Globant investors face June 23 deadline in securities lawsuit
Investors in Globant S.A. have until June 23, 2026, to seek lead plaintiff status in a federal securities class action lawsuit alleging false statements about business operations and growth prospects in Latin America. The lawsuit claims Globant concealed declining demand, project cancellations, and wage freezes, leading to significant stock price drops following disappointing financial results in 2025.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Investors in Globant S.A. who purchased securities between February 15, 2024, and August 14, 2025, face a June 23, 2026, deadline to seek lead plaintiff status in a federal securities class action lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that Globant made materially false and misleading statements regarding its business operations, growth prospects, and financial stability, specifically concerning a $1 billion strategic pivot to increase Latin American business announced in mid-2023. The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz, alongside The Gross Law Firm, Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, Rosen Law Firm, Pomerantz LLP, and Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, are advising investors of their rights to pursue claims against the company and certain officers and directors for alleged violations of federal securities laws.
The complaints highlight a series of financial disclosures that reportedly contradicted the company's prior optimistic statements. According to the filed complaint, defendants made false and/or misleading statements by failing to disclose that Globant’s Latin American operations began experiencing turmoil in late 2023. Latin America was not, as defendants claimed, a "particularly beneficial" region that would allow for the "ability to grow" Globant’s business. Nor was the market in Latin America "stable" or "improving a lot." In truth, Globant was facing decreasing demand across Latin America and had frozen wages in both Argentina and Mexico in late 2023, and Latin American clients were reducing and cancelling their projects with the Company. Moreover, it was misleading for Globant to discuss the effects of the depreciation of the Argentine currency on its project contracts without disclosing that it had frozen the wages of its Argentine employees and that, because of currency depreciation, those wage freezes amounted in practical terms to wage cuts.
Throughout 2024, Globant described Latin America as its most strategically important growth region, projecting 11% IT sector growth and calling itself the "employer of choice." Management told investors the company was continuing to hire and was making "significant investments in Mexico and Brazil." However, the lawsuit contends that behind these projections, Globant faced declining client demand, project cancellations, and a troubled integration of its Iteris acquisition in Brazil. The company had frozen employee wages in Mexico and Argentina despite double-digit inflation, effectively cutting real compensation and fueling workforce unrest.
On February 20, 2025, Globant reported a 1.3% decrease in Latin American revenue for the fourth quarter of 2024, offering muted guidance for the first quarter of 2025. CEO Martín Migoya attributed the "rocky" situation to political turmoil in Brazil and Colombia. Following this announcement, the stock price fell $58.45 per share, or 27.81%, to close at $151.72 per share on February 21, 2025. Subsequent disclosures further exacerbated investor losses. On May 15, 2025, Globant reported disappointing Q1 2025 results, citing a challenging macroeconomic context and lower-than-expected growth in Latin America. The company revealed a 9% year-over-year decline in Latin American revenue, with notable contractions in Mexico and Brazil. Consequently, the stock price dropped $31.37 per share, or 23.61%, to close at $101.47 per share on May 16, 2025.
Finally, on August 14, 2025, Globant reported mixed Q2 2025 results, including a 2% reduction in headcount, or approximately 1,000 employees, and a $47.6 million restructuring charge. The lawsuit alleges that Globant had concealed pervasive problems, including declining demand, client defections, and project cancellations. It also claims the company froze wages for employees in Mexico and Argentina in late 2023, triggering unrest and degrading service quality. On this news, the stock price fell from a closing price of $78.12 per share on August 14, 2025, to a closing price of $66.46 per share on August 15, 2025. The filing further states that Globant failed to integrate the Iteris acquisition, with former Iteris employees reportedly never receiving promised salary increases.
The overall stock price decline from $210.17 to $66.46 represents a total drop exceeding $143 per share, or 68%. Investors may contact Frank R. Cruz at The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz by phone at 310-914-5007 or email at info@frankcruzlaw.com , Danielle Peyton at Pomerantz LLP by phone at 646-581-9980 or email at newaction@pomlaw.com , Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at Levi & Korsinsky, LLP at (212) 363-7500 or jlevi@levikorsinsky.com , Phillip Kim, Esq. at Rosen Law Firm, P.A. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email at case@rosenlegal.com , Josh Wilson at Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310), or The Gross Law Firm at (646) 453-8903 or email at dg@securitiesclasslaw.com to evaluate recovery options. The class action is handled on a contingency fee arrangement, requiring no upfront fees.
Key Stock Price Declines
| Date | Event | Closing Price ($) | Drop ($/Share) | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 2025 | Q4 2024 results | 151.72 | -58.45 | -27.81% |
| May 16, 2025 | Q1 2025 results | 101.47 | -31.37 | -23.61% |
| Aug 15, 2025 | Q2 2025 results | 66.46 | -11.66 | -14.93% |
How will the $47.6 million restructuring charge and headcount reductions impact Globant's ability to deliver on existing contracts and attract new talent?
What are the potential long-term reputational and operational consequences for Globant following the alleged mismanagement of the Iteris acquisition?
Will the ongoing litigation and allegations of concealed wage freezes trigger further investigations from regulatory bodies beyond the SEC?
























