• Wall Street has fallen in love with the mobile adtech and gaming company AppLovin.
• AppLovin's recent push into e-commerce sent its market valuation over the $100 billion milestone.
• Some ad industry insiders question the sustainability of its run, however.

Shares in the mobile ads and gaming company AppLovin have been running wild — and advertising industry insiders have a lot of questions.

AppLovin entered the Nasdaq 100 in November, with its market value surpassing the $100 billion milestone and shares up more than 780% so far this year. It's a remarkable ascent for any company, but especially for one that had flown fairly under the radar until recently, even within the ad industry itself.

At its current valuation, AppLovin dwarfs even The Trade Desk, long considered adtech's star performer, which has a market capitalization of around $65 billion.

AppLovin — which helps app developers make money through advertising and find new users through ads — has grown its share to 42% of the mobile gaming market, per analysts at Piper Sandler.

But there's one key new development that's driving its stunning stock run: e-commerce.

Bullish analysts say AppLovin has room to grow further and do for e-commerce marketers what it has for gaming companies, taking on Meta in the process.

"In all my years, it's the best product I've ever seen released by us, fastest growing, but it's still in pilot," AppLovin CEO Adam Foroughi said of the company's new e-commerce product on an earnings call last month.

With its stock riding high, some industry insiders also think AppLovin could make a transformative acquisition that would make it a household name.

Still, others in the ad industry say AppLovin's business model deserves some skepticism amid its meteoric rise.

22V Research analyst John Roque wrote in a recent note that AppLovin was the most overbought stock in the Russell 3000.

AppLovin declined to comment on a list of detailed questions about its business.

Investor enthusiasm goes stratospheric

Wall Street's interest in AppLovin soared this year as the company unveiled a plan to go after a new target customer outside the mobile gaming community: e-commerce advertisers.

The move opened up a total addressable ad revenue opportunity of around $120 billion, two to three times the size of the $40 to $50 billion mobile games user acquisition market, according to Macquarie Equity senior analyst Tim Nollen.

Nollen recently raised the firm's target share price for AppLovin to $450 from $270, citing its e-commerce push.

Cody Pfloker, chief marketing and revenue officer for Jones Road Beauty, which is testing AppLovin, said direct-to-consumer advertisers are excited by the prospect of a new player in the market.

"Meta has been the dominant customer acquisition channel for brands and while other platforms have come up like TikTok a few years ago, none are either as efficient or scalable," Pfloker said. "Nothing has been able to dethrone Meta."

AppLovin says it can reach a potential audience of 1.4 billion daily active users across mobile apps and connected-TV devices — an audience comparable to Meta or Google's apps.

Pfloker said part of the appeal is that e-commerce advertisers can easily repurpose their Meta ads into ads for AppLovin's mobile games and other apps.

AppLovin is only inviting e-commerce advertisers that spend upward of $20,000 a day on Meta ads to try its product, and it's incentivizing some of those buyers with $10,000 ad credits, multiple industry insiders told BI. They, like some others in this story, requested anonymity to preserve business relationships; their identities are known to BI.

Prescient AI, a marketing measurement company, ran an analysis in October that found AppLovin delivered a 1.5 times higher return on ad spend for its customers than Meta and Google Adwords, on average.

"A pretty startling thing is happening," said Will Holtz, VP of strategy and operations at Prescient AI. The top spenders are spending 25% to 30% of their budgets on AppLovin, he said, something Prescient hasn't seen before on a new channel, except for something like TV where people bulk up spending over the holidays.

What's more, Holtz added: "They're spending incremental dollars; they're not just shifting budget away from channels like Meta."

It's worth noting that the ads are full-screen and can't be skipped, which also likely boosts some performance metrics compared to other platforms. The results are also early and could fluctuate as more advertisers come on board.

Out-Googling Google

Despite the enthusiasm from some customers, others in the digital ad community have raised concerns about AppLovin.

