SNOW'S GENERIC RISK WARNINGS ALLEGEDLY FAILED TO DISCLOSE KNOWN HEADWINDS -- LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
Disclosure Under Scrutiny: Were Snowflake's Risk Warnings Adequate?
NEW YORK, April 22, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP examines the adequacy of Snowflake Inc.'s (NYSE: SNOW) risk disclosures during the period June 27, 2023 through February 28, 2024. A securities class action has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of investors who purchased SNOW stock during that period and lost money. Find out if you are eligible to recover losses from inadequate disclosures or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at [email protected] or (212) 363-7500.
Snowflake shares fell $41.72 per share (18.14%) after the Company disclosed material consumption headwinds it had allegedly known about for months. The lead plaintiff deadline is April 27, 2026.
What the Company Disclosed to Investors
Throughout the Class Period, Snowflake's public statements painted an optimistic picture of consumption trends and product developments. On its Investor Day in June 2023, the Company reaffirmed confidence in reaching $10 billion in product revenue by 2029. In quarterly earnings calls in August and November 2023, the Company described consumption as "good" and "strong from a broad base of customers," the complaint recounts. Product initiatives such as Iceberg Tables were framed exclusively as growth opportunities that would open new workload categories.
What the Complaint Alleges Was Missing
The action contends that these public statements omitted specific, known adverse facts:
- Product efficiency gains were already reducing the amount customers paid per workload, with a projected 6.2% to 6.3% revenue headwind for the following fiscal year
- Tiered storage pricing, which Snowflake began rolling out in Q3 of fiscal 2024, was reducing storage revenue from the Company's largest customers
- Many large customers had directly communicated their plans to adopt Iceberg Tables, which would shift storage out of Snowflake and eliminate both storage and compute revenue
- The arm chip rollout in Microsoft Azure was expected to further reduce consumption per customer
- Internally, Snowflake monitored consumption and revenue on a daily basis, giving executives real-time visibility into these trends
The complaint challenges the adequacy of Snowflake's disclosures because while generic risk factors may have referenced competition or changing customer preferences, they allegedly did not alert investors to specific, quantifiable headwinds that executives were already tracking and that large customers had already confirmed.
Why Generic Warnings May Not Protect
Under the federal securities laws, boilerplate risk factor language cannot substitute for disclosing specific, known problems that are already affecting operations. When a company's SVP of Product confirms that "for many of our large customers, we have been in touch on their plans for adoption on Iceberg," and its CFO acknowledges monitoring consumption daily, the complaint contends that investors were entitled to more than general cautionary language about potential future risks.
"Generic risk factor language cannot substitute for disclosing specific, known problems that are already affecting a company's operations. When executives have daily visibility into consumption trends and direct communications from customers about adoption of competing formats, investors deserve to know," stated Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Speak with an attorney about whether Snowflake's disclosures were adequate or call (212) 363-7500.
LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: April 27, 2026
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Top 50 securities litigation firm (ISS, seven consecutive years). Over 70 professionals. Hundreds of millions recovered for investors.
CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
SOURCE Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Share this article