solstice said it has identified more than $180 million in expected annualized run-rate cost synergies on a net basis, which it expects to realize within three years of closing. Sewell broke down the expected savings as follows:

Approximately $100 million from operational initiatives and operating model integration, including efficiencies in G&A, sales and marketing, and R&D; About $25 million from supply chain improvements, including raw material and procurement scale and copper recovery from deposition processes; Around $20 million from footprint optimization; About $35 million from other initiatives. Solstice CFO Tina Pierce said the combined company, including run-rate synergies, is expected to have an adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 26%. She said revenue is expected to grow at a mid- to high-single-digit rate over the medium term, with adjusted EBITDA growing faster than revenue as synergies phase in. Pierce also said the company expects cash conversion of approximately 75% and expects the transaction to be accretive to adjusted earnings per share in year one.

Solstice expects net leverage of approximately 3.5 times at closing and said it anticipates deleveraging to below 3 times within 18 months after the transaction closes. Pierce said the longer-term net leverage target is 2 times to 3 times, in line with the company’s current credit rating profile.

Portfolio Fit and Integration Plans Sewell said Solstice’s strengths are concentrated in front-end semiconductor fabrication, including chemistries used in deposition, patterning, etching and cleaning. Element Solutions, he said, largely complements those capabilities in advanced packaging, printed circuit board building and assembly. He highlighted copper interconnects and thermal management as areas where the companies believe they can offer more complete solutions together.

In response to analyst questions, Sewell said the timing of the deal reflected the importance of advanced electronics to Solstice’s long-term strategy and the increasing demands customers are placing on suppliers for solutions. He said the integration is expected to be manageable because of the complementary nature of the businesses, though he stopped short of calling it a simple “drop-in” acquisition.

Gliklich said Element Solutions was approached by Solstice and had not put itself up for sale. He described the offer as attractive for Element Solutions shareholders because it includes upfront cash, a premium and continued participation in the expected value creation through Solstice stock.

Executives also said they see potential revenue synergies, though Pierce said the company’s revenue growth target depends only on a relatively small amount of revenue synergy. Sewell said some opportunities could come from cross-selling into each company’s customer base, while longer-term opportunities may require qualification processes that could take about two years.

Asked about possible divestitures, Sewell said it was premature to provide details but said the transaction gives Solstice more flexibility to tailor its portfolio to its long-term vision. He said the combined company would not be a pure-play electronics company, emphasizing that refrigerants and nuclear services also fit into Solstice’s view of data center infrastructure, including cooling and power needs.

Solstice executives said planned investments, including Kuprion facilities at Element Solutions and Solstice’s nuclear expansion and sputtering targets expansion, are included in the company’s financial model. Sewell said those investments are not expected to prevent the company from meeting its deleveraging goals.

About Element Solutions NYSE: ESIElement Solutions Inc is a global specialty chemicals company that develops and supplies highly engineered chemistries to performance-driven end markets. The company's solutions serve customers across the electronics, energy, transportation, consumer and industrial sectors, with a particular emphasis on electronics chemicals, metal plating, and industrial coatings additives.

In the electronics market, Element Solutions provides a range of plating and surface-treatment chemistries used in the manufacture of printed circuit boards, semiconductor devices, and advanced display technologies.

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Should You Invest $1,000 in Element Solutions Right Now?Before you consider Element Solutions, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Element Solutions wasn't on the list.

While Element Solutions currently has a Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

MarketBeat just released its list of the 7 hottest IPOs expected to hit Wall Street in 2026. See which companies are preparing to go public and why investors are watching closely.

Get This Free Report

LEQEMBIÂ Subcutaneous Autoinjector Clinical Data Supports Similar Efficacy and Safety to IV Formulation in Early Alzheimer's Disease Presented

The obvious dividend names in consumer goods -- the colas, the ketchups, the toothpaste giants -- are picked over, written about endlessly, and their stocks are priced accordingly. I'd rather look one shelf down, at the companies doing the work without the crowd standing on top of them.

These companies pay good dividends, too; after all, a dividend isn't just a number. It's a promise a company keeps quarter after quarter, and the ones that keep that promise the longest usually have durable businesses behind their payouts. Here are three consumer goods dividend payers worth a look for the back half of 2026, each offering a different flavor of income.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. The Marzetti Company: A Dividend King hiding behind a new name You may still know this one as Lancaster Colony. In July 2025, it renamed itself The Marzetti Company (MZTI +2.42%) after its flagship dressings brand, and I suspect a lot of investors haven't caught up to the new ticker yet. What hasn't changed is the streak: 63 straight years of raising its dividend. Only a dozen other U.S. companies have streaks that long or longer. That also makes it a Dividend King -- a title reserved for those companies that have boosted their dividend payouts annually for at least 50 consecutive years. Streaks like that don't happen by accident. They reflect a business that generates cash reliably through good times and bad.

