Will Salesforce's AgentForce pricing model remain unchanged through Q2 FY2027 (July 2026)?

Q4 FY2026 earnings provide the strongest stabilization signal yet. The three coexisting monetization paths -- (1) premium SKU seat upgrades (tripled QoQ), (2) new seats/apps, (3) Flex Credits (50% of Q4 bookings) -- represent a mature multi-channel approach rather than continued experimentation. ILAs (120+ sold, far exceeding 50-100 expectation) bundle subscription and consumption into a hybrid model, providing exactly the flexibility that previously required structural pricing changes. With 22K+ paid customers (from 9.5K) and 4K in production, the adoption base is now large enough that pricing changes carry real disruption risk to existing contracts. The historical ~6 month cadence concern is mitigated by the fact that the current model is working at unprecedented scale. However, 5 months remain in the resolution window, and competitive dynamics (Intercom, Google) could still force a response.

The ILA structure is the critical stabilization mechanism that the pre-earnings assessment underweighted. ILAs bundle subscription + consumption into one agreement, meaning Salesforce can adjust the internal economics (credit allocation, tier thresholds) without changing the external pricing structure. This gives Salesforce a pricing adjustment valve that doesn't trigger the resolution criteria. The 120+ ILAs sold in Q4 alone -- now the #1 product sold -- means a significant portion of the customer base is locked into these hybrid agreements. Changing the pricing model would require renegotiating these agreements, creating massive friction. Additionally, the calibration lesson from resolved sibling markets shows we were systematically too bearish on CRM execution metrics. Adjusting upward is warranted. The reputational incentive for stability is stronger than ever: 'fastest-growing product in Salesforce history' narrative depends on consistent execution, not pricing churn.

The progression from pre-earnings to post-earnings data represents a phase change in the pricing stability thesis. Pre-earnings: 16 AELAs, ~100 pipeline, uncertain adoption -- pricing model still being validated. Post-earnings: 120+ ILAs (rebranded AELAs), #1 product sold, 22K customers, $800M ARR -- pricing model is working at scale. The key insight is that the three monetization paths coexisting IS the stable state -- Salesforce found that different customer segments need different models, and ILAs provide the umbrella agreement. The 5 months remaining is the primary risk factor, but enterprise customers signing ILAs expect pricing stability, and Salesforce Q1 FY27 guidance implicitly assumes current pricing. The AWU metric (2.4B total, 771M in Q4) adds a consumption measurement layer without pricing implications. The narrow resolution criteria continues to structurally favor YES.

Q4 earnings strongly favor pricing stability. The 48% QoQ ARR growth to $800M demonstrates the current pricing model is generating substantial revenue acceleration. With 22K+ paid customers and 4K in production, Salesforce now has a large installed base whose contracts implicitly depend on current pricing. The ILA model (120+ sold) provides a flexible hybrid vehicle that can absorb future adjustments without structural changes. However, the historical pattern of ~6 month changes cannot be fully dismissed -- the last major change was late 2025, putting mid-2026 in the risk zone. Competitive pressure from Google and Intercom remains, though Salesforce's Q4 results suggest they're winning on ecosystem value, not price. The 50% of bookings from Flex Credits shows consumption-based pricing is working alongside subscription, reducing the need for a forced choice between models.

While Q4 data is strongly positive for stability, several countervailing factors prevent a dramatic upward revision. First, the historical base rate: Salesforce changed AgentForce pricing roughly every 6 months, and the resolution window extends 5+ months -- the base rate alone suggests ~45-50% chance of change. Second, rapid adoption growth (9.5K to 22K customers) could surface pricing friction points faster -- more customers means more feedback on where pricing doesn't work. Third, the competitive landscape is intensifying: Google's Vertex AI agents at $0.012/query and Intercom's $0.99/resolution create pressure that could accelerate if those competitors gain enterprise traction. Fourth, the AWU metric introduction suggests Salesforce is still evolving how it measures and potentially charges for agent work. The calibration lesson says adjust upward, which I do relative to the pre-earnings 52% estimate, but the base rate and competitive dynamics cap the upside.

The most important new data point is that ILAs became the #1 product sold in Q4 with 120+ agreements. ILAs are enterprise agreements that bundle subscription + consumption -- they create contractual gravity that resists pricing model changes. When your #1 product is a hybrid agreement, changing the underlying pricing model requires renegotiating your most popular product, which is operationally and legally complex. This is qualitatively different from the pre-earnings situation where only 16 AELAs were signed. Additionally, Miguel Milano's articulation of three clear monetization paths (SKU upgrades, new seats, Flex Credits) at the earnings call suggests this is now the official go-to-market strategy, not an interim arrangement. The remaining 5 months is still meaningful risk, but the contractual and strategic commitment to the current model is much deeper than it was pre-earnings.

Q4 earnings shifted the balance toward pricing stability. Customer base tripled to 22K+, ARR grew 48% QoQ to $800M, and ILAs became the #1 product with 120+ sold. Three monetization paths are working simultaneously. The adoption acceleration reduces pressure for pricing changes -- you don't fix what's working. The narrow resolution criteria (excluding promotions and enterprise-specific deals) continues to structurally favor YES. Historical ~6 month cadence is the main bearish factor, but the current model has more market validation than any previous iteration.

Strong Q4 data supports stability but the base rate cannot be ignored. Previous changes happened at roughly Feb 2024, Aug 2024, May 2025, late 2025 -- that's roughly 6-8 month intervals. We're now in Feb 2026, meaning mid-2026 falls within the historical change window. The current model has the best adoption metrics yet, which argues against change, but Salesforce's AI strategy is aggressive and management has shown willingness to iterate pricing quickly when they see an opportunity to capture more value. The AWU metric could become a new pricing dimension (per-work-unit pricing) though this is speculative. Overall, the Q4 data moves the probability meaningfully higher from the pre-earnings 53%, but the 5-month window and historical pattern keep me from going above mid-60s.

The ILA structure is the key stabilization signal. With 120+ ILAs signed as hybrid subscription+consumption agreements, Salesforce has created contractual commitments that make structural pricing changes much harder to execute. These aren't month-to-month consumption plans -- they're enterprise agreements that likely span 1-3 years. Changing the pricing model would require renegotiating the company's best-selling product. Combined with the narrow resolution criteria that excludes minor adjustments and enterprise-specific deals, the structural barriers to a YES outcome are high. The calibration lesson from sibling markets (ensemble was too bearish on CRM) supports adjusting upward from pre-earnings levels.