Some industry insiders attribute AppLovin's performance to its cornering of every part of the mobile app ad transaction.

AppLovin operates AppDiscovery, the technology that advertisers use to buy the ads; the MAX mediation technology developers use to sell their ads; and the ALX exchange that connects the two. It also has Adjust, its ad measurement platform, and AXON, an AI engine designed to improve the performance of its ads.

This could give AppLovin a unique view of the market and allow it to see what different advertisers and buying platforms are bidding. Theoretically, AppLovin could use this intelligence to refine its own ad bidding strategies.

"It's one company for monetizing your app, growing your userbase, and then grading its own homework," a mobile ad veteran told BI. "They say there's a firewall and 'we don't talk,' but it's hard to prove otherwise."

If that sounds familiar, it's because it's similar to how people often describe the approach that helped Google dominate advertising on the web. A judge in Google's adtech antitrust trial is currently weighing whether that strategy, as well as its use of other auction tactics, amounted to Google operating an illegal monopoly. Google denies this and has said the adtech market is fiercely competitive and that its innovations have brought benefits to consumers, publishers, and advertisers.

Jeromy Sonne, the founder of marketing AI technology company Simbiant, has been monitoring the early AppLovin e-commerce results.

He said he'd seen an "extremely high correlation" between when AppLovin sees a spike in conversions and when Meta sees an increase in ad spend. He said he hadn't seen a similar trend when comparing Meta and Google or AppLovin and Google.

He said that made him wonder if AppLovin was driving real incremental value or whether its campaigns were just reaching the exact same audience as Meta in some way.

He said he'd also seen a "concerning overlap" where Shopify sales purportedly driven by AppLovin have a very high geographic overlap with where Meta ad website traffic was coming from.

Separately, Prescient AI's analysis found that brands spending between 25% to 30% of their digital ad budgets on AppLovin acquired fewer incremental new customers than brands in the 5% to 10% range. While reacquiring some old customers isn't necessarily a bad thing, the finding raises questions about the appropriate level of spending advertisers should devote to AppLovin, Prescient AI's Holtz said.

Other advertisers have questioned why AppLovin doesn't share granular data about exactly where their ads ran.

"It's a little bit of a black box — we have no idea where our ads are appearing," Pfloker said of AppLovin. "There's a lot to be excited about, but there's a lot to be skeptical about."

Could AppLovin become SnapLovin?

AppLovin recently paid more than $150 million to add developer Zynga's portfolio of games to its MAX ad exchange as part of Zynga's divestment of its adtech platform Chartboost, three people familiar with the matter told BI. This boosted AppLovin's already huge audience of gamers.

A spokesperson for Zynga owner Take-Two declined to comment.

Some in the industry think AppLovin could make an even bigger move. The company recently sold $3.5 billion in bonds, which Bloomberg reported were to pay down debt "and for general corporate purposes."

Could that include an acquisition?

Alex Merutka, an early AppLovin employee who now runs his own digital marketing company, Craftsman+, thinks AppLovin should make a bid for a social network — a particularly valuable sector of apps because users tend to be logged in, visit often, and share useful data.

People who use mobile games don't usually hand over data like phone numbers or email addresses, vital pieces of information for marketers to help connect their ads to outcomes, and to retarget users with ads.

AppLovin is already trading at a larger market capitalization than Snap, Pinterest, and Reddit combined.

Years ago, Snap held informal, early-stage talks about potentially acquiring AppLovin, a person familiar with the matter told BI.

Perhaps the roles could be reversed this time around. While Snap posted a revenue growth bounceback in its latest quarter, it's struggled to keep momentum amid fierce competition from the likes of TikTok. AppLovin could theoretically help optimize Snap's ad platform for performance advertisers to better compete with Google and Meta.

"If Adam was in control, Snap could be a $100 billion business — a $200 billion, $300 billion company — and AppLovin would be stronger too," Merutka said, referring to AppLovin CEO Adam Foroughi. "There's a lot of opportunity there."