The more interesting story is how Marzetti grows. It has become the intermediary between restaurant chains and your grocery cart, licensing Texas Roadhouse dinner rolls (now in roughly 4,000 Walmart stores), Chick-fil-A sauces, and Olive Garden dressings for the retail shelf. Borrowing other brands' fame is a capital-light way to grow, meaning Marzetti doesn't have to spend heavily building demand that it can rent instead.

Today's Change

(

2.42

%) $

2.71

Current Price

$

114.80

2. Reynolds Consumer Products: The boring aisle that pays around 4% Reynolds Consumer Products (REYN +0.84%) makes foil and trash bags (Reynolds Wrap and Hefty) -- the kind of products people toss in their carts almost without thinking. That autopilot demand is exactly what supports a forward dividend yield that recently sat above 4%, comfortably higher than the broader market average. The company keeps its brands playful in small ways, even rolling out heart-embossed aluminum foil this spring, but the real appeal is habit, not novelty.

There's a risk worth naming plainly. Reynolds Wrap is made from aluminum, so metal prices and tariffs can pinch its margins in ways management can't control, and revenue has been running roughly flat. This is an income-first, growth-second holding, which is fine, as long as you buy it for the yield rather than expecting the share price to sprint higher.

Today's Change

(

0.84

%) $

0.22

Current Price

$

26.25

3. Energizer Holdings: More than the bunny Most people file Energizer Holdings (ENR +1.29%) under batteries and move on. The part I find most underappreciated is its auto-care arm, with brands including Armor All, STP, and A/C Pro. Together with the battery business, those lines generate enough cash to fund a dividend that yields well north of 5% at the current share price.

That headline yield comes with the most risk, too. Energizer carries meaningful debt, and both batteries and car-care products face rising input costs and cheaper store-brand competition. A high-yielding dividend is only as valuable as a company's ability to keep paying it, so I'd treat this as the spicier pick rather than the anchor of an income-focused portfolio.

Aqua Capital, Energizer's largest outside shareholder with a roughly 10% stake, bought another 40,000 shares recently for about $844,000. That extends a steady buying streak that has added more than 314,000 shares since late May despite the company's sluggish sales. This is a solid sign for the company.

Today's Change

(

1.29

%) $

0.26

Current Price

$

20.47

Think of these three stocks as a ladder, not a contest. Marzetti offers the safest, slowest-growing income and an enviable streak of payout raises. Reynolds sits in the middle with a dependable yield in the mid-single-digit percentages, supported by a business that's tied to people's everyday habits. Energizer offers the highest payout and, fittingly, the highest risk. Rather than chasing the biggest number, make your pick based on your risk tolerance.

With dividends, the durability of the payout almost always matters more than its size.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Futu Holdings Limited (NASDAQ: FUTU) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Futu securities between May 24, 2023 and May 27, 2026, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: bgandg.com/FUTU.

Futu Case Details

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

Futu was not in compliance with the requirements of the China Securities Regulatory Commission ("CSRC"), including because Futu continued to conduct securities business, public fund sales business, and futures business in mainland China without obtaining the requisite licenses or approval; as a result, Futu was reasonably likely to face regulatory penalties, including the disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and other penalties; and as a result of the foregoing, Futu's financial results were overstated; and as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about Futu's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.What's Next for Futu Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm's site: bgandg.com/FUTU, or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Futu you have until August 25, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Futu Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys' fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Futu Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/303317

Source: Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) could reach a $10 trillion market capitalization by January 2032, according to a projection generated by ChatGPT.

Artificial intelligence has become one of the technology industry’s biggest battlegrounds, but the debate is no longer just about which model performs best. Increasingly, it is about who controls the future of AI itself. 

Open-source advocates argue that freely available models will democratize AI, lower costs, and prevent a handful of companies from dominating the market. Yet the dollars flowing through enterprise AI tell a different story. As businesses ramp up spending, the biggest winners continue to be the companies selling proprietary models. 

For investors, that’s the trend worth watching because spending, not downloads, ultimately determines who captures the profits.

Enterprise Spending Tells A Different Story On the All-In podcast, David Sacks challenged the popular narrative that open-source AI is winning. His argument was simple: ignore GitHub stars, Hugging Face downloads, and social media buzz. Follow where enterprises are writing checks.

According to the latest a16z CIO survey of 100 verified Global 2000 technology executives, open-source AI accounted for 19% of enterprise AI spending last year. This year, that figure has fallen to 11%. Closed models moved in the opposite direction, climbing from 81% to 89% of enterprise spending.

The same survey found enterprise preferences steadily shifting toward proprietary platforms. In January 2026:

Metric January 2026 Prefer closed-source models 36% Prefer open-source models 30% Average annual LLM spending $7 million Average spending two years ago $4.5 million Expected spending increase in 2026 65% That growing budget is flowing primarily to OpenAI, Anthropic, and Alphabet‘s (NASDAQ:GOOG | GOOG Price Prediction) Google.

To put that into perspective, enterprises aren’t reducing AI investments. They’re increasing them. The question is simply where the money is going, and the answer is increasingly toward closed providers.

