Which Apps and SaaS have lost a lot of revenue lately?

Are apps and SaaS really losing a lot of revenue right now?

Yes. A small but meaningful group of apps and SaaS businesses are currently losing 10% to 50% of their revenue year over year, although the wider software market is still growing.

We checked actual revenue rather than stock prices, layoffs or slowing growth, and that changes the picture quite a lot. Chegg, C3 AI, Shutterstock, Bumble, BetterHelp, LivePerson, Angi and Fiverr have all recently reported double-digit revenue declines. Chegg has lost roughly half its revenue in a year. Several others are down between 10% and 25%.

Yet these companies are still unusual. SaaS Capital's latest survey covered more than 1,000 private B2B SaaS companies and found median growth of 22%. Only 7.3% reported flat or negative growth, up only slightly from 6.9% in the previous survey and well below the 13% reached during 2020.

Public SaaS tells a similar story. Software Equity Group's latest index of 106 listed SaaS companies found that revenue growth had started improving again while median EBITDA was almost 70% higher than a year earlier. Investors have become much less generous with SaaS valuations, but customers have not suddenly stopped paying for software.

The interesting part is concentrated in a smaller group of companies where something inside the old revenue engine has genuinely broken.

Which apps and SaaS have lost the most revenue lately?

Chegg currently stands far above the other major revenue losers we found, followed by C3 AI, Shutterstock and Bumble.

We use roughly 10% year-over-year contraction as the cutoff here. A company growing 2% instead of 20% may have a serious problem, but it has not lost a lot of revenue. We also prioritize reported company revenue over app-store estimates because most private apps do not disclose enough financial data to make a clean comparison.

Taken together, these eight businesses generated about $1.15 billion in their latest comparable quarters, down from roughly $1.38 billion a year earlier. They lost around $230 million of quarterly revenue between them, a weighted drop of nearly 17%. This is a deliberately selected group of companies already shrinking, so it should not be read as an industry-wide average.

Company or product	Latest quarterly revenue	YoY change	Revenue lost vs. year-ago quarter
Chegg	$51.8M	-51%	$53.3M
C3 AI	$52.4M	-25%	$17.9M
Shutterstock	$221.8M	-17%	$45.2M
Bumble	$210.5M	-15.2%	$37.7M
BetterHelp	$212.6M	-12%	$27.8M
LivePerson	$52.5M	-12%	$7.1M
Angi	$248.0M	-11%	$30.2M
Fiverr	$97.8M	-10%	$10.8M

Is Chegg the clearest AI revenue collapse right now?

Yes. Chegg is currently the strongest large-scale example we found of generative AI directly damaging an established internet subscription business.

Chegg's latest quarterly revenue was $51.8 million, down 51% from $105.1 million a year earlier. The drop keeps getting harder to dismiss as a temporary bad quarter. Chegg's revenue fell 14% across 2024, then 39% across 2025. Earlier this year, quarterly revenue was already falling by roughly half. Pretty brutal.

We also have unusually good evidence about what caused it. In its 2025 second-quarter results, Chegg said subscribers had fallen 40% and explicitly blamed lower traffic "largely due to Google AI Overviews." Google could increasingly answer study-related searches without sending students to Chegg, while ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude could answer many of the questions students previously paid Chegg to solve.

That hits Chegg twice. Fewer students arrive through search, and the people who do arrive have far more free alternatives.

The remaining business is moving toward skills and employability. Chegg Skilling recently generated $17.5 million and grew 2%, so there is still something to rebuild around. But a small growing segment cannot hide what has happened to the old academic subscription engine. Chegg has lost more than $50 million of quarterly revenue in twelve months, and AI-driven changes in both search and student behavior are clearly part of the explanation.

Is C3 AI still collapsing, or has it finally hit bottom?

C3 AI is still much smaller than it was a year ago, but the latest numbers finally suggest that the revenue collapse may have stopped getting worse.

