The CoreWeave, Inc. securities fraud class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired CoreWeave, Inc. (“CoreWeave”) (NASDAQ: CRWV) securities between March 28, 2025, and December 15, 2025, inclusive (the “Class Period”). Captioned Masaitis v. CoreWeave, Inc., et al, Case No. 2:26-cv-00355 (D.N.J.), the CoreWeave class action lawsuit alleges that CoreWeave 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 CoreWeave 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:
The Class Period begins on March 28, 2025, when CoreWeave conducted its IPO. On March 31, 2025, CoreWeave filed a prospectus on Form 424B4 with the SEC in connection with the IPO (the “Prospectus”). The Prospectus stated that CoreWeave is “the AI Hyperscaler driving the AI revolution,” and defined a “Hyperscaler” as “[a] cloud provider or technology company that is capable of delivering computing infrastructure and services at massive scale, typically through large data centers and geographically distributed networks.” The Prospectus stated that one of CoreWeave’s “competitive strengths,” which CoreWeave “believe[s] set us apart from the generalized cloud providers in the industry,” was its ability to “deploy[] AI infrastructure at massive scale.” Specifically, CoreWeave touted that the company’s “specialization in deploying AI infrastructure at massive scale enables us to serve some of the world’s leading providers of AI who require massive deployments, benefit from clear economies of scale, and detect issues and derive insights from across our AI infrastructure sooner than our competitors.” Also in the Prospectus, CoreWeave specifically represented that its coordination with third parties allowed it to provide customers with infrastructure that would meet their bespoke needs.
On July 7, 2025, CoreWeave announced an agreement to acquire Core Scientific, to “significantly enhance operating efficiency and de-risk [its] future expansion, solidifying [its] growth trajectory.” However, on October 30, 2025, Core Scientific announced that it had not received enough shareholder votes to approve the merger agreement with CoreWeave, terminating the merger. On this news, CoreWeave’s stock price fell $8.87, or 6.3%, to close at $131.06 per share on October 30, 2025.
Then, on November 10, 2025, after the market closed, CoreWeave released its third quarter 2025 financial results, announcing lowered revenue guidance for 2025 due to “delays related to a third-party data center developer who is behind schedule.” During market hours, on November 11, 2025, CoreWeave’s CEO revealed the delays concerned not just a single data center, as previously asserted, but a data center provider, with multiple data centers owned by the same provider potentially affected. On this news, CoreWeave’s stock price fell $17.22, or 16.3%, to close at $88.39 per share on November 11, 2025.
Then, on December 15, 2025, the Wall Street Journal, revealed, among other things, that Core Scientific was the building partner behind the delayed data centers, and that it began flagging the delays nine months prior. The Wall Street Journal also revealed that other data centers would be delayed due to revised design plans. On this news, CoreWeave’s stock price fell $2.85, or 3.9%, to close at $69.50 per share on December 16, 2025.
The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) CoreWeave had overstated the company’s ability to meet customer demand for its service; (2) CoreWeave materially understated the scope and severity of the risk that CoreWeave’s reliance on a single third-party data center supplier presented for the company’s ability to meet customer demand for its services; (3) the foregoing was reasonably likely to have a material negative impact on CoreWeave’s revenue; (4) as a result, CoreWeave’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS:
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired CoreWeave securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the CoreWeave 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.