Forget download counts—follow the money. While open source wins on popularity, proprietary giants are building a massive moat by capturing 89% of corporate budgets. © 24/7 Wall St. Cheap Tokens Don’t Necessarily Mean Valuable Work Granted, open-source supporters raise a reasonable counterargument. Open models often cost between five and 20 times less per token than proprietary alternatives. If inference is dramatically cheaper, open models could process far more raw tokens even while generating less revenue.

That may be true for experimentation, internal utilities, or batch processing. The problem is equating cheap volume with valuable work.

Don't wait: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just revealed his top 10 AI stocks. See the full list FREE now.

Sacks argues enterprises continue relying on closed models for production systems where reliability matters most. Those applications often involve AI agents maintaining conversation history, long context windows, company-specific knowledge, and custom API integrations. Once those systems are deployed, replacing them becomes expensive and risky.

Ironically, the very features enterprises want from open source — vendor independence, portability, and data sovereignty — become harder to achieve after they’ve built workflows around proprietary models.

Those production workloads also tend to consume more tokens per task because they involve repeated interactions, larger context windows, and more sophisticated reasoning. While there is no public evidence that open-source models dominate total token usage, there is even less evidence they dominate the highest-value AI work.

The Lock-In Effect Is Becoming AI’s Moat Perhaps the most important insight from Sacks wasn’t about market share but switching costs.

Software history shows businesses rarely migrate away from platforms deeply embedded in daily operations. AI appears to be following the same pattern. As enterprise LLM spending has risen from $4.5 million to $7 million over two years, companies are investing in agents, workflows, and integrations built around proprietary APIs. Those investments create operational inertia that favors incumbents.

That doesn’t mean open source disappears. It will likely remain the preferred choice for developers, research, experimentation, and cost-sensitive deployments. But the highest-value enterprise workloads increasingly belong to companies offering frontier performance and enterprise-grade support.

Key Takeaway In short, popularity and profitability are becoming two different conversations. Open-source AI may generate millions of downloads and plenty of experimentation, but the a16z CIO survey suggests enterprises continue directing 89% of their AI budgets toward closed models. Cheaper tokens can drive volume, but they don’t automatically translate into the most valuable workloads. 

Ultimately, investors should watch where enterprise dollars are accumulating because history shows the companies capturing spending, not attention, usually create the most lasting shareholder value.

Don't wait: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just revealed his top 10 AI stocks. See the full list FREE now.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of common stock of Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) between May 1, 2025 and January 28, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important August 11, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Microsoft common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Microsoft class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/microsoft-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 11, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered billions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Microsoft's Copilot family of products had experienced significant brand positioning, user experience, usage, data siloing, computational capacity, organizational, and interoperability problems; (2) Microsoft's flagship proprietary AI model ranked well below competitors on a number of benchmark tests; (3) Microsoft needed to increase by billions of dollars its capital expenditures and divert graphics processing unit ("GPU") and central processing unit ("CPU") capacity away from fulfilling demand for its profitable Azure services in order to improve the competitive positioning of its critical Copilot family of products and increase its AI-related research and development ("R&D"); and (4) as a result, Microsoft had failed to convert a significant percentage of its commercial Microsoft 365 users to paid Copilot subscriptions and Microsoft's Copilot offerings had lost market share to rival products, a trend that was increasing. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Microsoft class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/microsoft-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304773

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

NEW YORK, July 12, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Microsoft securities between May 1, 2025 and January 28, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: bgandg.com/MSFT.

Microsoft Case Details

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements because they failed to disclose that: 
  (1) Microsoft’s Copilot family of products had experienced significant brand positioning, user experience, usage, data siloing, computational capacity, organizational, and interoperability problems; 
  (2) Microsoft’s flagship proprietary AI model ranked well below competitors on a number of benchmark tests; 
  (3) Microsoft needed to increase by billions of dollars its capital expenditures and divert graphics processing unit (“GPU”) and central processing unit (“CPU”) capacity away from fulfilling demand for its profitable Azure services in order to improve the competitive positioning of its critical Copilot family of products and increase its AI-related research and development (“R&D”); and 
  (4) as a result of the above, Microsoft had failed to convert a significant percentage of its commercial Microsoft 365 users to paid Copilot subscriptions and Microsoft’s Copilot offerings had lost market share to rival products, a trend that was increasing.

What's Next for Microsoft Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm’s site: bgandg.com/MSFT. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Microsoft you have until August 11, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Microsoft Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys’ fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Microsoft Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Contact Info

Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or Nathan Miller
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
917-590-0911 | [email protected]

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

HomeIndustriesBankingDeep DiveDeep DiveAmong the largest U.S. banks, Citigroup is expected to show the greatest improvement by one important measure. But it still has a long way to go to reach its own performance target.July 12, 2026, 11:30 a.m. ET

Every quarter, the largest U.S. banks kick off earnings season with JPMorgan Chase reporting on the first day, typically along with one or two others. On Tuesday we’re in for something unusual, with five of the “Big Six” banks announcing results before the market open.