The company has just reported $52.4 million of quarterly revenue, around 25% below the $70.3 million generated in the comparable period last year. More importantly, revenue was $51.6 million in the preceding quarter. Sequentially, C3 AI has finally moved slightly upward.

That comes after a brutal fall. Quarterly revenue had reached $108.7 million before dropping to $70.3 million, then $75.1 million, $53.3 million and $51.6 million. The latest $52.4 million still leaves the business at less than half the size it was at the peak of that sequence.

Management has been unusually open about the failure. Thomas Siebel previously called the company's sales performance "completely unacceptable." C3 AI reorganized sales, cut spending and replaced senior leadership. In the latest results, bookings jumped 73% quarter over quarter and Siebel said revenue had stabilized.

We should take that stabilization seriously without pretending a turnaround has already happened. C3 AI is guiding to roughly $210 million to $240 million of revenue for the current fiscal year, far below the scale investors once expected.

C3 AI is also a useful counterexample to the wider software debate. This company sells enterprise AI software, so its revenue collapse cannot sensibly be blamed on customers suddenly deciding they do not want AI. Poor sales execution and company-specific problems have been much more important here.

Is Fiverr already losing revenue because of AI?

Yes. Fiverr is now one of the clearest cases where AI automation is removing transactions that used to generate marketplace revenue.

Fiverr's latest revenue fell 10% to $97.8 million, but the core marketplace deteriorated faster, with marketplace revenue down 15.5%. Active buyers fell 21.9%, from 3.4 million to 2.7 million.

The speed of the reversal is striking. One year earlier, Fiverr was still growing revenue by almost 15%. Within twelve months, the company moved from roughly +15% growth to -10% contraction.

Fiverr has been unusually direct about why. CEO Micha Kaufman said AI is absorbing "high-volume, low-value, transactional tasks," and the company cut its outlook because of AI-related demand and traffic headwinds. Management now expects another much larger year-over-year revenue decline in the following quarter and a double-digit decline across the full year.

The marketplace is already adapting. Clients completing projects worth more than $1,000 grew 13% on a trailing-twelve-month basis, while Fiverr is repositioning toward longer, more complicated projects where buyers still want human expertise and accountability.

That split shows where AI disruption is landing first. Logo design, simple writing, translation, basic coding and other small digital jobs are increasingly easy to generate or automate. Larger projects are proving harder to replace. Fiverr built enormous volume around the first group, so the shift is showing up quickly in its financial results.

Is Shutterstock's revenue drop really caused by generative AI?

Shutterstock is definitely losing a lot of revenue right now, but we still cannot pin the whole decline on generative AI.

Revenue recently fell 17%, from $267.0 million to $221.8 million. That removed $45.2 million from one quarterly comparison. Content revenue fell 17% to $165.7 million, while Data, Distribution and Services revenue fell 16% to $56.1 million.

The direction changed remarkably fast. In the comparable quarter a year earlier, Shutterstock had reported 21% revenue growth. Acquisitions contributed to that earlier increase, so comparing the two percentages directly overstates the organic reversal, but the current weakness is still substantial.

Shutterstock says weak new-customer acquisition was the main reason Content revenue declined. Subscriber numbers also fell from 1.073 million to 951,000 over twelve months, an 11% reduction.

Generative images and video obviously create a serious competitive problem for stock-content libraries. A marketer who once bought ten stock images can now generate some of them. At the same time, Shutterstock earns money licensing content and data to AI companies, so AI also creates revenue opportunities.

We would therefore keep the causal claim tighter than with Chegg or Fiverr. Shutterstock is clearly shrinking, and its traditional content business is having trouble attracting new customers. Generative AI almost certainly changes the competitive environment, but the reported numbers do not let us assign most of the 17% decline to AI alone.

Why is Bumble losing so many paying users?

Bumble's revenue is falling mainly because far fewer people are paying for the company's dating apps.

