Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. for alleged securities fraud and unlawful business practices [2][3]. Company Performance - On February 28, 2024, DoubleVerify lowered its revenue growth expectations for Q1 2024, leading to a stock price drop of $8.35 per share, or 21.3%, closing at $30.89 on February 29, 2024 [3]. - On May 7, 2024, the company cut its full-year 2024 revenue outlook due to reduced ad spending from customers, resulting in a stock price decline of $11.79 per share, or 38.6%, closing at $18.78 on May 8, 2024 [4]. - On February 27, 2025, DoubleVerify reported lower-than-expected Q4 2024 sales and earnings, with a stock price drop of approximately 36%, closing at $13.90 on February 28, 2025 [5]. Market Research Findings - On March 28, 2025, Adalytics Research, LLC released a report claiming that DoubleVerify's advertisement verification services are ineffective, stating that customers are billed for ad impressions served to bots [6]. - The Wall Street Journal reported that DoubleVerify frequently fails to detect nonhuman traffic, contradicting the company's claims of helping brands avoid serving ads to bot accounts [6].

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased common stock of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. during the specified class period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who purchased DoubleVerify common stock between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025, may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and interested parties must move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff by July 21, 2025 [3]. - Investors can join the class action by visiting the provided link or contacting the law firm for more information [6]. Group 2: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that DoubleVerify made false and misleading statements regarding its business operations, including the shift of customers' ad spending to closed platforms where DoubleVerify's capabilities were limited [5]. - It is claimed that the company overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots and that its risk disclosures were materially false and misleading [5]. - The lawsuit asserts that competitors were better positioned to incorporate AI into their offerings, adversely impacting DoubleVerify's profits and competitive standing [5]. Group 3: Rosen Law Firm's Credentials - Rosen Law Firm has a strong track record in securities class actions, having achieved the largest securities class action settlement against a Chinese company at the time and being ranked No. 1 for the number of settlements in 2017 [4]. - The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors, securing over $438 million in 2019 alone [4]. - Founding partner Laurence Rosen has been recognized as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar by Law360, highlighting the firm's expertise in this area [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. alleging securities fraud that negatively impacted investors between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025 [1] Group 1: Allegations of the Lawsuit - The lawsuit claims that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's technological capabilities were limited [2] - It is alleged that DoubleVerify's ability to monetize its Activation Services was constrained due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [2] - The complaint states that monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services on certain closed platforms would take several years [2] - Competitors of DoubleVerify were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, affecting DoubleVerify's competitive edge and profitability [2] - The company is accused of systematically overbilling customers for ad impressions served to declared bots from known data center server farms [2] - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were claimed to be materially false and misleading, presenting adverse facts as mere possibilities [2] - As a result of these issues, the lawsuit asserts that the positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were materially false or lacked a reasonable basis [2] Group 2: Next Steps for Investors - Investors who suffered losses in DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. during the specified timeframe have until July 21, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff [3] - Participation in the lawsuit does not require serving as a lead plaintiff, and class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs [3] Group 3: Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky, LLP has a history of securing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and has a strong track record in high-stakes securities litigation [4] - The firm has been recognized in ISS Securities Class Action Services' Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years as one of the leading securities litigation firms in the United States [4]

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. for allegedly misleading investors about its business prospects and financial performance during the specified period [1][2]. Allegations - The lawsuit claims that DoubleVerify did not disclose significant shifts in customer ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's capabilities were limited [2]. - It is alleged that the company’s ability to monetize its Activation Services was constrained due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [2]. - The complaint states that monetization of Activation Services related to certain closed platforms would take several years, impacting revenue generation [2]. - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, which negatively affected DoubleVerify's competitive stance and profitability [2]. - The company is accused of systematically overbilling customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data centers [2]. - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were claimed to be materially false and misleading, as they downplayed adverse facts that had already occurred [2]. Impact of Disclosure - The truth about DoubleVerify's business challenges was revealed on February 27, 2025, when the company reported lower-than-expected sales and earnings for Q4 2024, attributed to reduced customer spending and service suspension by a major client [3]. - Following this disclosure, DoubleVerify's stock price fell by $7.83, or 36%, from $21.73 to $13.90 within a day [3]. Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders interested in participating in the class action must file their papers by July 21, 2025, to serve as lead plaintiffs [4]. - Shareholders can choose to remain absent class members without participating in the case [4]. About Robbins LLP - Robbins LLP is noted for its focus on shareholder rights litigation, aiming to help shareholders recover losses and improve corporate governance [5].

Investors can contact the law firm at no cost to learn more about recovering their losses LOS ANGELES, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --  The Portnoy Law Firm advises DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. ("DoubleVerify" or the "Company") (NYSE: DV) investors of a class action representing investors that bought securities between November 10, 2023 and February 27, 2025, inclusive (the "Class Period"). DoubleVerify investors have until July 21, 2025 to file a lead plaintiff motion. Investors are encouraged to contact ...

