U.S. News & 360 Reviews sue Compare Pet Insurance Services
Lawsuit filed on May 9, 2025, in New York Supreme Court accuses Compare Pet Insurance Services and its CEO, Alex Stone, of launching a “malicious campaign of threats and intimidation” to harm the business and reputation of 360 Reviews and U.S. News & World Report in the pet insurance aggregator market.
Compare Pet Insurance Services operates as Petted, which was acquired by Wag! in Q3 2021. Wag , known for its dog-walking app and ongoing financial struggles, went public in August 2022—where a $10 investment is now worth about 25 cents. In Q1 2025, the company brought in $15.2 million in revenue, with over 60% ($9.2M) from its Wellness segment, which includes Petted.com. That makes insurance and wellness its top revenue source, ahead of services ($4.9M) and pet food ($1.1M).
U.S. News, via its 360 Reviews unit, has published personal finance content like pet insurance comparisons. Since 2021, it partnered with Compare Pet, which operates petinsurer.com. They signed a non-exclusive agreement on December 30, 2023, allowing 360 Reviews to also work with other aggregators. The deal lasted through 2024 and wasn’t renewed. At the moment, the 360 Reviews site is powered by Fletch, an embedded insurance platform that also powers Insurify’s pet insurance comparisons.
In April 2025, Compare Pet learned that 360 Reviews had started sending customers to another aggregator. While the agreement allowed this, Compare Pet and its founder, Alex Stone, allegedly responded by pressuring insurers not to work with 360 Reviews or Fletch, threatening to pull business from other major websites.
Plaintiffs claim that some insurers have already ended partnerships with them because of the defendants’ actions, causing harm and risk of more damage. They say the defendants refused to back down or fix the situation.
Compare Pet and Alex Stone have moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing it lacks specific allegations of criminal or wrongful conduct—such as fraud or economic coercion—required for a tortious interference claim. They also say the claims are vague, with no named lost deals, and that punitive damages aren’t warranted in a typical business dispute. They’ve also asked the court to seal Exhibit B, the “Insertion Order” agreement with 360 Reviews, citing confidential business terms like pricing and IP usage. “Moreover, the Insertion Order should be sealed because it contains highly sensitive pricing information, the disclosure of which would place the parties at a competitive disadvantage when negotiating with prospective future business partners, as those partners could use their knowledge of prior pricing arrangements as leverage. The Insertion Order also contains non-public information regarding the scope of the parties’ business arrangement, including the scope of use of the parties’ respective intellectual property. For these reasons, good cause exists to seal the Insertion Order.”
The lawsuit is ongoing, with 360 Reviews and U.S. News & World Report seeking $20 million in compensatory damages.
Bottom Line: If two words stand out—aside from the sealed Exhibit B—they’re “limited budgets,” as noted in the defendants’ response. All in all, not a signal of strength for the aggregator pet insurance business. The ultimate two words? $20 million—but that’s still up in the air.
