Fluence Energy, Inc.

On February 22, 2024, Blue Orca Capital published a report revealing that Fluence’s founders and largest sources of revenue, Siemens AG (“Siemens”) and The AES Corporation (“AES”) had been divesting their interest in Fluence and that the US affiliate of Siemens, Siemens Energy, had filed a lawsuit accusing Fluence of misrepresentations, breach of contract, and fraud. Additionally, the report stated that much of Fluence’s sales and earnings growth were the result of aggressive revenue pull-forwards and selectively applied earnings adjustments and, as a result, the Company’s reported revenues were unreliable and facing a sharp decline.

On this news, Fluence’s stock price fell $2.28, or 13.4%, to close at $14.73 per share on February 22, 2024, thereby injuring investors.

Then, on February 10, 2025, Fluence released its first quarter fiscal 2025 financial results, reporting a net loss of $57 million with revenues falling 49% year-over-year. The Company also significantly lowered its revenue guidance, stating that it “experienced customer-driven delays in signing certain contracts . . . coupled with competitive pressures[.]”

On this news, Fluence’s stock price fell $6.07, or 46.4%, to close at $7.00 per share on February 11, 2025, thereby injuring investors further.

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) Fluence’s relationship with its founders and largest sources of revenue, Siemens AG and The AES Corporation, was poised to decline; (2) Siemens Energy, Siemens AG’s U.S. affiliate, had accused the Company of engineering failures and fraud; (3) Fluence’s margins and revenue growth were inflated as Siemens and AES were moving to divest; and (4) 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.