Just ten months after its blockbuster IPO debut, design software firm Figma is back in the spotlight—this time due to pressure from an activist investor. Findell Capital Management publicly sent a letter to Figma's board this week, demanding significant cost cuts, a streamlined product lineup, and a review of governance ties with AI company Anthropic. This move is seen as another prime example of why tech companies are hesitant to go public: once exposed to public markets, previously hidden governance flaws and cost structures become impossible to conceal.
Findell Capital outlined three core demands in its letter. First, it called for Figma to narrow its product focus to four core offerings—Design, Dev Mode, FigJam, and Make—and to halt or integrate other peripheral businesses. Second, it urged the company to reduce R&D expenses and stock-based compensation to industry-comparable levels. Currently, Figma's stock-based compensation accounts for 27% of its revenue, compared to roughly 8% at Adobe. Third, it demanded an independent investigation into the relationship between Figma's board and Anthropic, noting that Anthropic's chief product officer resigned from Figma's board just three days before Anthropic launched Claude Design, a product that directly competes with Figma.
Figma's stock performance underscores the activist investor's concerns. After closing its first trading day in July 2025 at $115.50, with a market cap nearing $80 billion, the stock has since declined sharply, now trading around $21—a drop of over 80% from its peak. This has resulted in substantial paper losses for retail investors who bought at the IPO high, while early investors and insiders who entered at much lower costs in the private market have been able to cash out during multiple post-IPO lockup expirations.
Analysts note that Figma's situation serves as a sobering lesson for the many AI unicorns currently lining up to go public. The issue is not that public markets are "punishing" Figma, but rather that the transparent accounting environment of an IPO has revealed structural problems previously obscured by private capital. Of particular concern is the cost burden of stock-based compensation—Figma's stock-based compensation expense reached approximately $1.36 billion in fiscal 2025 and $169 million in the first quarter of 2026 alone, turning what would have been a GAAP net profit into a $142 million loss for that quarter.
Findell's intervention shifts the narrative from "failed IPO" to the reality of "uncontrolled company costs." Moving forward, the market will closely watch whether Figma's management responds to the activist's demands by reducing the proportion of stock-based compensation and improving operational efficiency. The outcome will also serve as a key benchmark for assessing whether future AI giants can smoothly transition from being darlings of private capital to publicly accountable companies.
Comments