Former Takeover Target Threatens Adobe's (ADBE) Clould Creativity Empire
Don't Miss TipRanks' Half-Year Sale
Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence.
Make smarter investment decisions with TipRanks' Smart Investor Picks, delivered to your inbox every week.
Notably, Adobe was required to pay a $1 billion breakup fee following the failed acquisition attempt. The timing of Figma's IPO is particularly significant, as Adobe's revenue growth has slowed from 15–25% in previous years to just 11%, contributing to recent pressure on its stock performance.
Additionally, there is growing sentiment that generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools may be narrowing Adobe's competitive moat. However, Adobe remains proactive in defending its leadership in the creative software space, leveraging its innovation capabilities and extensive ecosystem. Given the balance of emerging risks and potential opportunities, I maintain a Neutral outlook on ADBE.
Figma's Ascent: A Formidable Competitor Emerges
Figma officially filed for its IPO with the SEC via an S-1 registration statement earlier this month, marking a significant milestone for the fast-growing design platform. Its business is thriving—revenue surged 48% to $749 million in fiscal year 2024, with first-quarter revenue rising 46% year-over-year to $228.2 million. A net dollar retention rate of 132% reflects strong customer loyalty and product engagement.
Adobe's interest in acquiring Figma in 2022 now seems even more justified. However, the deal was terminated a year later amid regulatory antitrust concerns, resulting in a $1 billion breakup fee paid to Figma. This infusion of capital further strengthened Figma's ability to scale independently.
Best known for its browser-based, real-time collaboration tools, Figma has since expanded into adjacent offerings, including Figma Sites (no-code website creation), Figma Make (AI-driven code generation), and Figma Draw (vector editing)—many of which directly compete with Adobe products, such as Illustrator.
While Figma's scale is still modest compared to Adobe's 2024 revenue of $21.5 billion, it remains a formidable challenger in the creative software space. Its IPO is expected to accelerate its growth trajectory and broaden its market presence.
AI Threatens to Democratize Creativity
In addition to competitive pressure from platforms like Figma and Canva, the creative software industry is being rapidly reshaped by the rise of generative AI tools such as Midjourney, OpenAI's Sora, and RunwayML. These solutions are particularly valuable in the early 'ideation phase' of content creation and are widely accessible, with pricing ranging from $20 per month to $1,500 per year.
Their growing influence on Adobe's traditional offerings is significant. Many argue that these tools are democratizing creative capabilities, lowering barriers to entry for individuals and small teams. With tens of billions of dollars being invested in AI innovation, even an industry leader like Adobe may find it increasingly challenging to maintain its competitive edge in this rapidly evolving landscape.
Adobe's Counter-Offensive: Firefly and AI Integration
That said, Adobe is actively incorporating AI to enhance its product offerings. At the center of its AI strategy is Firefly, a suite of generative tools that includes features such as generative fill and expand, AI-assisted workflows, and text-based editing.
A key differentiator is Adobe's emphasis on the commercial safety of Firefly, positioning it as a more secure alternative to other generative AI tools—such as those from OpenAI—which have faced concerns around copyright and content sourcing.
This focus on reliability and legal clarity appeals particularly to enterprise clients and established organizations that prioritize compliance and risk mitigation, even at a premium. Additionally, Firefly is integrated with major partners, including Google Cloud and OpenAI, expanding its reach and functionality within Adobe's ecosystem.
Financial Fortitude: Adobe's Stable Foundation
surpassing 37 million paid subscribers by the end of 2024, according to the most recent data sourced by TipRanks. Flagship products, such as Photoshop, continue to be widely adopted by creative professionals worldwide. From a financial standpoint, Adobe is performing exceptionally well. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2025, the company posted record revenue of $5.87 billion.
Operating cash flow reached $2.19 billion, representing a robust margin of 37.3%. High margins remain a key strength for Adobe, with a free cash flow margin of 36.83%—significantly outperforming the Information Technology sector median of 11.66% by over 215%.