The five largest U.S. banks by total assets are JPMorgan Chase JPM, Bank of America BAC, Citigroup C, Wells Fargo WFC and Goldmans Sachs GS. They will all report second-quarter results Tuesday morning, followed by Morgan Stanley MS — the sixth largest — on Wednesday.

Alphabet (GOOGL 0.48%) (GOOG 0.29%) has been developing its own Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) for years. But it wasn't until recently that the company started to see these processors not just as a side project but as a real alternative to Nvidia's (NVDA +3.90%) graphics processors.

The shift could be consequential for Nvidia, as Google focuses more on using its own processors and renting them to other AI companies.

Here's why Google's TPUs could be a bigger threat to Nvidia than investors might think.

Image source: Getty Images.

Custom processors are really good at AI compute It used to be that graphics processors were the hands-down winners for all things artificial intelligence.

But what AI companies have found recently is that designing their own custom processors can be a great way to achieve fast and efficient AI computing.

For example, Google's TPUs can handle AI workloads at an estimated total cost savings of up 30% compared to using chips made by other hyperscalers. That's because the custom processors can be designed specifically for how its Gemini AI model processes information.

Alphabet is spending up to $190 billion in capital expenditures this year, and management has said, "Next year, we expect it to significantly increase compared to 2026." Drastically reducing AI compute costs could help Google eventually run its AI data centers far more efficiently, and make its massive AI investments eventually worth the high cost.

And Google isn't the only one doing this. Many tech companies are looking more to custom processors to make their AI models more efficient and reduce costs. Space Exploration Technologies (SPCX 4.51%) is building what some are calling a "sovereign AI" in which SpaceX owns everything from the chip design and manufacturing to the AI model itself. And others, like Amazon and Microsoft, are designing their own AI processors as well.

All of which means that Nvidia could lose its dominance in the AI chip design market. It's not inevitable, of course, but as AI investments have skyrocketed, tech giants are trying to figure out how to make these investments pay off.

Today's Change

(

-0.48

%) $

-1.71

Current Price

$

357.18

Why Nvidia can't take this lightly Google announced a few months ago that it's starting a joint venture with Blackstone to deploy 500 megawatts of its own TPU capacity by 2027 and added that it has "plans to scale significantly over time."

That level of capacity shows Google is serious about using its TPUs as more than just a pet project.

What's more, it plans to rent some of that capacity to other tech companies. This system is called a neocloud business model, in which a tech company uses its own processors and data center and rents some of its capacity out to others. The rapidly expanding neocloud market could take 20% of the AI cloud market by 2030.

If more tech companies pivot to renting out Google's TPUs, or using their own processors, it will not only hurt Nvidia's market share in the AI data center space -- currently around 86% -- but it could also bring Nvidia's margins down.

Nvidia enjoys an enviable gross profit margin of about 74%, but with more competition looming from Google's TPUs, it might not be that long before Nvidia can't command the same pricing power it once did. And that could be one of the biggest threats to Nvidia's dominance in a long time.

Delta Air Lines NYSE: DAL lived up to its motto, with the Q2 2026 earnings results showing strength, suggesting its shares can Keep Climbing. Drivers include outperformance driven by international demand, overall demand, premiumization, and structural cost advantages, which together provide ample cash flow.

Delta Air Lines Today

DAL

Delta Air Lines

$87.48 -1.52 (-1.70%)

As of 07/10/2026 03:59 PM Eastern

This is a fair market value price provided by Massive. Learn more.

52-Week Range$50.44▼

$95.68Dividend Yield0.98%

P/E Ratio14.51

Price Target$97.06

The critical detail in the release was the guidance, which forecasts that these trends will continue. More importantly, guidance was raised, prompting a robust response from analysts.

Get Delta Air Lines alerts:

While no upgrades or price target revisions were tracked within the first hours of the release, several commentaries hit the wires. Analyst commentary reaffirms the robust trends, including numerous initiations, upgrades, and price target increases ahead of the earnings release on July 10.

As it stands, MarketBeat tracks 27 analysts rating DAL as a consensus Moderate Buy; coverage is up versus the prior month, quarter, and year, with sentiment firming and an 89% Buy-side bias in the data. The consensus price target assumes fair value near the early-July highs, but the trend matters. Recent revisions place this market in the high-end range, between $100 and $116, which would be a fresh all-time high when reached.

Delta’s July Pullback: A Touch-and-Go Event, Buy the DipDelta’s price pullback reflects a market expecting strength, as the Q2 results and guidance revealed nothing but that. Revenue growth accelerated sequentially and year over year with a robust 18.7% advance, ahead of expectations.

Delta’s strength was seen across metrics, underpinned by a mere 1% increase in capacity. Total revenue per average seat mile (TRASM) grew by 12.4%, with strength in the main cabin and premium, which grew by 17%. Domestic revenue grew by 12% and international revenue by 8%, with cargo up by 39% and maintenance services by 32%. Loyalty, a forward-looking indicator, grew by 19%, and corporate traffic grew by double digits.

