Activist Investor Moves in Getty Images and Biotech Firms: Opportunities and Risks in 2026

The surge in shareholder activism during 2025–2026 has reshaped corporate governance and stock performance across industries, with biotech firms and media conglomerates like Getty Images emerging as focal points. Activist investors, leveraging strategic settlements, board seat demands, and public campaigns, have pushed for operational overhauls and value unlocking. This analysis examines the opportunities and risks these campaigns pose, drawing on recent developments in both sectors.

Biotech: A Sector Under Siege

Biotech companies have become prime targets for activist investors amid post-pandemic revenue declines and regulatory uncertainty. Starboard Value's $1 billion stake in Pfizer, for instance, has driven calls for a reevaluation of the company's M&A strategy and board composition. Similarly, Shah Capital's pressure on Novavax before Sanofi's intervention highlights the sector's vulnerability to governance-driven activism as research shows.

The stock market effects of these campaigns are pronounced. Proxy contests have surged, with 57 launched against Russell 3000 companies by October 2025, many targeting healthcare firms. Activists often advocate for asset sales, board refreshments, or strategic break-ups to address undervaluation. For example, biotechs trading at or below cash value-such as those with large cash reserves but declining stock prices-have attracted activists seeking to optimize capital allocation.

However, the risks are significant. Regulatory scrutiny and market volatility complicate activist strategies, as seen in the biotech M&A landscape, where smaller, targeted acquisitions have become the norm to align with activist demands. Companies must balance shareholder pressure with long-term innovation goals, a challenge underscored by the sector's reliance on lengthy development timelines.

Getty Images: A Case of Merger-Driven Volatility

Getty Images (GETY) has faced its own activist pressures, though the campaigns have been less overt than in biotech. In 2023, Trillium Capital demanded a board seat, arguing for strategic alternatives including a potential sale of the stock-photo company. While no public resolution emerged, the broader trend of board seat demands-43% of 2025 campaigns involved governance changes-suggests similar pressures could resurface in 2026.

Getty's stock price has been more influenced by its merger with Shutterstock, which was approved by 82% of Shutterstock shareholders in June 2025. The deal, expected to close by late 2025, drove an 11% surge in Getty's shares, reflecting investor optimism about synergies and AI-driven licensing partnerships. Yet, the stock has faced headwinds, including a 51.8% decline from its 52-week high by November 2025, partly due to Neuberger Berman's $7.8 million share sale as reported.

The merger also introduced regulatory risks. The UK Competition and Markets Authority's Phase 2 review and the U.S. Department of Justice's Second Request highlighted potential hurdles. These uncertainties, combined with Getty's $1.39 billion debt load as noted, illustrate the volatility inherent in activist-driven strategies.

Opportunities and Risks: A Balancing Act

Activist campaigns offer clear opportunities for value creation. In biotech, governance changes can accelerate R&D efficiency and streamline leadership, as seen in the 92% of board seat gains in 2025 achieved through negotiated settlements. For Getty, the Shutterstock merger aims to create a dominant visual content platform, with projected annual cost synergies of $200 million.

Yet, risks abound. Overreaching activism-such as demanding asset sales that undermine core competencies-can erode long-term value. Biotech firms, in particular, must avoid sacrificing innovation for short-term gains. Similarly, Getty's reliance on AI licensing partnerships, while promising, has yet to translate into sustained profitability.

Retail and institutional investors are also reshaping the landscape. Social media campaigns and auto-voting programs have amplified retail influence, while passive investing strategies have enabled smaller activists to sway larger equity stakes. These dynamics complicate corporate responses, requiring nuanced engagement strategies.

Conclusion

The 2025–2026 activist wave underscores a shift toward governance modernization and shareholder accountability. While biotech firms and media companies like Getty Images face distinct challenges, the common thread is the need for strategic agility. Investors must weigh the potential for value unlocking against the risks of regulatory friction, operational disruption, and market volatility. As activism evolves, companies that proactively engage stakeholders and articulate clear value-creation narratives will likely emerge stronger.