The Avantor, Inc. class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired Avantor, Inc. (“Avantor”) (NYSE: AVTR) common stock between March 5, 2025 and October 28, 2025, inclusive (the “Class Period”). Captioned Building Trades Pension Fund of Western Pennsylvania v. Avantor, Inc., No. 25-cv-06187 (E.D. Pa.), the Avantor class action lawsuit alleges that Avantor and/or certain of its officers and/or directors violated federal securities laws by making false or misleading statements and/or omitted to disclose material information.
If you suffered losses as a result of your Avantor investment and want to find out more about this action and your rights, fill out the form on this page or contact attorney Jonathan Naji, Esq. of KTMC by calling (484) 270-1453 or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com.
CASE BACKGROUND:
Avantor, a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices in Radnor, Pennsylvania, provides scientific products and services for customers in biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, healthcare, education, government, and other industries.
The Class Period begins on March 5, 2024, when Defendant Michael Stubblefield, then the company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, represented Avantor at a TD Cowen healthcare industry conference. In response to an analyst’s question about Avantor’s competitive positioning in its Laboratory Solutions business, Stubblefield emphasized that Avantor’s competitive position “[c]ontinues to be strong,” further representing that “we continue to have confidence in the positioning [of] a lot of investments in our digital capabilities there to make it more efficient for our customers to engage with us…” and that “the traffic to our sites relative to our competitors is a nice indicator for our business.”
During the Class Period, Defendants misled investors by falsely touting the company’s competitive positioning and downplaying the effects of increased competition. For example, during an earnings call on July 26, 2024, in response to an analyst’s question about whether Avantor was losing share to a competitor, Defendant Stubblefield, assured investors that Avantor’s “lab business stacks up well against every number that certainly that we’ve seen,” that “we continue to enhance our position,” and that “we’re really confident in our value proposition and our competitive position.” Likewise, Defendants repeatedly pointed to Avantor’s purported competitive advantages, such as its digital capabilities, as evidence that the company would continue to enjoy strong competitive positioning.
Investors began to learn the truth about the effects of increased competition on Avantor’s business on April 25, 2025, when the company reported disappointing first quarter 2025 financial results, cut its guidance for 2025, and announced that Defendant Stubblefield would be stepping down from his roles as President and Chief Executive Officer. Defendants attributed Avantor’s weak performance and outlook to “the impact of increased competitive intensity.” On this news, the price of Avantor common stock declined $2.57 per share, or more than 16.5%, from a close of $15.50 per share on April 24, 2025, to close at $12.93 per share on April 25, 2025.
Then, on August 1, 2025, the company reported disappointing second quarter 2025 financial results, including a year-over-year decrease in net sales, and further reduced the company’s 2025 guidance—now projecting organic revenue growth of -2% to 0%. Defendants again attributed Avantor’s poor results and outlook to “increased competitive intensity,” and further admitted that the company did not expect the competitive environment to materially improve in the remainder of 2025 and weak performance would therefore likely persist. In response to this news, the price of Avantor common stock declined $2.08 per share, or more than 15%, from a close of $13.44 per share on July 31, 2025, to close at $11.36 per share on August 1, 2025.
Finally, on October 29, 2025, the company reported weak third quarter 2025 financial results, including -5% organic revenue growth (below the guidance Defendants had provided in August), and a net loss of $712 million, which Defendants primarily attributed to a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $785 million. Defendants revealed that the impairment charge was necessary due in part to “competitive pressures” that had “meaningfully impacted” the company’s margins, and further admitted that the Company had lost several large contracts. On this news, the price of Avantor common stock declined $3.50 per share, or more than 23%, from a close of $15.08 per share on October 28, 2025, to close at $11.58 per share on October 29, 2025.
The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts, about the company’s business and operations. Specifically, Defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Avantor’s competitive positioning was weaker than Defendants had publicly represented; (2) Avantor was experiencing negative effects from increased competition; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about the company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS:
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired Avantor common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Avantor class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Filling out the online form above or communicating with any counsel is not necessary to participate or share in any recovery achieved in this case. Any member of the purported class may move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of his/her choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member.
ABOUT KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP:
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (KTMC) is a leading U.S. plaintiff-side law firm focused on securities-fraud class actions and global investor protection. The firm represents individual investors as well as institutions, such as major pension funds, asset managers, and international investors. KTMC has led some of the largest recoveries in securities litigation and has been recognized by peers and the legal media with numerous accolades, including The National Law Journal’s Plaintiff’s Hot List and Trailblazers in Plaintiffs' Law, BTI Consulting Group’s Honor Roll of Most Feared Law Firms, The Legal Intelligencer’s Class Action Firm of the Year, Lawdragon’s Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers, and Law360’s Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar. The firm operates globally with offices in Pennsylvania and California. For more information about Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, please visit www.ktmc.com.