Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Salesforce (CRM) Stock Plunges 30% in 2026 as Board Members Scoop Up Shares

Published

on

CRM Stock Card

Key Takeaways

  • CRM shares have plunged over 30% during 2026, hitting a 52-week low at $174.57
  • Board directors purchased CRM shares in March at approximately $194–$195 apiece
  • The iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF has declined roughly 24% year-to-date
  • The company exceeded Q4 projections with earnings per share of $3.81 versus the anticipated $3.05, while greenlighting a $25 billion stock repurchase initiative
  • Several institutional stakeholders expanded their CRM holdings during Q4 2024

Salesforce has faced significant headwinds throughout 2026. The enterprise software giant has witnessed its market value decline by more than 30%, pressured by widespread selling across the software industry and mounting anxieties regarding artificial intelligence competition.


CRM Stock Card
Salesforce, Inc., CRM

The stock’s descent accelerated toward the end of January, with concerns about AI disruption repeatedly weighing on investor sentiment. A notable trigger emerged when reports surfaced that Anthropic’s Claude artificial intelligence system possessed the capability to operate computers autonomously, raising questions about the long-term viability of traditional enterprise software solutions.

Yet amid the ongoing volatility, a pair of company board members made notable purchases of CRM shares during March.

Board member Laura Alber — concurrently serving as Williams-Sonoma’s chief executive — acquired 2,571 CRM shares priced at approximately $195 on March 19, for a total investment of $451,166. This marked her inaugural open-market transaction since her appointment to the board in November 2021.

Meanwhile, David Kirk, another board director and former Nvidia chief scientist, secured 2,570 CRM shares at $194.62 per share on March 18. This represented his first open-market acquisition of the calendar year. Kirk’s direct ownership now stands at 13,689 CRM shares with an estimated value around $2.5 million.

Advertisement

Impressive Financial Results and Repurchase Plan Fail to Halt Decline

Salesforce unveiled its Q4 financial performance on February 25, surpassing Wall Street expectations. Earnings per share reached $3.81, comfortably beating the consensus forecast of $3.05. Quarterly revenue totaled $11.20 billion, representing 12.1% growth compared to the prior year period and modestly exceeding analyst projections.

The board additionally greenlit a $25 billion share repurchase authorization on March 16 — a program substantial enough to retire approximately 14.1% of shares currently outstanding. The quarterly dividend received an increase to $0.44 from $0.42, translating to an annualized distribution of $1.76 per share.

Despite these positive developments, the stock has continued its downward trajectory. From March 19 — when Alber executed her purchase — shares have dropped an additional 7%.

Institutional Investors Continue Accumulating Positions

Among institutional participants, CMH Wealth Management expanded its CRM holdings by 37.3% throughout Q4, acquiring 10,102 additional shares to reach a total position of 37,208 shares, valued at $9.87 million. Multiple other investment funds similarly increased their allocations during the same timeframe.

Advertisement

Institutional investors and hedge funds collectively control 80.43% of outstanding CRM shares.

Wall Street analyst perspectives remain predominantly optimistic. The stock maintains an aggregate “Moderate Buy” rating accompanied by a consensus price objective of $280.21 — significantly above present trading levels. Individual analyst price targets span from $250 (TD Cowen) to $430 (Citizens JMP).

Agilysys (AGYS), another software company experiencing insider purchasing activity in mid-March, has appreciated 5.6% following director Melvin Keating’s acquisition of $27,289 worth of shares between March 16 and 17.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Trump crypto czar David Sacks exits role after 130 days

Published

on

Trump crypto czar David Sacks exits role after 130 days

The US government’s crypto and AI czar, David Sacks, is stepping down from his special government employee (SGE) role to join Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg and Nvidia’s Jensen Huang on Donald Trump’s new tech council. 

Sacks announced his departure in an Interview with Bloomberg that also covered the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).

Sacks told Bloomberg, “In the first year of the Trump administration, I had that role as an SGE. I had 130 days.”

“We’ve now used up that time,” Sacks said, adding that his role as co-chair of PCAST means he’ll now “make recommendations on not just AI, but an expansive range of technology topics.”

Advertisement
Sacks shared an assessment from Elon Musk’s GROK that tried to clarify if his departure was a promotion or not.

Read more: David Sacks promised ‘market structure bill in 100 days’ a year ago

The council has been created to guide tech policies within government, and counts major tech executives such as Marc Andreessen and Sergey Brin among its ranks.  

Tesla CEO Elon Musk was also a SGE under Trump’s administration, and also stepped down from the role after 130 days. He won’t be part of the tech council, however.

Sacks’ time as crypto czar was bittersweet 

Under Sacks’ stewardship, the US administration loosened its grip on crypto regulations, the president launched a memecoin, and the government promised to implement a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR). 

Advertisement

During this time, it gained a reputation for intense profiteering and crypto corruption. Indeed, Trump’s son Eric boasted very publicly about his family making profits of $1 billion from its various crypto enterprises. 

Sacks promised in February last year that the market structures bill, aka the CLARITY Act, and stablecoin legislation, also known as the GENIUS Act, would have been passed through the Senate and House within 100 days. 