Bumble recently reported $210.5 million of quarterly revenue, down 15.2%, while total paying users fell 16.4% to 3.2 million. Average revenue per paying user actually increased 1.2% to $21.96.

That combination is revealing. Bumble still extracts slightly more money from each remaining payer, but there are about 600,000 fewer paying users than a year earlier.

The deterioration has also been persistent. Revenue was already shrinking in previous quarters and the latest decline is substantially worse than the roughly 8% contraction recorded a year earlier. Bumble App revenue fell 14.7%, while Badoo and the company's other products fell 17.1%.

Dating apps as a category are having a harder time with user growth, but Bumble is doing noticeably worse than Match Group right now. Match Group's latest total revenue slipped only around 1%. Tinder's daily active users were still falling, but the decline narrowed to 4%, its best trend in ten quarters. Hinge, meanwhile, grew revenue 22% and monthly active users 13%.

Hinge's performance makes it difficult to blame Bumble's entire decline on people giving up on dating apps. Users are still joining and paying for the right product. Bumble has a broader dating-market problem around it, but a meaningful part of its current weakness is specific to Bumble.

Is BetterHelp's old subscription model breaking?

BetterHelp's traditional cash-pay business is currently shrinking much faster than its headline revenue number suggests.

BetterHelp revenue fell 12% to $212.6 million in Teladoc's latest reported quarter. Underneath that, the Consumer and Other business, which includes people paying directly for BetterHelp, dropped 20% from $238.3 million to $190.9 million.

Insurance-covered services moved sharply in the other direction, growing from only $2.1 million to $21.8 million. Without that newer revenue stream, BetterHelp's decline would look considerably worse.

Consumers appear increasingly interested in receiving therapy through insurance rather than paying BetterHelp directly. Teladoc is expanding insurance coverage nationwide, although the company has said clinician capacity has limited how quickly it can convert that demand into appointments.

The profitability drop is also hard to ignore. BetterHelp's adjusted EBITDA fell from $11.9 million to just $0.5 million in the latest comparable quarter.

BetterHelp still has a large business and plenty of demand for online therapy. What is breaking is the economics of the old cash-pay model that powered its rise. The insurance business may eventually replace part of that revenue, but currently it is growing from too small a base to keep total BetterHelp revenue from falling.

Is LivePerson still shrinking even though conversational AI is booming?

Yes. LivePerson kept losing revenue while conversational AI exploded around it, and the company has now been acquired by SoundHound AI.

LivePerson's latest quarterly filing shows revenue of $52.5 million, down 12% from $59.6 million a year earlier. Hosted-services revenue lost $4.7 million, primarily because of customer cancellations and downsells, while professional-services revenue lost another $2.4 million.

This has been going on for much longer than one quarter. LivePerson generated $312.5 million of revenue in 2024 and only $243.7 million in 2025, a decline of about 22%. Its earlier quarterly results repeatedly pointed to cancellations and customers spending less.

The ending is now concrete. SoundHound completed its acquisition of LivePerson just days ago after shareholders approved the transaction. The announced deal valued LivePerson's equity at only $43 million, although the transaction had a substantially higher implied enterprise value after accounting for debt and cash.

LivePerson spent years positioned directly inside conversational AI, which makes the outcome particularly instructive. Being in a market that AI is expanding does not guarantee that an existing vendor keeps its customers. LivePerson's enterprise relationships, debt burden and technology still had enough value for SoundHound to buy, but the standalone company had already been shrinking for years.

Is Angi's 11% revenue drop an AI problem?

No. Angi is losing substantial revenue today, but its latest numbers point much more toward weak homeowner demand and lower spending by service professionals.

Angi revenue fell from $278.2 million to $248.0 million, an 11% decline. Service requests fell 6%, leads fell 13%, average monthly active professionals fell 17%, and network revenue dropped 34%.

The company says homeowners have shifted toward smaller, lower-consideration projects, leaving professionals with more unused capacity and making them less willing to spend on leads. That explanation fits the operating numbers closely.