Despite these strong fundamentals, Adobe trades at a relatively modest valuation. Its current Price-to-Earnings ratio of 24.3 is below the sector median of 29.19, suggesting that the market may be factoring in expectations of slower growth ahead.
What is the Price Target for ADBE?
On Wall Street, the consensus rating on ADBE is Moderate Buy based on 19 Buy, seven Hold, and two Sell ratings in the past three months. T he stock's average price target of $484.88 implies a 26% upside potential over the next twelve months.
Following Adobe's fiscal second-quarter results, Citi lowered its price target on ADBE from $465 to $450 while maintaining a Hold rating. The firm acknowledged Adobe's initial progress in monetizing AI as encouraging but expressed caution, citing uncertainty around the sustainability of its AI-driven growth. Citi pointed to fluctuating pricing strategies in fiscal 2025 and what it described as a 'seemingly diminishing' market and mindshare for Adobe's AI models as key concerns.
Adobe at a Crossroads: Maturing Growth Meets Rising AI Competition
Adobe faces a range of challenges. Growth in the creative software market appears to be entering a mature phase, which has weighed on investor sentiment and stock performance. The market no longer prices ADBE as a high-growth stock; its P/E ratio—once consistently around 50 since 2015—has been roughly halved. The failed acquisition of Figma may also have long-term competitive implications. Additionally, the rise of generative AI tools poses a threat to Adobe's moat, particularly among individual creators and small to mid-sized businesses.
That said, Adobe remains a highly profitable enterprise and a trusted leader in the creative software market, which is projected to grow at a 7.1% annual rate. The company's efforts to adapt—highlighted by its AI-driven Firefly platform—demonstrate its commitment to innovation and relevance in a rapidly evolving landscape. Combined with a more reasonable valuation, these strengths make it challenging to adopt an overly bearish stance. All things considered, my outlook on ADBE is Neutral.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
10 hours ago
- CNBC
Tech IPOs are roaring after 'years of Prohibition' — it may be too good
The Bullish IPO this week took on added significance, perhaps because of the company name. When shares of the Peter Thiel-backed cryptocurrency exchange more than doubled out of the gate on Wednesday before finishing the day up 84%, it was the latest sign that the tech IPO bulls are back in business. In July, design software vendor Figma more than tripled in its New York Stock Exchange debut, and a month earlier shares of crypto firm Circle soared 168% in their first day on the Big Board. Wall Street has been waiting a long time for this. Three years ago, steep inflation and soaring interest effectively closed the market for public offerings. Tech stocks tanked and private capital dried up, forcing cash-burning startups to turn their attention away from growth and toward efficiency and profitability. The roadblock appeared to be loosening earlier this year, when companies like StubHub and Klarna filed their prospectuses, but then President Donald Trump roiled the markets in April with his plans for sweeping tariffs. Roadshows were put on indefinite hold. The president's tariff agenda has since stabilized a bit, and investor money is pouring into tech, pushing the Nasdaq to record levels, up more than 40% from this year's low in April. Optimism is growing that the hefty backlog of high-valued startups will continue to clear as CEOs and venture capitalists gain confidence that the public markets will welcome their top-tier companies. Ahead of Figma's debut, NYSE president Lynn Martin told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" that immense demand for that offering could "open the floodgates" for the rest of the market. And earlier this week, Nasdaq CEO Adena Friedman told "Fast Money" that there's a "very healthy list" of companies looking to IPO in the second half of this year, ahead of the holiday season. "I've been meeting a lot of CEOs, getting them prepared to think about what they want in the public markets and where they're going," Friedman said. There are more than two-dozen venture-backed U.S. tech companies