While the GENIUS Act was passed, albeit well beyond the self-imposed deadline, the CLARITY Act is still struggling to join it. 

Sacks was revealed by the New York Times to have held over 400 investments in various crypto and AI firms while still maintaining his SGE role in Trump’s administration, raising concerns about a potential conflict of interest.  

Advertisement

The administration also signed into existence the SBR but it was watered down significantly when officials revealed that the US wouldn’t be buying any BTC to contribute to the it and would instead rely on the coins it had already seized and forfeited.

An audit of crypto assets intended for both the SBR and Digital Asset Stockpile was supposed to be complete by April 5, 2025. However, no such review has been published almost 356 days after the deadline.

Read more: David Sacks sends silly legal threat to the New York Times

Crypto traders happy about David Sacks crypto czar departure

Upon discovering Sacks’ departure yesterday, X users have remarked on the less-than-stellar effect he had on the crypto market. 

Advertisement

Venture capitalist Adam Cochran mocked Bitcoiners who voted for Trump, asking “How’d that bitcoin reserve work out for you? Remember those day one promises?”

“Remember how Trump and Sacks promised you the world, and you told us we had TDS when we told you that you were getting played?” he added. 

Others pointed to today’s BTC price of $66,600, and how it’s down 34% from the day Sacks was inaugurated as crypto czar. 

Read more: US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve audit now 172 days overdue

Advertisement

Traders have also complained that under Sacks’ role, nothing was actually achieved, adding that he’s “the single most useless person of Trump administration [sic] (right there with Trump).”

Eleanor Terrett reports that it’s unclear whether or not Sacks’ crypto czar role will be replaced while major crypto legislation, such as the CLARITY Act, continues to work its way through the Senate.

If the Trump administration does decide to hire a replacement, at least one willing candidate has already thrown their hat into the ring on X. Despite currently serving a 25-year prison sentence, FTX fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried posted simply “dibs.”

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on XBluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

ECB Study Questions How Decentralized DeFi Governance Really is

Published

on

ECB Study Questions How Decentralized DeFi Governance Really is

The European Central Bank published a working paper on March 26, finding that governance in four major DeFi protocols was heavily concentrated.

The staff paper looks at Aave, MakerDAO, Ampleforth and Uniswap, and finds that while governance tokens are held across tens of thousands of addresses, the top 100 holders control more than 80% of the supply in each protocol.

Based on holdings snapshots from November 2022 and May 2023, the authors found that a large share of governance tokens could be linked either to the protocols themselves or to centralized and decentralized exchanges, with Binance the largest identified centralized exchange holder across the four protocols.

The authors said the findings challenge the idea that decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are inherently decentralized, raising questions about accountability and complicating efforts to identify possible regulatory anchor points under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) framework. MiCA currently excludes “fully decentralised” services from its scope.

Advertisement

Top token holders dominate governance

The authors also look at who actually votes on key proposals, concluding that top voters are mostly delegates who wield delegated voting power from smaller token holders. 

The top 20 voters in Ampleforth control 96% of delegated voting power, while the top 10 voters in MakerDAO hold 66% of delegated votes, and the top 18 in Uniswap hold 52%. Around one-third of top voters cannot be publicly identified, and among those that can, the largest groups are individuals and Web3 companies, followed by university blockchain societies and venture firms.

Related: DAOs may need to ditch decentralization to court institutions

ECB Working Paper on DeFi: Source: ECB

Cointelegraph reached out to Aave, Uniswap, MakerDAO, and Ampleforth, but had not received a response by publication.

Kavi Jain, senior research associate at Bitwise, told Cointelegraph that many large DeFi protocols were not as decentralized in practice as they might appear, especially in the earlier stages, where a small group still has “meaningful influence over decisions.”

Advertisement

He pointed to the recent Aave governance debate that highlighted how, even with a DAO structure, voting power can “still be concentrated among a few participants.”

MiCA faces DeFi accountability problem

The paper catalogues what governance actually decides, finding that the largest share of proposals relates to “risk parameters” that shape the protocols’ risk profiles. That raises further questions about accountability, especially given that it is “not possible” to tell from public data whether protocol-linked holdings belong to founders, developers or treasuries, or whether exchange wallets are voting their own positions or those of customers.

Related: How a 2.85% price error triggered $27M in liquidations on Aave

There are some caveats with the methodology, and the paper itself warns that it does not capture the “full scope of the DeFi ecosystem,” due to insufficient data.

Advertisement

The paper also stresses that it reflects the authors’ views rather than official ECB policy, however, it warns that the difficulty of reliably identifying who controls major protocols makes it harder to lean on popular entry points such as governance token holders, developers or centralized exchanges, and says that the relevant anchor may differ protocol by protocol and require information that is not publicly available.

Its findings echo earlier warnings from the Financial Stability Board and others, cited in the paper, that DeFi’s promise of disintermediation often masks new forms of concentration and governance risk that resemble, and sometimes amplify, those seen in traditional finance.

Magazine: Ethereum’s Fusaka fork explained for dummies — What the hell is PeerDAS?