However, AppLovin execs said onstage at the Nasdaq Investor Conference earlier this month that M&A wasn't a near-term priority and that the company was keeping a close eye on its head count and margins.

"It's much harder than people realize, and it's exceptionally hard for a company that's structured like us," Foroughi said of M&A and the difficulty of absorbing different company cultures, according to a transcript provided by the market intelligence platform AlphaSense.

• OpenWeb's board ousted the company's founder and CEO, Nadav Shoval, earlier this year.
• In his first interview since his removal, he said his situation is a cautionary tale for other founders.
• A legal battle between Shoval and OpenWeb is ongoing in an Israeli court.

Nadav Shoval says the conflict that culminated in his dramatic ouster from OpenWeb, the company he cofounded, started with a disagreement over a prospective BlackRock investment.

In his first interview since his removal as CEO, which is still playing out in court, Shoval told Business Insider that tensions with OpenWeb's board bubbled up when the company received "several term sheets" for further investment in mid-2024, including an offer from BlackRock.

OpenWeb, which provides tech to publishers to help manage the comment sections of their sites, create newsletters, and sell advertising, had previously raised $392 million and was last valued at $1.5 billion.

BlackRock's capital infusion, Shoval said, would have been a "game changer," allowing the company to make its fourth acquisition and advance toward an initial public offering. But it hit a roadblock.

"We brought in some of the best bankers in the world to support the process, and everybody was very excited until we started to see that one of the board members, specifically, one of the funds, was really pushing against taking this money," Shoval said, without naming the fund.

Two people familiar with the discussions said some board members had concerns about the conditions tied to BlackRock's proposed investment. They asked for anonymity to discuss private conversations. Their identities are known to BI.

BlackRock declined to comment.

OpenWeb's big-name investors include Insight Partners and Georgian Partners. It has also attracted investments from Samsung's Next investment group, The New York Times, and the famed NYU Stern professor and podcaster Scott Galloway, who sits on the company's board.

Shoval's relationship with his board of directors went rapidly downhill from there — and was thrust into public view.

Shoval's messy battle with the board goes public

Tensions boiled over in mid-2024 when OpenWeb's board changed Shoval's reporting line, a move he felt breached his contract. He sent an ultimatum to reverse the change to the board, which responded by firing him.

Then the company announced to staffers that Shoval would be replaced with an interim CEO, OpenWeb's former chair Tim Harvey.

Shoval went on a rampage.

Cut off from his business accounts, he used his personal Gmail to send a companywide email saying that he refused to step down.

He also took to LinkedIn, writing: "I do not accept these actions. I will continue to fight for OpenWeb's mission and purpose alongside our team."

Two former colleagues of Shoval and four people who have worked closely with him described him as a force of nature who's extremely passionate about the publishing industry. They said he could also be hotheaded and sometimes lacked the willingness to listen to others, including the board. They declined to be named to protect business relationships. Their identities are known to BI.

In October, Shoval sued OpenWeb and many of its board members in a Tel Aviv, Israel, court, alleging he had been the victim of an illegal boardroom coup enacted so investors could seize control of the company. His complaint argued that he should be reinstated as CEO and able to appoint two new board directors of his choosing.

The litigation is ongoing, and OpenWeb is seeking to have the case dismissed. BI has reviewed copies of some of the related court filings, translated from Hebrew to English.

In denying Shoval's claim for a temporary injunction against his firing, Ariel Zimmerman, the Tel Aviv judge presiding over that case, said the chances of Shoval succeeding in his claim for reinstatement as CEO "do not appear promising, to say the least."

In response to Shoval's suit, OpenWeb said in court filings that the case was a classic situation in which the board of directors had lost confidence in its CEO. OpenWeb said Shoval was trying to extract money that was not owed to him and that he had chosen to give up control of the company when he brought in investors.

In a statement to BI, a spokesperson for OpenWeb said the company was excited about the steps it had taken to set it up for long-term success.