While margin contracted in the quarter, and slightly more than expected, the contraction was minimal. More importantly, top-line strength carried through to the bottom line, leaving the adjusted earnings per share of $1.56 above forecasts by 400 bps. Looking ahead, the company expects strength to continue and reaffirmed its guidance. The critical details are that free cash flow and capital returns will continue, and that the guidance may be cautious. Travel trends remain robust across leisure and business segments, potentially accelerated by falling energy prices.

Delta’s Cash Flow Recovery Story Takes FlightDelta’s stock price recovery is underpinned by growth but, more importantly, the cash flow it produces. Drivers of the share price include persistent debt reduction, improving investment-grade balance-sheet quality, and the return of capital to shareholders.

Q3 capital returns included dividends but no share buybacks, with the dividend annualizing to about 1%. The payout ratios reveal no red flags for investors, as the company is in a position to continue executing its strategy while increasing its dividend annually. Balance sheet highlights include increased cash, reduced debt, and improving equity, with equity up 4.6% year to date.

Institutional activity reflects the potential in a DAL investment. The group owns a substantial 70% of the stock and has been accumulating at a nearly $2-to-$1 pace over the trailing 12 months. They provide a solid support base and market tailwind that will likely remain in place, given the guidance. In this scenario, DAL’s share price might continue pulling back in Q3, but the downside is limited, and higher share prices are likely by year’s end. Critical support targets are near $85 and $80; lower lows are unexpected.

Delta’s risks center on cost controls and execution. Costs, including labor, continue to rise while a major C-suite transition is underway. Two retirements and one exec’s departure for new opportunities resulted in several promotions and consolidated roles. The risk lies in disruptive hiccups tied to the role changes, specifically during the upcoming seasonal shift. If Delta fails to match capacity to demand, it risks losing pricing power, which would be detrimental to both top- and bottom-line results. In the longer term, Delta is expected to sustain modest growth over the next five years.

The stock price action is favorable, despite the early Q3 price pullback. Delta is rising on a wave of strength, cash flow, and dividends that has yet to play out, leaving the underlying uptrend intact. The likely outcome is that support kicks in at or near the early July lows, leading to a trend-following signal and price rebound later this year. Signals of strength include MACD convergence on the weekly chart, suggesting the latest highs will at least be retested, and support at the 30-day exponential moving average.

Should You Invest $1,000 in Delta Air Lines Right Now?Before you consider Delta Air Lines, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Delta Air Lines wasn't on the list.

While Delta Air Lines currently has a Moderate Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Looking to profit from the electric vehicle mega-trend? Click the link to see our list of which EV stocks show the most long-term potential.

Get This Free Report

Plus, a plan to protect Earth from solar storms, how to shop for iPhones this year, how AI advice is undermining eating-disorder therapy and more.

Let me put a realistic number on the table before anyone gets carried away. Palantir Technologies (PLTR 1.77%) could carry a market value of roughly $400 billion by the end of 2027. That sounds bold until you remember the company was already worth a little more than $300 billion this summer and briefly commanded even more earlier in the year.

So the target isn't a moonshot. It's closer to the stock re-earning ground it has already lost.

Today's Change

(

-1.77

%) $

-2.29

Current Price

$

126.75

The realistic case for a $400 billion Palantir What makes me pay attention isn't the price chart because the stock has actually cooled off, down just over 30% from where it started 2026. Instead, it's what the company is shipping. Palantir spent years being described as a consulting shop in software clothing. That description is getting harder to defend. Its Artificial Intelligence Platform is turning into plumbing that customers build on rather than a demo they kick the tires on.

Image source: Getty Images.

The signals are concrete. This year, Palantir made its AIP Analyst tool broadly available, letting non-technical employees query a company's data in plain language, and it rolled out support that lets AI agents autonomously build and edit applications across its Foundry platform. On the commercial side, it signed Wheels Up as a launch customer for a new operating system aimed at private aviation. None of these individually moves a $300 billion company, but together they suggest Palantir is embedding itself into daily operations, which is exactly the kind of stickiness that supports a higher valuation over time.

Today's Change

(

-1.65

%) $

-0.13

Current Price

$

7.74

Why this is not a sure thing Here's the part the enthusiasts tend to skip. Even after its pullback, Palantir trades at a valuation that already assumes years of rapid growth. Paying up for a great business is one thing, but paying up leaves very little room for disappointment. A single soft quarter, a delayed government contract, or a broader cooling in AI spending could knock the stock down sharply, as this year's slide has already shown.

There are structural risks worth naming, too. A meaningful chunk of revenue still depends on U.S. government work, tying Palantir to budget cycles and shifting political priorities. And the company's stock-based compensation remains high, quietly diluting existing shareholders. A path to $400 billion depends on commercial growth staying strong enough to offset all of that.

I think $400 billion by the end of 2027 is achievable, but "achievable" is not the same as "likely" or "safe." The reason to pay attention isn't the target itself. It's that Palantir is shifting from a story stock into an operating system that businesses and agencies actually run on. If you believe the transition is real, this recent weakness may be a chance to start a modest position and add to it over time, rather than a green light to bet the farm.