valued at $10 billion or more, according to CB Insights. StubHub has updated its prospectus, suggesting an offering is coming soon. "The IPO window is open," said Rick Heitzmann, a partner at venture firm FirstMark, in an interview with CNBC's "Closing Bell" this week. "You've seen across industry, broad-based support for IPOs, and therefore, we're advising companies we're investing in to get ready and go public." Another big topic among VCs and bankers is the regulatory environment. The Biden administration took heat from startup investors for cracking down on big acquisitions, mostly attributable to Lina Khan's perceived heavy hand at the Federal Trade Commission, while also failing to ease restrictions that they say make it less appealing for companies to go public than to stay private. Paul Atkins, the new head of the SEC, said in July he wants to "make IPOs great again," by removing some of the impediments around the complexity of disclosures and litigation risk. He hasn't offered many specific recommendations. Friedman told CNBC that the first conversation she had with Atkins after he took the job was about making it easier and more attractive for companies to go public. "The conversation was constructive along many fronts, looking at disclosure requirements, the proxy process, other things that really make it harder for companies to be public and navigate the public markets," Friedman said. "He's as interested as we are, so hopefully we'll turn that into great action." In addition to the big gains notched by Bullish, Figma and Circle, the public markets welcomed online banking provider Chime with a 37% gain last month and trading app eToro with a 29% pop in May. The health-tech market has seen two IPOs: Hinge Health and Omada Health. But it was the roaring debuts of Circle and Figma that sparked chatter of a new bull market for IPOs. Figma jumped 250% on IPO day after pricing shares a dollar ahead of an updated range. Circle's value more than doubled after the stablecoin issuer also priced above the expected range. That sort of price action reignited a debate ahead of the last IPO boom in 2020 and 2021, when venture capitalist Bill Gurley made the case that big first-day pops suggest intentionally mispriced offerings that hurt the company and hand easy money to new investors. Gurley has advocated for direct listings, where companies list shares at a price that effectively matches demand. As Figma was hitting the market, Gurley was back at it, referring to the big gains as an "expected & fully intentional" outcome benefitting clients of major investment banks "They bought it at $33 last night and can sell it today for over $90," he wrote. In a follow-up post, he said, "I would have loved to see DLs replace IPOs — it just makes sense to match supply/demand. But Wall Street may just be too addicted to the massive customer give-aways." Lise Buyer, founder of IPO advisory firm Class V Group, wrote on LinkedIn that the company gets to make the call on where it prices the stock and that plenty of thought gets put into the process. Also, in the IPO, companies are selling only a small percentage of outstanding shares — in Figma's case roughly 7% — so if they deliver on results, "there will very likely be plenty of future opportunities to sell more shares at higher prices." That's already happening. Circle said this week that it's offering another 10 million shares in a secondary offering. And on Friday's, CNBC's Leslie Picker reported that bankers for CoreWeave, which is up 150% since its March IPO, orchestrated some block trades this week. But Buyer warns that tech markets have a history of overheating. While there's always a difference between what institutions are willing to pay in an IPO and what exuberant retail investors will pay, it's currently "a gap like we haven't really seen since 1999, 2000," Buyer told CNBC, adding "and, of course, we know how that ended." Compared to the dot-com bubble, businesses that are going public now have sizable revenue and actual fundamentals, but that doesn't mean the IPO pops are sustainable, she said. "It's almost like we had several years of Prohibition," Buyer said, referring to a period a century ago when alcohol was banned in the U.S. "Folks, in some cases, are drinking to excess in the IPO market."
