Ardent Health, Inc.

On November 12, 2025, after market hours, Ardent released its third quarter 2025 financial results, revealing a $43 million decrease in revenue. The Company explained it had “recently completed hindsight evaluations of historical collection trends” and as a result, had significantly negatively revised the collectability of certain accounts receivable.

Additionally, the Company reported a $54 million increase in professional liability reserves due to “recent settlements and ongoing litigations arising from a limited set of claims between 2019 and 2022 in New Mexico” as well as “broader industry trends, including social inflationary pressures.”

On this news, Ardent’s stock price fell $4.75, or 33.8%, to close at $9.30 per share on November 13, 2025, thereby injuring investors.

The complaint filed in this class action 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, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Ardent did not primarily rely on “detailed reviews of historical collections” in determining collectability of accounts receivable nor did “management determine . . . [when an] account is uncollectible.”; (2) the Company’s accounts receivable framework “utilized a 180-day cliff at which time an account became fully reserved,” which allowed Ardent to report higher amounts of accounts receivable during the Class Period, and delay recognizing losses on uncollectable accounts; (3) Ardent did not maintain professional malpractice liability insurance in amounts “sufficient to cover claims arising out of [its] operations”; (4) Ardent’s professional liability reserves were insufficient to cover “significant social inflationary pressure in medical malpractice cases the past several years,” which had been an “increasing dynamic year-over-year” in the Company’s New Mexico market; and (5) as a result, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.