AI is actually showing up on the other side of Angi's business. The company has reorganized product development around an AI-first strategy, started testing an AI Front Desk that follows up with homeowners for service professionals, and is building more automation into the marketplace. Large Pro and National Partnership revenue grew 20% for the second quarter in a row.

Angi is a useful counterexample. An internet marketplace can lose double-digit revenue at the same time that it adopts AI aggressively. Sometimes demand, customer budgets and the economic cycle still explain more than technological disruption.

Why is Fiverr shrinking while Upwork is almost holding up?

Fiverr is currently taking a much harder hit from changing freelance demand than Upwork, suggesting that AI is hurting some kinds of freelance work far more than others.

Upwork's latest revenue was $191.7 million, down only 2%, while gross services volume fell 4%. Spending per active client actually increased 5% to a record $5,230.

The AI categories are especially interesting. Upwork said gross services volume from AI-related work grew more than 22% year over year, while AI Strategy & Consulting grew more than 50%. Companies are spending less on some traditional freelance tasks while simultaneously paying people to implement, manage and advise on AI.

Fiverr historically had more exposure to smaller transactional jobs. Upwork has pushed further toward longer projects, specialists, larger small businesses and enterprise work. AI can write a short product description or produce a basic logo increasingly well; replacing someone who understands a company's systems, works on a project for weeks and takes responsibility for the result is harder.

That difference is already visible in the numbers. As seen above, Fiverr's core marketplace is contracting at a double-digit rate, while Upwork remains close to flat and its AI-related work is growing quickly.

Are Expensify and Domo also losing a lot of revenue?

Expensify and Domo are currently shrinking, but neither belongs in the same revenue-collapse category as Chegg, Bumble or Fiverr.

Expensify's latest revenue fell 5% to $33.9 million, while paid members declined 2% to 640,000. There are also pieces of the business growing: Expensify Card interchange revenue increased 12% to $5.9 million. The company is still working through the long migration from Expensify Classic to New Expensify, so we would describe it as a struggling SaaS transition rather than a major collapse for now.

Domo has an even fresher development. Its latest SEC filing shows quarterly revenue of $76.8 million, down roughly 4% from $79.7 million. Subscription revenue fell 3%, and Domo disclosed that existing customers removed a net $8.3 million of subscription revenue while new customers added $5.9 million. Remaining performance obligations also fell from $430.9 million to $410.8 million.

Revenue therefore understates how serious Domo's situation became. The company has agreed to sell substantially all of its operating assets and employees to Progress Software for $400 million. Its filing also discusses debt covenant problems and going-concern uncertainty if the transaction fails.

A revenue screen has limits. Expensify has weak growth but still has a viable path back. Domo's revenue decline looks modest while its corporate situation is much more dramatic. Neither should be described as having "lost a lot of revenue" merely because the companies themselves are under pressure.

Which supposed SaaS losers are actually still growing?

Many companies pulled into the current SaaS-collapse narrative are still increasing revenue, sometimes very quickly.

The gap between perception and actual revenue is particularly large today because software valuations have fallen so much. Software Equity Group found the median EV-to-revenue multiple across its public SaaS index dropping from 5.7x to 3.2x year over year. A company can therefore lose a huge percentage of its stock-market valuation while continuing to add customers and revenue.

Unity is a striking example. After years of layoffs, restructuring and controversy, its latest revenue increased 24% to $546 million. Strategic revenue grew 38%. Life360 grew total revenue 38%, Workiva grew 19%, and Dropbox remains barely positive rather than shrinking.

Company	Latest revenue growth	What is happening
Life360	+38%	Subscription revenue +31%, paying circles +27%
Unity	+24%	Strategic revenue +38%
Workiva	+19%	Subscription and support revenue +19%
Dropbox	+0.9%	Core revenue still growing; paying users increased sequentially

What do the apps and SaaS companies losing revenue have in common?