NEW YORK, July 12, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Zillow Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: Z) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Zillow securities between February 11, 2025 and May 7, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: bgandg.com/Z.

Zillow Case Details

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

      (1)   Zillow's agreement with Redfin Corporation was not a "partnership," but rather an acquisition of Redfin's business;
      (2)   as a result of the Redfin Agreement, Zillow faced a materially heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny and liability under federal antitrust laws;
      (3)   upon the filing of an antitrust lawsuit, Zillow continued to downplay its legal exposure; and
      (4)   as a result, defendants' statements about Zillow's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

What's Next for Zillow Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm’s site: bgandg.com/Z. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Zillow you have until August 10, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Zillow Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys’ fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Zillow Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Contact Info

Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or Nathan Miller
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
917-590-0911 | [email protected]

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

New clinical and real-world data support a subcutaneous treatment pathway from initiation through maintenance treatment, offering dosing convenience for patients and care partners

, /PRNewswire/ -- Eisai Co., Ltd. and Biogen Inc. (Nasdaq: BIIB) announced today that new data presented at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference® (AAIC®) 2026 in London support that the LEQEMBI® (lecanemab) subcutaneous autoinjector (SC-AI) formulation offers efficacy and safety comparable to intravenous (IV) administration for people with early Alzheimer's disease (AD). The data was featured during the "Lecanemab Subcutaneous Formulation in Early Alzheimer's Disease: Emerging Clinical Evidence and Practical Use Considerations" Developing Topics Session #1-32-FRS-C.

AD is a chronic, progressive disease that requires ongoing treatment. LEQEMBI is an early AD treatment that targets the underlying pathology of the disease, helping to slow cognitive decline and loss of daily functioning. The lecanemab subcutaneous auto‑injector (SC‑AI) was developed to provide a more convenient alternative to intravenous (IV) dosing from the initiation of treatment.

Key Findings
This session presented data from the lecanemab SC-AI development program in early Alzheimer's disease, including pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), efficacy, safety and real-world patient and care partner experience findings. Results showed that once-weekly 500 mg SC-AI achieved drug exposure similar to the approved intravenous (IV) initiation regimen (10 mg/kg every two weeks), supporting the expectation of similar clinical efficacy and safety, independent of the route of administration.

If approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), subcutaneous dosing for initiation may offer a convenient at-home alternative to IV infusion which could support access and delivery of care across healthcare settings.

Data Showed

Bioequivalence Achieved: Once-weekly 500 mg SC-AI demonstrated bioequivalence to the IV initiation regimen (10 mg/kg every two weeks), with an exposure ratio of 104% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 99.1%–109%). Exposure remained consistent across body weight quartiles, demonstrating a stable pharmacokinetic profile in a broad patient population. Efficacy Driven by Exposure, Not Route of Administration: Amyloid removal measured by amyloid PET, clinical efficacy measured by CDR-SB, and the incidence of ARIA-E were driven by lecanemab exposure rather than route of administration. The 500 mg SC-AI initiation regimen achieved exposure comparable to the IV initiation regimen, supporting the expectation of a comparable efficacy and safety profile despite the different route of administration. Consistent Results Across Patient Populations: The 500 mg SC-AI initiation regimen demonstrated consistent exposure, amyloid clearance as measured by amyloid PET, clinical efficacy and safety across body weight groups. In addition, amyloid clearance and clinical outcomes were not meaningfully affected by body weight, supporting the appropriateness of a fixed-dose regimen. Flexible switching between IV and SC administration: Patients may also switch from IV to SC administration, or vice versa, and if a dose is missed patients can take it the next day or up to day six providing greater convenience and flexibility in LEQEMBI administration. Safety Profile Aligned of SC LEQEMBI

Overall safety profile of SC-AI was generally consistent with that observed for the IV formulation. Incidence of ARIA-E with the 500 mg SC-AI initiation regimen was predicted to be similar to that observed with the IV initiation regimen. Injection-related reactions were observed with subcutaneous LEQEMBI, most of which were localized, while systemic reactions were less frequently observed. The incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) was low, at 1.4% in the 500 mg SC-AI group. No neutralizing antibodies were observed, confirming that the low immunogenicity profile was maintained with the SC-AI formulation. Clinical Trial Perspectives and Real-World Evidence: Sustained Clinical Benefit with SC-AI

Data from two U.S. Alzheimer's treatment centers (Alzheimer's Research and Treatment Center, and First Choice Neurology and Visionary Investigators Network) provide early insight into clinical trial and real-world use of subcutaneous LEQEMBI: At Alzheimer's Research and Treatment Center, 28 patients receiving SC administration demonstrated slower cognitive decline as measured by CDR-SB over 36 months relative to a matched Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) natural history cohort. The cohort included 25 patients newly initiated on SC administration and 3 patients who transitioned from IV administration.  In a separate case series from First Choice Neurology and Visionary Investigators Network, 10 of 11 evaluable patients (91%) showed improvement or remained stable on MMSE compared with baseline before maintenance therapy. At this center, patients who had received maintenance therapy with SC administration for at least 6 months were included in the analysis. Patient and care partner surveys in these two sites demonstrated high satisfaction with subcutaneous LEQEMBI administration, with satisfaction rates ranging from 75% to 97%, convenience ratings from 83% to 97%, and willingness to recommend treatment ranging from 92% to 100%. Results presented in this session further reinforce the importance of early and continuous treatment, highlighting how LEQEMBI SC initiation and maintenance administration provides greater optionality for long-term disease management.