San Francisco Chronicle
10 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Marin-Sonoma rail corridor expansion faces ‘existential threat' from lawsuit
The long-planned expansion of a hiking and biking pathway parallel to the North Bay commuter rail is facing a legal challenge from landowners who aren't keen on the trail cutting through their backyards. Sonoma-Marin Area Regional Transit, or SMART, has already constructed more than 39 miles of trail alongside its commuter rail tracks. The agency's ultimate goal is a multi-use pathway that runs the 70-mile length of the entire SMART corridor, which winds north from Larkspur in Marin County. The train currently goes only as far north as Windsor; a station in Healdsburg is slated to open in 2028, followed later by Cloverdale, the planned end of the line. SMART says it provides a way for people to access its 14 stations without needing to use a car. When completed, the pathway would also form the southern leg of the Great Redwood Trail, which could someday connect San Francisco Bay and Humboldt Bay. More than 130 plaintiffs sued SMART in 2021, accusing the agency of building its pathway on their properties without permission, by overstepping a series of 19th century easement agreements which allowed predecessor railroads to use the land for 'railroad purposes' only. After a judge dismissed about 100 of those claims, SMART paid $612,000 to settle the lawsuit with the remaining plaintiffs early last year. Now, however, about 65 of the plaintiffs whose claims had been dismissed have moved to proceed with the litigation. These plaintiffs, who own land along planned or newly-constructed stretches of the trail, argue that they should be compensated as the pathway extends. SMART spokeswoman Julia Gonzalez said the agency was notified of the second lawsuit, which has not been previously reported, on May 27. 'That's a real kind of existential threat to the remaining path system for SMART going forward,' David Rabbitt, who sits on SMART's Board of Directors, said at a meeting of the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District's board last month. The plaintiffs are represented by a Sacramento attorney, as well as a Kansas City-based law firm that specializes in securing compensation for 'landowners whose property is taken for recreational trails.' Those cases often pertain to the National Trails System Act, which created a program to convert abandoned rail corridors into public trails in 1983. Under that process, known as 'railbanking,' the responsibility for compensating eligible landowners falls to the federal government. But SMART isn't interested in railbanking because its rail corridor isn't abandoned — it's an active line, and the agency says pedestrian pathways are key to its services. 'SMART's rail corridor remains fully active for passenger and freight rail service and has been in continuous use since the District began service in 2017,' Gonzalez said. 'The pathway, located within SMART's existing, active rail corridor, is a public transit asset that integrates with rail operations and supports rather than replaces rail service.' Thomas Stewart, an attorney with the Kansas City practice Stewart, Wald and Smith, said the agency was trying to 'have their cake and eat it too' by applying its easement to both train and pedestrian services. 'If you're not using (the corridor) for railroad purposes and you're putting a totally different use on top of that railroad purposes easement, then you have, in essence, changed the use,' Stewart said. 'That's a violation of the terms of the original easement and you're responsible for whatever damages there are.' Stewart said the case could go to trial in February unless the plaintiffs secure a settlement. If a judge rules against SMART, the agency would still be able to complete its pathway, he said, but only after paying landowners a 's—load of money.' SMART maintains that its pathway serves the 'railroad purpose' required by the easement agreement — it provides 'critical first- and last-mile connections' by helping walkers and bikers bridge the gaps between stations. 'We believe this lawsuit is less about protecting property rights and more about seeking settlements from public agencies — with taxpayers ultimately bearing the cost,' Gonzalez said. 'Although SMART believes it has the right to construct the pathway within its rail corridor, to resolve the issue and avoid prolonged legal costs, SMART has initiated a process to clarify (the new plaintiffs') property title and, where appropriate, offer fair compensation for pathway use within SMART's existing active rail corridor.' Gonzalez declined to comment further on the open litigation, but she stressed that the agency would continue to prioritize pathway construction. Advocates, however, have concerns about what a compensation policy could mean for the ambitious expansion SMART has planned. Warren Wells, the policy and planning director of the Marin County Bicycle Coalition, wants to see the pathway completed promptly — and he worries that any strain on the project's funds could create additional delays. SMART's expansion has been cramped by cash constraints, especially after North Bay voters rejected a 2020 sales tax measure intended to give the agency a boost. The agency's reliance on grant funds has left gaps in the trail that frustrate bikers and pedestrians. 'Someone trying to get around by bicycle might have a stretch of really great multi-use path, and then all of a sudden you're riding on the shoulder of a busy four-lane road,' Wells said. 'Failure to deliver complete networks scares people out of riding bikes, pushes them into driving cars and adds more traffic. So I think SMART's goal of building a large and complete network is important.'
