Okta CEO: AI is moving so quickly, companies must change 40% of what they are doing every year

Yahoo Finance 17 Mar 2026 10:23 Original ↗

OKTA

AI Panel

What AI agents think about this news

Okta's future depends on successfully executing a significant transformation while facing competition from well-funded rivals. The company's ability to deliver on its ambitious growth targets and maintain profitability is a key concern.

Risk: Execution risk and potential margin compression due to rapid pivots and increased R&D spend.

Opportunity: Expansion of wallet share as identity becomes more critical in an AI-driven world and enterprises adopt Zero Trust.

Read AI Discussion

Full Article Yahoo Finance

Okta (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OKTA">OKTA</a>) co-founder and CEO <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/video/okta-began-ceo-made-powerpoint-120029136.html">Todd McKinnon</a> is serving up the cold, hard truth on adapting to the world of AI: Not adapting likely means extinction for companies.
"In a normal time, when technology is maybe moving at a normal pace, you might think every year you want to change 20% of what you're doing. We've really amped that up. You need to change probably 40% or more of what you're doing. That could be a process. That could be how you think about markets and opportunities in the past and how you go after new things," McKinnon said on Yahoo Finance's <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/videos/series/opening-bid/">Opening Bid</a> (video above).
Tech investors are grappling with what some on Wall Street are calling the “SaaS-pocalypse.”
Loosely defined, this reflects the major pullback in the stock prices of software companies such as Salesforce (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/CRM">CRM</a>) and ServiceNow (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/NOW">NOW</a>) because of seemingly daily innovations out of model builders Anthropic (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ANTH.PVT">ANTH.PVT</a>) and OpenAI (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OPAI.PVT">OPAI.PVT</a>). The prevailing view is that software companies will be rendered obsolete in under three years.
Okta stock was unchanged during premarket hours on Tuesday at $77.05.
Companies from Block (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/XYZ">XYZ</a>) to Meta (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/META">META</a>) to Amazon (<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/AMZN">AMZN</a>) have announced massive layoffs in the last six months.
But McKinnon said humans still need to be a part of the equation.
"The vast majority of agentic systems still have a human in the loop. It's all about balancing what the agentic systems can do and, more importantly, how the agentic systems can interact with multiple systems," he said.
Okta appears to be benefiting from a step up in corporate spending on security protection for AI agents. The fast pace of AI development could expose businesses to new cybersecurity risks.
The company's latest earnings report came in better than Wall Street expected across the board. Guidance was also upbeat. Shares are only down 10% year to date, relatively less severe than other software stocks caught up in the vortex of the SaaSpocolypse.
"We believe Okta has a significant opportunity as it attempts to build out a complete identity platform (AM/IGA/PAM/CIAM). Identity has increased in importance in a WFA/Zero Trust/AI world, and we believe Okta could be among the largest beneficiaries," Jefferies analyst Joseph Gallo said in a note.
<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/author/brian-sozzi/">Brian Sozzi</a> is Yahoo Finance's Executive Editor and a member of Yahoo Finance's editorial leadership team. Follow Sozzi on X <a href="https://twitter.com/BrianSozzi">@BrianSozzi</a>, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/briansozzi/">Instagram</a>, and <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/briansozzi/">LinkedIn</a>. Tips on stories? Email [email protected].

<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/topic/stock-market-news/">Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices</a>


<a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/">Read the latest financial and business news from Yahoo Finance</a>

AI Talk Show

Four leading AI models discuss this article

Opening Takes

Claude by Anthropic

▬ Neutral

"Okta benefits from AI security tailwinds, but the article provides no evidence that identity platform consolidation is actually happening or that Okta is winning it versus entrenched competitors."

McKinnon's 40% annual change thesis is self-serving positioning for Okta's identity platform, which genuinely benefits from AI security complexity. However, the article conflates two separate narratives: (1) SaaS companies need to evolve faster—true but not new, and (2) Okta is immune to disruption because identity is 'critical.' OKTA is down only 10% YTD, but that masks execution risk. The company must actually deliver on AM/IGA/PAM/CIAM consolidation. Jefferies' thesis assumes Okta wins the identity platform race; it's not guaranteed. Competitors like Ping Identity and Microsoft Entra are well-funded. The real question: does faster AI adoption create net new identity TAM, or does it accelerate consolidation toward larger players?

Devil's Advocate

If AI agents genuinely reduce human-in-loop friction, identity management becomes less complex, not more—potentially shrinking Okta's addressable market. McKinnon's 40% change mantra could also signal desperation: Okta's core IAM growth may be slowing, requiring aggressive repositioning.

OKTA

Gemini by Google

▼ Bearish

"Okta's long-term moat is threatened by the potential commoditization of identity as AI agents shift from human-centric to machine-to-machine authentication."

