BofA names Figma the stronger AI design-tools bet, cuts Adobe to Underperform

Bank of America Securities analyst Tal Llani has shifted his expectations for the software market’s AI-driven design tools, arguing that Figma is positioned better than Adobe for the next wave of product-creation workflows. In a note highlighted by Yahoo Finance, Llani rated Figma a Buy and set a $30 price target, while assigning Adobe an Underperform rating with a $190 price target.

The core of the comparison is not simply that both companies are working AI into their offerings, but that the market opportunity for AI-linked design productivity may be different for each. Llani’s framing suggests Figma’s platform approach to design collaboration and product-team workflows offers a clearer pathway to monetizing AI features than Adobe’s broader creative-software footprint.

The ratings also land in a backdrop where investors continue to weigh how replaceable or expandable modern design workflows are. Figma’s model centers on shared, web-based collaboration that product teams use across the lifecycle of digital products, while Adobe has historically been associated with creative content tools used by a wider set of users, from design to marketing production.

The analyst’s view comes as Adobe and Figma have remained linked by an attempted acquisition from Adobe’s side. As discussed in a separate Yahoo Finance piece, Adobe tried to buy Figma in an approximately $20 billion deal, which ultimately did not go through. That earlier attempt has become a reference point for investors trying to understand whether Figma’s workflow momentum can be captured by larger incumbents or whether it remains largely its own ecosystem.

Beyond the analyst ratings, the market is also watching how quickly companies in this space can turn AI features into durable customer value. In general, design-tool AI has a familiar challenge: it can improve output, but customers still need confidence that the tools reduce time and rework rather than creating new formats or workflows they must retrain on.

For Adobe, the Underperform call implies the bank believes investors’ expectations are harder to satisfy than with Figma, whether due to competitive pressure, product mix, or the timing and magnitude of monetization from AI capabilities. For Figma, a Buy rating and a higher target announcement the opposite view, namely that the company’s customer base and product strategy may be closer to a scalable AI-driven growth engine.

Still, neither the Yahoo Finance highlight nor the additional research snippets provide full detail on the specific financial assumptions behind the two price targets. The post referenced the ratings and targets but did not lay out, in the available text, the precise operating metrics Llani relied on, such as revenue growth drivers, subscription dynamics, or the expected adoption timeline for AI features.