The filed complaint alleges that Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) IAS was experiencing a new material trend of increased competitive pricing pressures and as a result, IAS had been forced to cut prices to compensate for weakening demand and slowing revenue growth; (ii) IAS’s pricing function was no longer “favorable” and IAS could not sustain its pricing and drive price increases; (iii) pricing had become a key differentiator between IAS and its competitor necessary to close major renewals and new deals; (iv) the risks that competition “could result in increased pricing pressure” or “could put pressure on us to change our prices” had in fact transpired; and (v) as a result, the IAS’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.