The Action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants misled investors by failing to disclose that: (a) due to cost issues and other problems with its older Payeezy platform, Fiserv forced Payeezy merchants to migrate to its Clover platform; (b) Clover’s revenue growth and gross payment volume (“GPV”), the total monetary value of transactions processed through Clover, were temporarily and unsustainably boosted by these forced conversions, which concealed a slowdown in new merchant business; (c) shortly after these conversions, a significant portion of former Payeezy merchants switched to competing solutions due to Clover’s high pricing, significant down time, and systematic compatibility issues; (d) as a result of these merchant losses, Clover’s GPV growth was significantly slowing, and its revenue growth was unsustainable; and (e) based on the foregoing, Fiserv’s positive Class Period statements about Clover’s growth strategies, competition, attrition, GPV growth, and business prospects were materially false and misleading.