"The company is moving forward without distractions, fully committed to the success of our employees, partners, and the broader community we serve," the statement said.

Shoval told BI he's optimistic that "justice will come" as he continues his legal fight. He said he hoped his story would serve as a lesson to other founders to vet the funds and directors they work with closely.

"No one wants to see the behind the scenes of restaurants," Shoval said. "This is what I feel like I've seen about the VC industry."

Shoval's path to the New York startup scene

Shoval said he's used to defying the odds.

He often describes how he came close to death when he was 2 years old from Kawasaki disease, a rare condition that causes swelling of the blood vessels and can lead to heart problems.

The disease, Shoval said, affected his motor skills, making it difficult to write. He later struggled with dyslexia and didn't finish high school.

After serving in the Israel Defense Forces' elite Maglan commando unit — famed for going behind enemy lines — he moved to New York City in 2012 at the age of 21. There he cofounded OpenWeb, then known as Spot.IM, alongside two other cofounders who have since left the company.

Shoval said he had noticed that publishers and content creators were "under massive threat" from Big Tech companies that wouldn't compensate them for their content.

The startup sought to build tech to keep people more engaged on publishers' websites. It began with the comment section, providing community-management tools and analytics to help make online conversations less toxic. It later acquired three other companies to help publishers in other areas, like advertising and newsletter building.

OpenWeb grew to more than 370 employees and says it reaches more than 150 million active monthly users across sites such as Fox News, CNN, and Yahoo.

Through secondary transactions, as OpenWeb raised more capital, Shoval diluted his stake in the company, leaving him with less than 2% of issued shares and a remaining 5% in unvested options, per OpenWeb's legal filings.

The sales, which OpenWeb calculated earned Shoval tens of millions of dollars, resulted in him ceding his control of the company to its investors.

The board calls Shoval's bluff

Shoval said in legal filings that OpenWeb's sudden decision in mid-2024 to change his reporting line was an illegal move that hindered his management capabilities and diminished his role. The board had decided he would start reporting to a newly appointed temporary executive chair, Omer Cygler, the managing partner of its investor Lion Investment. Shoval had previously reported to the entire board.

Furious, he sent a letter in September to the board demanding it reverse the decision.

OpenWeb's legal filing said Shoval's letter had also set out "excessive and baseless financial demands" amounting to tens of millions of dollars in exchange for his continued appointment as its chief executive. In an attachment to his letter, Shoval mapped out a scenario where he would resign as CEO and help with the search for a replacement until summer 2025, on the condition that the investors bought his shares and accelerated the vesting of his options.

The board called his bluff.

Board members convened an urgent telephone meeting in which the directors who attended, including those appointed by Shoval himself — Galloway and Cygler — unanimously voted for his dismissal.

In the statement to BI, OpenWeb said: "OpenWeb is laser-focused on continued growth and advancing our mission to foster healthier online discourse — creating a web that is safe for users, profitable for publishers, and fair for advertisers."

Shoval says his ousting is a cautionary tale for other startup founders

Looking forward, Shoval told BI he remained committed to fixing toxicity in online discourse and promoting independent journalism.

Shoval didn't start the company "for a small secondary," he said, referring to money he might have taken off the table were the company to raise a further investment round. "It's not a nonprofit. I'm here also for everybody to make money, but it's not the only reason why I started the business. I'm an extremely mission-driven person. I love what we do."

Shoval maintains that OpenWeb board meetings and decisions were conducted improperly and that he still has the right to appoint two new board directors of his choosing.

He said that he wanted to impart a lesson to other founders: There can be some occasions in startups when "there is inherent conflict between the fund and the founder."

After the huge investment boom of 2021 amid a stock-market rally and low interest rates, many startup valuations plunged in the following years, and IPO and M&A activity dramatically slowed.

"When those funds are successful, they act like a cheerleader," Shoval said. "They agree with you. They follow your strategy. As soon as market conditions change — and it really, really changed — some of those people change."