SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in SentinelOne, Inc. of Class Action Lawsuit and Upcoming Deadline - S

NEW YORK, Aug. 4, 2023

If you are a shareholder who purchased or otherwise acquired SentinelOne securities during the Class Period, you have until August 7, 2023 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at newaction@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased. 

[Click here for information about joining the class action]

SentinelOne is a cybersecurity company that claims to have pioneered the world's first AI-powered Extended Detection and Response platform to make cybersecurity defense truly autonomous. The Company claims its Singularity Platform instantly defends against cyberattacks, performing at a faster speed, greater scale, and higher accuracy than otherwise possible from humans. The Company's fiscal year 2023 ended January 31, 2023.

SentinelOne claims that its "Annualized Recurring Revenue" or "ARR" is a key business metric. The Company defines ARR as "the annualized revenue run rate of our subscription and capacity contracts at the end of a reporting period, assuming contracts are renewed on their existing terms for customers that are under contracts with us."

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, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (i) that the Company lacked effective internal controls over accounting and financial reporting; (ii) that, as a result, the Company's ARR was overstated; (iii) that, as a result, the Company's guidance was overstated; and (iv) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendant's positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.