Eisai serves as the lead for lecanemab's development and regulatory submissions globally with Eisai and Biogen co-commercializing and co-promoting the product and Eisai having final decision-making authority.

This release discusses investigational uses of agents in development and is not intended to convey conclusions about efficacy or safety. There is no guarantee that such investigational agents will successfully complete clinical development or gain health authority approval.

MEDIA CONTACTS

Eisai Co., Ltd.

Public Relations Department

TEL: +81 (0)3-3817-5120

Eisai Europe, Ltd.  

EMEA Communications Department 

+44 (0) 797 487 9419 

[email protected] 

Eisai Inc. (U.S.)

Libby Holman

+1201-753-1945

[email protected] 

Biogen Inc.

Madeleine Shin

+1-781-464-3260

[email protected]

INVESTOR CONTACTS

Eisai Co., Ltd.

Investor Relations Department

TEL: +81 (0) 3-3817-5122

Biogen Inc.

Tim Power

+ 1-781-464-2442

[email protected]

Notes to Editors

About lecanemab (generic name, brand name: LEQEMBI®)
Lecanemab is the result of a strategic research alliance between Eisai and BioArctic. It is a humanized immunoglobulin gamma (IgG1) monoclonal antibody directed against aggregated soluble (protofibril) and insoluble forms of amyloid-beta (Aβ).

Lecanemab has been approved in 53 countries and regions including Japan, the United States, China, Europe, South Korea, Taiwan, and Saudi Arabia, and is under regulatory review in 6 countries. Following the initial phase with treatment every two weeks for 18 months, intravenous (IV) maintenance dosing with treatment every four weeks was approved in 8 countries including the U.S., China, the UK, and others, and applications have been filed in 12 countries and regions. The U.S. FDA approved Eisai's Biologics License Application (BLA) for subcutaneous maintenance dosing with LEQEMBI IQLIK in August 2025. In November 2025, an application for a subcutaneous injectable formulation in Japan was submitted. In January 2026, the Biologics License Application (BLA) for the subcutaneous formulation was accepted in China. In December 2025, lecanemab (IV) has been included in the "Commercial Insurance Innovative Drug List", recently introduced by the National Healthcare Security Administration (NHSA) of China.

Since July 2020, the Phase 3 clinical study (AHEAD 3-45) for individuals with preclinical AD, meaning they are clinically normal and have intermediate or elevated levels of amyloid in their brains, is ongoing. AHEAD 3-45 is conducted as a public-private partnership between the Alzheimer's Clinical Trial Consortium that provides the infrastructure for academic clinical trials in AD and related dementias in the U.S, funded by the National Institute on Aging, part of the National Institutes of Health, Eisai, and Biogen. Since January 2022, the Tau NexGen clinical study for Dominantly Inherited AD (DIAD), that is conducted by Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Trials Unit (DIAN-TU), led by Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, is ongoing and includes lecanemab as the backbone anti-amyloid therapy.

About Protofibrils
Protofibrils are thought to be the most toxic Aβ species that contribute to brain damage in AD and play a major role in the cognitive decline of this progressive and devastating disease. Protofibrils can cause neuronal and synaptic damage in the brain, which can subsequently adversely affect cognitive function through multiple mechanisms.1 The mechanism by which this occurs has been reported not only by increasing the formation of insoluble Aβ plaques, but also by directly damaging signaling between neurons and other cells. It is believed that reducing protofibrils may reduce neuronal damage and cognitive impairment, potentially preventing the progression of AD.2

About the Collaboration between Eisai and Biogen for AD
Eisai and Biogen have been collaborating on the joint development and commercialization of AD treatments since 2014. Eisai serves as the lead of lecanemab development and regulatory submissions globally with both companies co-commercializing and co-promoting the product and Eisai having final decision-making authority.

About the Collaboration between Eisai and BioArctic for AD
Since 2005, Eisai and BioArctic have had a long-term collaboration regarding the development and commercialization of AD treatments. Eisai obtained the global rights to study, develop, manufacture and market lecanemab for the treatment of AD pursuant to an agreement with BioArctic in December 2007. The development and commercialization agreement on the antibody lecanemab back-up was signed in May 2015.

