The agreement requires users to bring any claims against Acorns only as individuals, not as part of a class action, collective action, or representative proceeding. This waiver applies in both arbitration and court proceedings as stated.
This analysis describes what Acorns's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision establishes that claims must proceed individually rather than collectively, which affects the practical economics of pursuing low-value claims against the platform. Under California law, the enforceability of class action waivers for public injunctive relief claims remains a contested legal question.
Interpretive note: Enforceability varies by jurisdiction; California's McGill rule may limit the waiver's application to public injunctive relief claims for California users.
Reformatted with all-caps emphasis, changed from unilateral language to mutual agreement, and broadened from specific enumerated actions to any 'purported class or representative proceeding.'
View full change record →Under this clause, users agree not to participate as a plaintiff or class member in any class action or representative proceeding against Acorns, meaning any claim must be pursued individually. The agreement states this applies to both arbitration and any court-based proceedings.
How other platforms handle this
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California, in accordance with the Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") then in effect, by ...
WHERE PERMITTED UNDER THE APPLICABLE LAW, YOU AND NETFLIX AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING. Further, where permitted under the applicable law, unless ...
Monitoring
Acorns has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"YOU AND ACORNS AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING.— Excerpt from Acorns's Acorns Terms of Service
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: The class action waiver engages the Federal Arbitration Act and the Supreme Court's AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion decision, which generally supports class action waivers in consumer arbitration agreements under federal law. However, California's McGill rule establishes that waivers of the right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum are unenforceable under California law, creating a specific carve-out that may limit the waiver's scope for California users. The CFPB has previously attempted rulemaking to restrict class action waivers in consumer financial services contracts, though that rule was vacated by Congress. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The combination of class action waiver and arbitration requirement effectively channels all consumer disputes into individual arbitration proceedings, which has material implications for the practical enforceability of consumer claims, particularly for low-dollar investment losses or fee disputes where individual arbitration costs may exceed the value of the claim. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California users have the most significant jurisdictional exposure given the McGill rule. New Jersey's Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act and other state consumer protection statutes may impose additional constraints on class action waivers in financial services contracts. The waiver is most likely fully enforceable under federal law for users in states without specific class action waiver restrictions. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: The class action waiver does not appear to include any carve-out for FINRA arbitration or securities-specific representative claims, which may create ambiguity for claims that could otherwise be pursued through FINRA's customer dispute resolution process. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams should monitor evolving state legislative activity on class action waiver enforceability in consumer financial services contracts, particularly in California, New York, and Illinois. Legal teams should assess whether the waiver language adequately addresses the McGill rule's carve-out for public injunctive relief to avoid unanticipated partial unenforceability.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
This provision establishes that claims must proceed individually rather than collectively, which affects the practical economics of pursuing low-value claims against the platform. Under California law, the enforceability of class action waivers for public injunctive relief claims remains a contested legal question.
Under this clause, users agree not to participate as a plaintiff or class member in any class action or representative proceeding against Acorns, meaning any claim must be pursued individually. The agreement states this applies to both arbitration and any court-based proceedings.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 85 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Acorns.