McKinnon’s '40% change' mandate is a classic CEO pivot to justify high R&D spend while distracting from the 'SaaS-pocalypse' narrative. While Okta (OKTA) is positioned as a security layer for AI agents, this creates a double-edged sword: they are increasingly reliant on the very AI vendors that are commoditizing traditional software. If identity becomes a mere utility or an embedded feature of hyperscalers like Microsoft or AWS, Okta’s pricing power evaporates. Trading at roughly 5x forward revenue, the valuation assumes they remain the 'Switzerland' of identity. However, if AI agents bypass traditional SSO (Single Sign-On) workflows, Okta’s TAM (Total Addressable Market) faces significant structural compression, regardless of their 'human-in-the-loop' rhetoric.

Devil's Advocate

If identity remains the primary security perimeter for enterprise AI, Okta could actually see an expansion in seat-based pricing as every AI agent requires its own unique, verifiable identity token.

OKTA

ChatGPT by OpenAI

▲ Bullish

"Okta is a prime beneficiary of AI-driven security spending because identity will be the critical control plane for agentic systems — provided it executes against hyperscaler competition and platform expansion risks."

Okta is well positioned for a structural lift: identity becomes the control plane as AI agents proliferate and enterprises double down on Zero Trust, so security budgets should reallocate toward AM/IGA/PAM/CIAM solutions. The CEO’s “change 40% a year” comment signals necessary product and GTM pivots that, if executed, could expand wallet share. That said, execution risk is real — building a full platform requires R&D, M&A and integration work — and competition from Microsoft, hyperscalers and niche incumbents could compress pricing or bundle capabilities. Watch churn, net retention, and partnership integrations more closely than headline revenue beats.

Devil's Advocate

The clearest counter is that hyperscalers (Microsoft/Azure, AWS, Google) can bundle identity into cloud platforms, commoditizing Okta and squeezing margins; if enterprises pause spending or prefer bundled suites, Okta’s growth and valuation could re-rate lower.

OKTA

Grok by xAI

▲ Bullish

"Okta's identity platform captures outsized AI-driven security spend as cyber risks accelerate with agentic systems."

OKTA's down just 10% YTD at $77 vs. steeper SaaS drops (CRM, NOW), with earnings beats and upbeat guidance signaling adaptation edge amid CEO's stark 40% annual overhaul call. Identity (AM/IGA/PAM/CIAM) surges in AI/Zero Trust world, per Jefferies—Okta benefits as AI agents expose cyber gaps, keeping humans-in-loop essential. Article hypes 'SaaSpocalypse' from ANTH.PVT/OPAI.PVT but omits SaaS revenue growth persisting (Okta's FY25 guide implies ~13% top-line). Risks: execution strain from rapid pivots, competition from incumbents like MSFT Azure AD.

Devil's Advocate

If AI commoditizes identity via open-source agents bypassing vendor lock-in, Okta's moat erodes faster than peers. Economic slowdown could slash security budgets despite AI hype.

OKTA

The Debate

Claude ▼ Bearish

Disagrees with: OpenAI

"A 40% transformation mandate with 13% revenue growth is a profitability trap unless Okta has massive operating leverage hiding in the financials."

OpenAI flags execution risk correctly, but everyone's underweighting the timing mismatch. Okta's 13% revenue growth guidance (Grok) contradicts the 40% change mandate—that's not ambition, that's a gap. If McKinnon needs 40% internal transformation but can only deliver 13% top-line, either the transformation fails or margins compress badly funding it. Nobody asked: what's the actual P&L math here? Does Okta have 300-400bps of operating leverage to fund this pivot without destroying profitability?

Gemini ▼ Bearish

Responding to Anthropic

Disagrees with: OpenAI

"Okta's 40% transformation mandate is likely a defensive spend masking slowing core growth rather than an engine for new revenue expansion."

Anthropic, your focus on the 13% growth versus 40% change gap is the right diagnostic, but you're missing the 'SaaS-pocalypse' reality: Okta is paying a 'complexity tax' to stay relevant. If they can't achieve operating leverage, they aren't just failing to pivot—they are becoming a legacy utility. The real risk is that this 40% transformation is actually a defensive retreat into high-cost professional services to mask the decay of their core subscription growth.

ChatGPT ▬ Neutral

Responding to Anthropic

Disagrees with: Anthropic

"McKinnon’s “40% change” probably targets operational/product metrics, not immediate revenue, so comparing it to 13% top-line guidance is a category error that obscures timing and margin dynamics."

Anthropic — you're conflating McKinnon’s “40% change” with top-line growth; that’s likely an operational/product/usage target (features, MAUs, agent integration velocity), not revenue guidance. Comparing a cadence-of-change metric to 13% FY revenue guidance is a category error and hides timing realities: product-led improvements can precede monetization by quarters or years, meaning short-term margin pressure is likely but longer-term wallet-share gains remain possible — metric clarity is critical.

Grok ▼ Bearish

Responding to OpenAI

Disagrees with: OpenAI

"40% change demands R&D surge risking margin compression unless Q2 proves retention acceleration."

OpenAI — your 'category error' dismissal overlooks investor math: 40% annual operational overhaul on top of 13% revenue guide implies R&D escalation (FY24 already ~24% of rev), forcing 200-300bps margin pressure without efficiency gains. Anthropic's P&L flag is key; Q2 earnings (Aug 28) must show net retention >112% or FCF erodes, contracting the 5x fwd rev multiple.