Skip to main content
FilingExplorer
News API Pricing
FilingExplorer Join
Track
Watchlists
Filing Alerts
Explore
News
Presidential Actions
Sector Flows
Portfolio Insights
Filings
Investment Managers13-F
Insider TradesForm 4
Insider Clusters
Companies
Lobbying
Products
Pricing
API Access
API Docs
Support
Contact Us
Feedback
Join Sign in
Period 2026 Q3 TTM

PEGASYSTEMS, INC.

  1. └─ CIK 0001013857 · PEGA Nasdaq
Sponsor since
2016 Q4
Latest filing
July 08, 2026
TTM Spend
$120,000
YoY Delta
-$40.0K · -25.0%
Filings TTM
3
Firms Engaged
1

Scorecards 2026 Q3 trailing-four-quarter window

Influence Intensity
⚠ 4.6

↓ -0.08 vs 4Q ago

Influence Intensity — what this means

How big a footprint this sponsor has in Washington, compared with every other sponsor we track. Scored 0 to 10.

How to read it

  • Minimal · < 4
  • Substantial · 4 to 7
  • Top-decile · 7+

Think of this as a size-of-presence score. It rolls four things into one number — how much the sponsor spends on lobbying, how many lobbying firms it hires, how many topics it lobbies on, and how many parts of government it contacts — and weighs each against every other sponsor we track over the same year.

More of any of those four pushes the score up. A 0 means no measurable lobbying footprint at all. A 10 means this sponsor sits at the top of the pack on every dimension.

Below 4 — an occasional or modest presence. Most sponsors are here.

4 to 7 — a substantial, sustained operation.

7 and above — one of the largest footprints in Washington.

Because it's a comparison against everyone else, the score can move even when a sponsor's own activity holds steady: if the rest of the field ramps up and this sponsor doesn't, the score drifts down. Read it as relative standing, not as a dollar figure.

What goes into it

  • Lobbying spend — What the sponsor reported spending on lobbying over the last four quarters.
  • Lobbying firms hired — How many different lobbying firms worked for the sponsor during that year.
  • Issues lobbied — How many distinct policy topics the sponsor's lobbying touched.
  • Parts of government contacted — How many different agencies, departments, and congressional offices were lobbied.

Good to know

Spending is only part of the story, which is why the other three ingredients are in here. A company that writes one big check to one firm about one issue is doing something very different from a company spending the same money across a dozen firms, twenty issues, and thirty agencies. The second has its hands in far more of Washington, and the score reflects that.

Worth keeping in mind:

  • It covers a rolling year of filings, so it moves slowly by design. A single busy quarter won't swing it much.
  • Trade associations lobby on behalf of their members, so a trade group's footprint can overlap with the footprints of the companies inside it.
  • Everything here comes from what sponsors themselves report in public lobbying disclosures. Late filings and amendments can shift a score after the fact.

Source FilingExplorer — in-house composite

Questions about this score? Get in touch.

Spending Momentum
● -3.5σ

↓ -3.46 vs 4Q ago

Spending Momentum — what this means

Whether this sponsor's lobbying spending is unusually high or low right now, measured against its own past. Around zero is business as usual.

How to read it

  • Extreme drop · < −3
  • Drop · −3 to −2
  • Normal · −2 to 2
  • Spike · 2 to 3
  • Extreme spike · 3+

This score never compares a sponsor to anyone else — only to its own history. That matters, because "a lot of lobbying money" means something completely different for a Fortune 50 company than for a small trade association.

Around 0 — spending is right where this sponsor normally runs.

Above +2 — running high for this sponsor. Uncommon, but it happens.

Above +3 — a genuine spike, and usually worth a look. Something changed: an active fight, a new campaign ramping up, or occasionally a filing worth double-checking.

Below −2 — a meaningful pullback, often a campaign winding down.

Negative readings are the noisier half. A missing or late filing looks exactly like a real pullback at the time, so treat drops with more caution than spikes.

The score is blank when a sponsor doesn't have enough history to compare against, or when its spending has been so flat that there's no normal variation to measure it against.

