GO Lawsuit Alleges Inadequate Risk Disclosures Regarding Financial Performance - Grocery Outlet Holding Corp. Investors Face Losses Following the Disclosure of Missed Full Year Guidance and 36 Store Closures: SueWallSt

Disclosure Under Scrutiny: Were Risk Warnings Adequate?

NEW YORK, April 23, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- SueWallSt examines the adequacy of Grocery Outlet Holding Corp.'s (NASDAQ: GO) risk disclosures during the period between August 5, 2025 and March 4, 2026. Shareholders who lost money on GO stock may find out if you qualify to recover investment losses or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at jlevi@SueWallSt.com or (888) SueWallSt.

Grocery Outlet shares fell $2.45, or 27.9%, closing at $6.34 on March 5, 2026, after the Company revealed it had missed full year guidance on nearly every major financial metric and would close 36 underperforming stores. The lead plaintiff deadline is May 15, 2026.

What the Company Disclosed

Throughout the Class Period, Grocery Outlet's SEC filings contained general risk factor language acknowledging that "planned construction and opening of new stores has been, and may continue to be, negatively impacted" by various factors. The Company also disclosed its Restructuring Plan, describing it as "substantially completed in the second quarter of fiscal 2025." These disclosures painted a picture of a company that had already addressed its operational challenges and was positioned for disciplined growth.

What the Lawsuit Alleges Was Missing

The complaint challenges whether these disclosures were sufficient, contending that specific, material facts were omitted:

• The Company had allegedly "expanded too quickly" into new store locations, a fact its CEO later acknowledged on the March 4, 2026 earnings call
• 36 stores in the network allegedly lacked "a viable path to sustained profitability regardless of the operational support" provided
• The Restructuring Plan, described as "substantially completed," allegedly required an entirely new "Optimization Plan" layered on top of it
• $110 million in non-cash impairment charges for store long-lived assets were allegedly not foreseeable from existing disclosures
• Guidance figures for EBITDA, net sales, comparable store sales, and diluted adjusted EPS were allegedly set without a reasonable basis given known internal conditions

Why Generic Warnings May Not Protect

The securities laws distinguish between general cautionary language and specific omissions of known problems. As alleged in the action, telling investors that store growth "may" face headwinds is materially different from disclosing that dozens of existing stores were financially unviable. The complaint contends that boilerplate risk factors about construction delays and cost pressures did not alert shareholders to the alleged reality: that the fleet itself contained locations incapable of reaching profitability, requiring mass closures and hundreds of millions in write-downs.

"Generic risk factor language cannot substitute for disclosing specific, known problems that are already affecting a company's operations. When a company knows certain stores have no viable path to profitability, investors deserve that information before it surfaces as a $110 million impairment charge." -- Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Speak with an attorney about whether your GO losses are recoverable or call (888) SueWallSt.

LEAD PLAINTIFF DEADLINE: May 15, 2026

Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Top 50 securities litigation firm (ISS, seven consecutive years). Over 70 professionals. Hundreds of millions recovered for investors.

CONTACT:

SueWallSt

Joseph E. Levi, Esq.

Ed Korsinsky, Esq.

33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor

New York, NY 10004

jlevi@SueWallSt.com

Tel: (888) SueWallSt

Fax: (212) 363-7171

SOURCE SueWallSt.com