ServiceNow and Salesforce stocks surge as OpenAI threat eases

ServiceNow shares jumped as much as 14% on June 1 as investors collectively decided that maybe, just maybe, OpenAI isn’t going to eat the entire enterprise software industry for lunch.

The rally wasn’t a solo act. Salesforce and other major software names climbed alongside ServiceNow in what amounted to a sector-wide exhale.

From SaaSpocalypse to second wind

Software names including ServiceNow and Salesforce had fallen more than 50% from their highs earlier in 2026. The culprit was a narrative that Wall Street analysts had grimly dubbed the “SaaSpocalypse.”

The fear was straightforward and, on its face, reasonable. If OpenAI and its competitors could build AI agents capable of handling customer service, IT workflows, and sales operations, why would enterprises keep paying for expensive SaaS subscriptions? The market priced in a worst-case scenario where agentic AI would hollow out the value proposition of companies like ServiceNow and Salesforce entirely.

ServiceNow’s pivot to coexistence

ServiceNow signed a three-year agreement with OpenAI back in January 2026 to integrate OpenAI’s models directly into its platform. The deal covers an estimated 80 billion annual workflows.

In its most recent quarter, ServiceNow reported that 50% of new net Annual Contract Value came from consumption-based pricing models rather than traditional per-seat licensing. As AI automates more tasks, the volume of workflows processed through the platform could increase even as headcount stays flat.

What this means for investors

Of 37 analysts covering ServiceNow, 33 rate it a Buy. The average 12-month price target sits at $141, which implies roughly 52% upside from levels around the time of the surge.

For investors weighing whether to re-enter enterprise software names, the key metric to watch isn’t revenue growth in isolation. It’s the mix shift toward consumption-based pricing and the percentage of new deals that include AI-powered features.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.