What goes into it

  • Current spending — What this sponsor reported spending on lobbying over the last four quarters.
  • Its own spending history — The same figure for every earlier period on file, which sets the baseline for what counts as normal here.

Good to know

The point of this score is to catch real changes without being fooled by noise. Quarterly lobbying spending is genuinely messy — budgets land unevenly, regulatory cycles create real bursts, amended filings restate quarters after the fact, and smaller sponsors post near-zero quarters routinely. A plain "up 40% from last quarter" reading would flag all of that as news.

So the score is built around what's typical for this sponsor across its whole filing history, rather than around an average that one enormous quarter could drag out of shape. A sponsor with a couple of wild quarters in its past doesn't end up with a permanently numb signal because of them.

Two consequences worth knowing:

  • A sponsor needs a few periods of filing history before it gets a score at all.
  • A sponsor that has always spent heavily won't show high momentum for spending heavily again. Spending a lot and spending more than usual are different questions, and this answers the second one.

Source FilingExplorer — in-house composite

Questions about this score? Get in touch.

Regulatory Exposure
● 7.0

↑ +3.00 vs 4Q ago

Regulatory Exposure — what this means

Whether a sponsor looks like it's in an active fight over a rule or a bill, rather than doing routine lobbying. Scored 0 to 10.

How to read it

  • Baseline · < 4
  • Active · 4 to 7
  • In a fight · 7+

This is the "something is happening here" score. It looks for the pattern a real fight tends to leave behind in the filings: lobbying narrowly focused on a handful of issues, aimed heavily at regulatory agencies rather than at Congress, and running hot compared with the sponsor's own recent history. The more of that pattern is present, the higher the score.

Below 4 — routine, ongoing engagement. The background hum of a company that keeps a Washington presence.

4 to 7 — real activity, but spread out. Broad engagement rather than one concentrated push.

7 and above — a focused, intense push. Worth finding out what it's about.

A high score is a prompt, not a verdict. It tells you where to look; the filings themselves — which issues, which agencies, which firms — tell you what's actually going on.

What goes into it

  • How focused the lobbying is — Whether the sponsor's activity is concentrated on a few issues or spread across many.
  • Agencies versus Congress — What share of the sponsor's government contacts went to regulatory agencies rather than to Congress.
  • How unusual recent spending is — How far the sponsor's current spending sits from its own norm — the same reading as Spending Momentum.

Good to know

Fights look different from routine lobbying in a few observable ways, and this score leans on all three at once rather than on any single one:

  • Focus. A sponsor in a live fight concentrates on a few issues. A sponsor doing institutional maintenance spreads across many.
  • Where the asks land. Rulemaking fights play out at agencies, during comment periods and proposed rules. Ordinary legislative lobbying concentrates on Congress. The mix tells you which track a sponsor is on.
  • Timing. Real fights tend to show up as a burst against the sponsor's own baseline — the same thing Spending Momentum measures.

Requiring all three makes the score much harder to trigger by accident. A one-quarter spending bump on its own is often just an amended filing; heavy focus on a single issue can simply be a niche trade group's normal life; heavy agency contact alone misses fights that are purely legislative.

That last case is the main blind spot: a major legislative fight run entirely through Congress will score lower than its real intensity, because the agency signal stays flat.

Source FilingExplorer — in-house composite

Questions about this score? Get in touch.

Firm Loyalty
● 1.00

→ 0.00 vs 4Q ago

Firm Loyalty — what this means

How much of the sponsor's lobbying-firm roster stayed the same compared with a year ago. 1.0 means no change at all.

How to read it

  • Churning · < 0.5
  • Shifting · 0.5 to 0.75
  • Loyal · 0.75+

A straightforward retention measure: of the lobbying firms this sponsor works with now, how many are the same ones it used a year ago?

Above 0.75 — a stable, long-running program. The sponsor keeps its firms and its relationships.

0.50 to 0.75 — normal churn. Firms rotate in and out around a steady core.

Below 0.50 — the roster was materially reshuffled. Something changed.