The real revenue losers fall into a few very different groups, and lumping them together as victims of a "SaaS apocalypse" hides the useful part of the story.

Chegg and Fiverr give us the strongest evidence of direct AI pressure. Chegg is being hit where students discover answers and where they consume them. Fiverr is seeing AI absorb simple freelance tasks that previously created marketplace transactions.

Bumble and BetterHelp have more of a consumer-conversion problem. Bumble has lost a large number of paying users. BetterHelp's traditional cash-pay service is shrinking while customers show greater interest in insurance-covered care.

LivePerson and C3 AI show another failure mode: enterprise software companies can struggle badly even inside booming AI markets. Customer cancellations hurt LivePerson, while C3 AI went through a severe sales-execution breakdown.

Angi adds the macroeconomic case. Lower homeowner demand and weaker spending by service professionals are enough to produce an 11% revenue decline without invoking AI replacement.

Across all of them, the recurring pattern is simpler: something that used to refill the revenue funnel has weakened. For Chegg it is search traffic and subscribers. For Fiverr it is buyers and small freelance jobs. For Bumble it is paying users. For BetterHelp it is cash-pay customers. For LivePerson it was existing enterprise accounts. For Angi it is homeowner demand and professional spending.

AI is already one important cause, but today it explains only part of the list.

Is the SaaS apocalypse actually happening?

The "SaaS apocalypse" is currently much more visible in valuations and in vulnerable business models than in software revenue as a whole.

The broad data remains surprisingly healthy. SaaS Capital's survey puts median private B2B SaaS growth at 22%, with only 7.3% of companies flat or shrinking. Software Equity Group says its public SaaS index recently reached record median revenue of $1.2 billion, while median EBITDA rose almost 70% year over year.

Meanwhile, public SaaS valuation multiples have compressed dramatically. The SEG median moved from 5.7 times trailing revenue to 3.2 times. Investors are paying roughly 44% less for each dollar of revenue even though aggregate revenue has continued to grow.

That repricing makes sense if investors believe AI will eventually weaken retention, pricing power or differentiation. We can now see pieces of that future arriving at companies such as Chegg and Fiverr. Their problem has moved beyond theoretical competitive risk and into reported revenue.

But look at what is happening elsewhere at the same time. Life360 is growing 38%. Unity is growing 24%. Workiva is growing 19%. Hinge is growing 22%. Upwork's AI-related work is growing more than 22%.

The clearest conclusion is that AI is creating a much wider gap between software businesses. Products built around simple information retrieval, easily generated output or low-value digital tasks look increasingly exposed. Products tied deeply into company workflows, proprietary data, regulated processes, complex collaboration or difficult human work have held up much better so far.

Which apps and SaaS have lost a lot of revenue lately?

Yes, several well-known apps and SaaS businesses have recently lost a lot of revenue, with Chegg, C3 AI, Shutterstock, Bumble, BetterHelp, LivePerson, Angi and Fiverr standing out in the reported numbers.

Chegg is the most extreme case and currently the strongest evidence that generative AI can destroy revenue in an established digital subscription business. Fiverr gives us another important example because management directly links weaker demand to AI automating low-value freelance tasks.

The rest of the group makes the answer more interesting. Bumble is losing payers while Hinge keeps growing. BetterHelp is struggling to replace cash-pay revenue with insurance. C3 AI lost enormous revenue despite selling AI software itself. LivePerson kept losing enterprise customers before SoundHound ultimately acquired it. Angi's decline mostly comes from weaker home-services demand.

As pointed out above, the wider SaaS market is still growing. The companies already losing serious revenue are a minority.

That minority deserves close attention, though. These businesses show where changes in search, AI automation, consumer behavior, customer retention and spending are already strong enough to appear in financial statements. If the list starts getting materially longer, the SaaS-apocalypse argument becomes much harder to dismiss. For now, the evidence points to sharp disruption in specific business models rather than a general collapse of apps and SaaS.