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. alleging securities fraud that negatively impacted investors between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025 [1][2]. Case Details - The lawsuit claims that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, limiting the company's technological capabilities and increasing competition from platforms like Meta and Amazon [2]. - It is alleged that the monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services was hindered due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [2]. - The complaint states that it would take several years for DoubleVerify to monetize its Activation Services on certain closed platforms [2]. - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings, which negatively affected DoubleVerify's competitive standing and profitability [2]. - The company is accused of systematically overbilling customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data centers [2]. - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were claimed to be materially false and misleading, presenting adverse facts as mere possibilities [2]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were deemed materially false or misleading [2]. Next Steps - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until July 21, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require this role [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Why Levi & Korsinsky - Levi & Korsinsky has a strong track record of securing significant compensation for shareholders and has been recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States [4].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit alleging misleading statements and failure to disclose critical information during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1] Allegations Summary - Allegations include that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending to closed platforms, limiting the company's technological capabilities and competition with platforms like Meta and Amazon [1] - The company’s ability to monetize its Activation Services was hindered due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [1] - It is claimed that monetization of Activation Services on certain closed platforms would take several years [1] - Competitors were better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings, negatively impacting DoubleVerify's competitive edge and profits [1] - DoubleVerify allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data centers [1] - The company's risk disclosures were misleading, presenting adverse facts as mere possibilities [1] - As a result, positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were deemed materially false or misleading [1] Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders are encouraged to register for the class action by July 21, 2025, to participate in the case without any cost or obligation [2] - Registered shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software throughout the case lifecycle [2] Firm Background - The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized class action law firm focused on protecting investors' rights against deceit and fraud [3] - The firm aims to ensure companies adhere to responsible business practices and seeks recovery for investors who suffered losses due to misleading statements [3]

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased common stock of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. during the specified Class Period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1][2]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who bought DoubleVerify common stock between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025, may be eligible for compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and those wishing to serve as lead plaintiff must act by July 21, 2025 [3]. Group 2: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that DoubleVerify made false and misleading statements regarding its business operations, including the shift of customer ad spending to closed platforms where its capabilities were limited [5]. - It is claimed that DoubleVerify's high-margin Activation Services faced significant challenges in monetization due to the high costs and time required for technology development on closed platforms [5]. - The lawsuit also states that DoubleVerify systematically overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots, and its risk disclosures were materially misleading [5]. Group 3: Rosen Law Firm's Credentials - Rosen Law Firm emphasizes the importance of selecting qualified legal counsel with a successful track record in securities class actions, highlighting its own achievements in recovering hundreds of millions for investors [4]. - The firm has been recognized for its leadership in securities class action settlements, including a notable settlement against a Chinese company [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. for alleged securities fraud and unlawful business practices, with investors encouraged to join the lawsuit by July 21, 2025 [1][2]. Financial Performance - On February 28, 2024, DoubleVerify lowered its revenue growth expectations for Q1 2024, leading to a stock price drop of $8.35, or 21.3%, closing at $30.89 on February 29, 2024 [4]. - On May 7, 2024, the company cut its full-year 2024 revenue outlook due to reduced ad spending from customers, resulting in a stock price decline of $11.79, or 38.6%, closing at $18.78 on May 8, 2024 [5]. - On February 27, 2025, DoubleVerify reported lower-than-expected Q4 2024 sales and earnings, with a stock price drop of approximately 36%, closing at $13.90 on February 28, 2025 [6]. Market Concerns - A report by Adalytics Research on March 28, 2025, claimed that DoubleVerify's advertisement verification services are ineffective, stating that customers are billed for ad impressions served to bots, which contradicts the company's claims [7].

Core Viewpoint - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP is investigating potential claims against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. due to allegations of violations of federal securities laws, with a deadline for investors to seek lead plaintiff status in a class action lawsuit by July 21, 2025 [3][5]. Group 1: Allegations Against DoubleVerify - The complaint alleges that DoubleVerify misled investors by failing to disclose that customers were shifting ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's capabilities were limited [5]. - It is claimed that DoubleVerify's ability to monetize its high-margin Activation Services was constrained due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [5]. - The complaint states that competitors were better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, negatively impacting DoubleVerify's competitive edge and profitability [5]. - Allegations include that DoubleVerify systematically overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots, and that risk disclosures were materially false and misleading [5]. Group 2: Impact of Allegations - The truth about DoubleVerify's financial struggles was revealed on February 27, 2025, when the company reported lower-than-expected sales and earnings, leading to a significant stock price drop of $7.83 per share, or 36%, from $21.73 to $13.90 [6]. - The decline in stock price was attributed to reduced customer spending and the suspension of services by a major client, alongside the shift of ad dollars impacting the company negatively [6]. Group 3: Legal Proceedings - The lead plaintiff in the class action will be the investor with the largest financial interest who is typical of class members, overseeing the litigation on behalf of the class [7]. - Any member of the class can move to serve as lead plaintiff or remain an absent class member without affecting their ability to share in any recovery [7].