Low loyalty is one of the more reliable tells on this page, because switching lobbying firms is deliberate and expensive. When you see it, the useful next step is to look at which firms arrived and which left — new energy counsel, new antitrust counsel, or a sudden crisis specialist each point somewhere different.

The score is blank when there's nothing to compare against: a sponsor new to lobbying, or one with no current engagements.

What goes into it

  • Firms working for the sponsor now — The distinct lobbying firms that filed for this sponsor over the last four quarters, not counting engagements that have formally ended.
  • Firms working for it a year ago — The same list for the four quarters a year earlier, used as the comparison.

Good to know

Firms get swapped for reasons, and the reasons are usually the interesting part: a new product line or new regulatory exposure, a crisis that calls for specialist counsel, a change of general counsel who brings their own relationships, or an acquisition that hands the sponsor somebody else's roster.

Two details shape how it's counted:

  • It's a year-over-year comparison, not quarter-to-quarter. Lobbying filings are quarterly and some firms only file at mid-year or year-end, so a shorter window would read ordinary seasonality as churn.
  • Engagements the sponsor has formally ended are left out of the current roster, so a wound-down relationship isn't counted as one that was kept.

Roster size matters too. A sponsor that keeps all three of its existing firms but adds two more won't score a perfect 1.0 — hiring is itself a change in posture, not a sign that nothing moved.

Source FilingExplorer — in-house composite

Questions about this score? Get in touch.

Foreign Influence
◦ 0.00

→ 0.00 vs 4Q ago

Foreign Influence — what this means

The share of this sponsor's lobbying paid for by clients with a foreign connection on the record.

How to read it

  • None reported · 0
  • Connected · > 0 to 0.5
  • Majority foreign-connected · 0.5+

One question, one number: how much of this sponsor's lobbying money comes from clients with a foreign connection — either an organization based outside the U.S., or one that has named a foreign owner, funder, or director in its filings?

0 — nothing on the record ties this sponsor's reported spending to a foreign connection. That covers most sponsors.

Anything above 0 — some of the money traces to a client with a foreign connection. Worth looking at which client, and what kind of connection.

Above 0.5 — most of it does. A more substantial flag.

Three limits, stated plainly.

This measures what was disclosed. A foreign tie nobody reported won't appear here, and the score should never be read as a clean bill of health — only as the absence of a reported one.

A disclosure is not an accusation. These filings are legally required and most are entirely routine. The score says a relationship exists and is worth understanding, not that anything is wrong.

And 0 does not always mean nothing was found. A sponsor can have a foreign connection firmly on the record and still read 0 because no reported spending traced to that client in this window — when that happens the scorecard says so directly underneath the number, and the number alone would mislead you.

What goes into it

  • Foreign-connected lobbying — Spending by clients based outside the U.S., or that have named a foreign owner, funder, or director.
  • Total lobbying — All reported lobbying spending over the same four quarters.

Good to know

Two different things can make lobbying foreign-connected, and this score counts both.

The first is a disclosed foreign interest: federal law requires filings to name foreign entities holding a large stake in the client, foreign affiliates that direct the lobbying, and foreign funding above a reporting threshold. Ownership, direction, and funding all count here equally — the underlying filings show which kind it was.

The second is simpler and easy to miss: the client is itself a foreign organization. That case produces no disclosure at all, because the rule asks who stands behind the client, and when a foreign association or company registers on its own behalf there is nobody behind it to name. Reading only the disclosures makes an overseas trade group lobbying Congress in its own name look identical to a domestic one.

Foreign interests are typically named once, when a client first registers, and restated only if they change — so a connection stays on the record from the point it is disclosed forward, rather than being re-reported every quarter. A score built on re-reporting would find almost nothing.

Where a client is foreign-connected, all of its lobbying counts. The law doesn't ask anyone to divide spending between foreign-connected and other work, so any split would be our invention rather than something in the record.

The score is blank rather than 0 when a sponsor reported no lobbying spending at all in the period — there's nothing to take a share of.

Source Lobbying Disclosure Act, 2 U.S.C. § 1603 et seq., Section 4(b)(4) and 5(b)(3)

Questions about this score? Get in touch.