About Eisai Co., Ltd.
Eisai's Corporate Concept is "to give first thought to patients and people in the daily living domain, and to increase the benefits that health care provides." Under this Concept (also known as human health care (hhc) Concept), we aim to effectively achieve social good in the form of relieving anxiety over health and reducing health disparities. With a global network of R&D facilities, manufacturing sites and marketing subsidiaries, we strive to create and deliver innovative products to target diseases with high unmet medical needs, with a particular focus in our strategic areas of Neurology and Oncology.

In addition, we demonstrate our commitment to the elimination of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), which is a target (3.3) of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), by working on various activities together with global partners.

For more information about Eisai, please visit www.eisai.com (for global headquarters: Eisai Co., Ltd.), and connect with us on X, LinkedIn and Facebook. The website and social media channels are intended for audiences outside of the UK and Europe. For audiences based in the UK and Europe, please visit www.eisai.eu and Eisai EMEA LinkedIn.

About Biogen
Founded in 1978, Biogen is a leading biotechnology company that pioneers innovative science to deliver new medicines to transform patient's lives and to create value for shareholders and our communities. We apply deep understanding of human biology and leverage different modalities to advance first-in-class treatments or therapies that deliver superior outcomes. Our approach is to take bold risks, balanced with return on investment to deliver long-term growth.

The company routinely posts information that may be important to investors on its website at www.biogen.com. Follow Biogen on social media – Facebook, LinkedIn, X, YouTube.

Biogen Safe Harbor
This news release contains forward-looking statements, including about the potential clinical effects of lecanemab; the potential benefits, safety and efficacy of lecanemab; potential regulatory discussions, submissions and approvals and the timing thereof including for lecanemab-irmb (LEQEMBI IQLIK); the treatment of Alzheimer's disease; the anticipated benefits and potential of Biogen's collaboration arrangements with Eisai; the potential of Biogen's commercial business and pipeline programs, including  lecanemab; and risks and uncertainties associated with drug development and commercialization. These forward-looking statements may be accompanied by such words as "aim," "anticipate," "assume," "believe," "contemplate," "continue," "could," "estimate," "expect," "forecast," "goal," "guidance," "hope," "intend," "may," "objective," "plan," "possible," "potential," "predict," "project," "prospect," "should," "target," "will," "would," and other words and terms of similar meaning. Drug development and commercialization involve a high degree of risk, and only a small number of research and development programs result in commercialization of a product. Results in early-stage clinical trials may not be indicative of full results or results from later stage or larger scale clinical trials and do not ensure regulatory approval. You should not place undue reliance on these statements. Given their forward-looking nature, these statements involve substantial risks and uncertainties that may be based on inaccurate assumptions and could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such statements.

These forward-looking statements are based on management's current beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to management. Given their nature, we cannot assure that any outcome expressed in these forward-looking statements will be realized in whole or in part. We caution that these statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which are outside of our control and could cause future events or results to be materially different from those stated or implied in this document, including, among others, uncertainty of long-term success in developing, licensing, or acquiring other product candidates or additional indications for existing products; expectations, plans and prospects relating to product approvals, approvals of additional indications for our existing products, sales, pricing, growth, reimbursement and launch of our marketed and pipeline products; our ability to effectively implement our corporate strategy; the successful execution of our strategic and growth initiatives, including acquisitions; the risk that positive results in a clinical trial may not be replicated in subsequent or confirmatory trials or success in early stage clinical trials may not be predictive of results in later stage or large scale clinical trials or trials in other potential indications; risks associated with clinical trials, including our ability to adequately manage clinical activities, unexpected concerns that may arise from additional data or analysis obtained during clinical trials, regulatory authorities may require additional information or further studies, or may fail to approve or may delay approval of our drug candidates; the occurrence of adverse safety events, restrictions on use with our products, or product liability claims; and any other risks and uncertainties that are described in other reports we have filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov.

These statements speak only as of the date of this press release and are based on information and estimates available to us at this time. Should known or unknown risks or uncertainties materialize or should underlying assumptions prove inaccurate, actual results could vary materially from past results and those anticipated, estimated or projected. Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements. A further list and description of risks, uncertainties and other matters can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 and in our subsequent reports on Form 10-Q, Except as required by law, we do not undertake any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise.

Digital Media Disclosure
From time to time, we have used, or expect in the future to use, our investor relations website (investors.biogen.com), the Biogen LinkedIn account (linkedin.com/company/biogen-) and the Biogen X account (https://x.com/biogen) as a means of disclosing information to the public in a broad, non-exclusionary manner, including for purposes of the SEC's Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD). Accordingly, investors should monitor our investor relations website and these social media channels in addition to our press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls and websites, as the information posted on them could be material to investors.

References

Amin L, Harris DA. Aβ receptors specifically recognize molecular features displayed by fibril ends and neurotoxic oligomers. Nat Commun. 2021; 12:3451. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23507-z. Ono K, Tsuji M. Protofibrils of Amyloid-β are Important Targets of a Disease-Modifying Approach for Alzheimer's Disease. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(3):952. doi: 10.3390/ijms21030952. PMID: 32023927; PMCID: PMC7037706. SOURCE Eisai Inc.