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Wall Street Analysts Think Adobe (ADBE) Is a Good Investment: Is It?
The recommendations of Wall Street analysts are often relied on by investors when deciding whether to buy, sell, or hold a stock. Media reports about these brokerage-firm-employed (or sell-side) analysts changing their ratings often affect a stock's price. Do they really matter, though? Let's take a look at what these Wall Street heavyweights have to say about Adobe Systems (ADBE) before we discuss the reliability of brokerage recommendations and how to use them to your advantage. Adobe currently has an average brokerage recommendation (ABR) of 1.78, on a scale of 1 to 5 (Strong Buy to Strong Sell), calculated based on the actual recommendations (Buy, Hold, Sell, etc.) made by 36 brokerage firms. An ABR of 1.78 approximates between Strong Buy and Buy. Of the 36 recommendations that derive the current ABR, 23 are Strong Buy and two are Buy. Strong Buy and Buy respectively account for 63.9% and 5.6% of all recommendations. Brokerage Recommendation Trends for ADBE Check price target & stock forecast for Adobe here>>> While the ABR calls for buying Adobe, it may not be wise to make an investment decision solely based on this information. Several studies have shown limited to no success of brokerage recommendations in guiding investors to pick stocks with the best price increase potential. Are you wondering why? The vested interest of brokerage firms in a stock they cover often results in a strong positive bias of their analysts in rating it. Our research shows that for every "Strong Sell" recommendation, brokerage firms assign five "Strong Buy" recommendations. In other words, their interests aren't always aligned with retail investors, rarely indicating where the price of a stock could actually be heading. Therefore, the best use of this information could be validating your own research or an indicator that has proven to be highly successful in predicting a stock's price movement. Zacks Rank, our proprietary stock rating tool with an impressive externally audited track record, categorizes stocks into five groups, ranging from Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) to Zacks Rank #5 (Strong Sell), and is an effective indicator of a stock's price performance in the near future. Therefore, using the ABR to validate the Zacks Rank could be an efficient way of making a profitable investment decision. ABR Should Not Be Confused With Zacks Rank In spite of the fact that Zacks Rank and ABR both appear on a scale from 1 to 5, they are two completely different measures. The ABR is calculated solely based on brokerage recommendations and is typically displayed with decimals (example: 1.28). In contrast, the Zacks Rank is a quantitative model allowing investors to harness the power of earnings estimate revisions. It is displayed in whole numbers -- 1 to 5. It has been and continues to be the case that analysts employed by brokerage firms are overly optimistic with their recommendations. Because of their employers' vested interests, these analysts issue more favorable ratings than their research would support, misguiding investors far more often than helping them. In contrast, the Zacks Rank is driven by earnings estimate revisions. And near-term stock price movements are strongly correlated with trends in earnings estimate revisions, according to empirical research. Furthermore, the different grades of the Zacks Rank are applied proportionately across all stocks for which brokerage analysts provide earnings estimates for the current year. In other words, at all times, this tool maintains a balance among the five ranks it assigns. Another key difference between the ABR and Zacks Rank is freshness. The ABR is not necessarily up-to-date when you look at it. But, since brokerage analysts keep revising their earnings estimates to account for a company's changing business trends, and their actions get reflected in the Zacks Rank quickly enough, it is always timely in indicating future price movements. Should You Invest in ADBE? In terms of earnings estimate revisions for Adobe, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the current year has remained unchanged over the past month at $20.63. Analysts' steady views regarding the company's earnings prospects, as indicated by an unchanged consensus estimate, could be a legitimate reason for the stock to perform in line with the broader market in the near term. The size of the recent change in the consensus estimate, along with three other factors related to earnings estimates, has resulted in a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) for Adobe. You can see the complete list of today's Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) stocks here >>>> It may therefore be prudent to be a little cautious with the Buy-equivalent ABR for Adobe. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Adobe Inc. (ADBE) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
