Fortinet, Inc.

Case Overview
47 Days Left to Seek Lead Plaintiff
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: | Lead Plaintiff Deadline: 11/21/2025 |
Status: | Status: Investigating |
Company Name: | Company Name: Fortinet, Inc. |
Court: | Court: Northern District of California |
Case Number: | Case Number: 5:25cv08037 |
Class Period: | Class Period: 11/08/2024 - 08/06/2025 |
Ticker: | Ticker: FTNT |
Related Attorneys: | Lead Attorneys: Thomas W. Elrod |
Related Practices: | Related Practices: Securities |
The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP is investigating potential claims against Fortinet, Inc. (“Fortinet” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: FTNT). The investigation concerns whether Fortinet and/or certain of its officers have violated the federal securities laws and/or engaged in other unlawful business practices.
On August 6, 2025, Fortinet released its second quarter 2025 financial results, revealing that the Company was “approximately 40% to 50% of the way through the 2026 [firewall] upgrade cycle at the end of the second quarter based on the remaining active units and service contracts[.]” Additionally, the Company issued weaker than expected revenue guidance for the upcoming third quarter, projecting revenue between $1.67 billion and $1.73 billion. On this news, the price of Fortinet shares declined by $21.28 per share, or approximately 22%, from $96.58 per share on August 6, 2025 to close at $75.30 on August 7, 2025.
The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements concerning the business impact and sustainability of a purportedly “record” round of FortiGate unit upgrades. Defendants represented that this “refresh cycle” was "by far the largest we’ve seen probably ever,” would generate “around $400 million to $450 million in product revenue” in 2025 and 2026, and would create strong opportunities to cross-sell additional products and services. Defendants also represented that the refresh cycle would “gain momentum” in the second half of 2025 and beyond. These statements were materially false and misleading. In truth, Defendants knew that the refresh cycle would never be as lucrative as they represented because it consisted of old products that were a “small percentage” of the Company’s business. Moreover, Defendants misrepresented and concealed that they did not have a clear picture of the true number of FortiGate firewalls that could be upgraded. And while telling investors that the refresh would gain momentum over the course of two years, Fortinet misrepresented and concealed that it had aggressively pushed through roughly half of the refresh in a period of just a few months, by the end of 2Q 2025.
On August 6, 2025, Fortinet released its second quarter 2025 financial results, revealing that the Company was “approximately 40% to 50% of the way through the 2026 [firewall] upgrade cycle at the end of the second quarter based on the remaining active units and service contracts[.]” Additionally, the Company issued weaker than expected revenue guidance for the upcoming third quarter, projecting revenue between $1.67 billion and $1.73 billion. On this news, the price of Fortinet shares declined by $21.28 per share, or approximately 22%, from $96.58 per share on August 6, 2025 to close at $75.30 on August 7, 2025.
The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements concerning the business impact and sustainability of a purportedly “record” round of FortiGate unit upgrades. Defendants represented that this “refresh cycle” was "by far the largest we’ve seen probably ever,” would generate “around $400 million to $450 million in product revenue” in 2025 and 2026, and would create strong opportunities to cross-sell additional products and services. Defendants also represented that the refresh cycle would “gain momentum” in the second half of 2025 and beyond. These statements were materially false and misleading. In truth, Defendants knew that the refresh cycle would never be as lucrative as they represented because it consisted of old products that were a “small percentage” of the Company’s business. Moreover, Defendants misrepresented and concealed that they did not have a clear picture of the true number of FortiGate firewalls that could be upgraded. And while telling investors that the refresh would gain momentum over the course of two years, Fortinet misrepresented and concealed that it had aggressively pushed through roughly half of the refresh in a period of just a few months, by the end of 2Q 2025.