Quarterly Spend Last 20 quarterly periods

Top firms · issues · government entities 2026 Q3 trailing four quarters

Top firms

Firm 4Q $ Share
CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. $120.0K 100.0%

Top issues

Issue Activities Share
GOV Government Issues 3 100.0%
Full breakdown ↓

Top government entities

Entity Contacts Type
SENATE 3 Congress
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 3 Congress

Firm Roster Sorted by trailing-four-quarter spend · top 50 firms

Firm Status Engagement 2026 Q3 $ 4Q $ Lobbyists Top issue
CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. ○ Ended 2026-01 – 2026-07 $0 $120.0K 3 GOV

● Active filed in current period. ✦ New first engaged in the last 2 quarters. ○ Ended no filings in current period.

Issues 2026 Q3 trailing four quarters

GOV Government Issues ≈ $120.0K 100.0% · 3 activities

Of ≈$120.0K total in this window, $120.0K (100.0%) is precisely attributable — reported on filings naming a single issue.

How are issue dollars estimated?

Each lobbying filing reports one total amount, but a single filing often covers several issues. To estimate per-issue dollars, we divide each filing's amount equally across the issues it lists — the standard apportionment method in the empirical lobbying literature.

Dollars marked “precisely attributable” come from filings naming exactly one issue, where no estimation is needed. Activity counts are exact.

GOV

In their own words From recent filings, by issue

GOV Government Issues

Information technology modernization initiatives

CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. · 2026 Q2 similar language for 7 quarters

Lobbying spend last 5 years

Lobbying spend

PegaSystems across SEC filings institutional holders, insider trades and annual results

Institutional holders · 13F

Q2 2026
436 managers reported a position for Q2 2026 -50 vs Q1 2026
Largest Q2 2026 Form 13F holders of PegaSystems by reported value
Largest holders Reported value
BlackRock Inc $286.9M
VANGUARD PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT LLC $193.5M
AQR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC $147.4M
All institutional holders Holders of CUSIP 705573103

Insider trades · Form 4

-$24.7M net open-market insider transactions, last 12 months 0 filings with purchases ($0), 31 filings with sales ($24.7M)

Latest filings

  • Dianne Ledingham 2026-10-05 Sell
  • Efstathios A Kouninis 2026-09-17 Sell
  • Dianne Ledingham 2026-09-17 Sell
  • Alan Trefler 2026-09-16 Gift/Other
  • Rifat Kerim Akgonul 2026-09-15 Sell
All PegaSystems insider trades

Annual results · 10-K

Fiscal 2025
Revenue
$1.7B
Net income
$393.4M

As reported in the fiscal 2025 annual report.

View the filing

Recent filings Last 10 by posted date

Posted Period Registrant Type Income Expenses
2026-07-08 2026 Q2 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2nd Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2026-04-12 2026 Q1 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1st Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2026-01-13 2025 Q4 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4th Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2025-10-10 2025 Q3 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3rd Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2025-07-14 2025 Q2 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2nd Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2025-04-20 2025 Q1 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1st Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2025-01-16 2024 Q4 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4th Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2024-10-09 2024 Q3 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3rd Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2024-07-02 2024 Q2 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2nd Quarter - Report $40.0K —
2024-04-13 2024 Q1 CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1st Quarter - Report $40.0K —

Source: LDA.gov, data retrieved October 29, 2026. FilingExplorer is not affiliated with LDA.gov; the Senate Office of Public Records cannot vouch for data or analyses derived from these records after retrieval.

By using this site, you acknowledge that you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Claude Plugin Editorial Standards Accessibility RSS Contact Us
©Copyright 2026 filingexplorer.com.
site archive export

Sign Up to Continue

Create a free account in seconds to view this filing

Access filings from the last 6 months
Create watchlists and alerts
Free forever, no credit card required
Create Free Account
Already have an account? Sign in
100% Free

Send Feedback

Need help instead? File a support ticket here.
*
0/5000 characters (minimum 10)
PNG, JPEG, GIF, or WebP. Max 5MB.
Image preview
Need more help? Contact Support