Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Jan. 31, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Letters of Credit In conjunction with the execution of certain office space operating leases, letters of credit in the aggregate amount of $5 million and $6 million were issued and outstanding as of January 31, 2026 and January 31, 2025, respectively. No draws have been made under such letters of credit. Legal Matters From time to time in the normal course of business, the Company may be subject to various legal matters such as threatened or pending claims or proceedings. On May 20, 2022, a purported shareholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and certain of its executive officers, captioned In re Okta, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 3:22-cv-02990. The lawsuit asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, alleging that the defendants made false or misleading statements or omissions concerning the Company’s cybersecurity controls, vulnerability to data breaches, and the Company’s integration of Auth0, Inc. (“Auth0”). The lawsuit sought an order certifying the lawsuit as a class action and unspecified damages. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On March 31, 2023, the court dismissed in full the claims based on the plaintiff’s allegations related to the Company’s cybersecurity controls and vulnerability to data breaches, and dismissed in part and denied in part the claims based on allegations related to the Auth0 integration. On May 28, 2024, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement (the “Stipulation”) where, in exchange for the release and dismissal with prejudice of all claims, the Company agreed to pay and/or to cause its insurance carriers to pay a total of $60 million, which is covered through a combination of the Company’s Director & Officer (“D&O”) insurance and the balance of the Company’s $10 million retention on the primary D&O policy. The Stipulation does not constitute an admission of fault or wrongdoing by the Company or its executives. On November 19, 2024, the court granted final approval of the Stipulation and dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety, with prejudice. Additionally, two purported shareholders filed derivative lawsuits on behalf of the Company in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against certain of its current and former executive officers and directors, captioned O’Dell v. McKinnon et al., No. 3:22-cv-07480 (filed Nov. 28, 2022), and LR Trust v. McKinnon et al., No. 3:22-cv-08627 (filed Dec. 13, 2022) (together, the “California Federal Derivative Actions”). The California Federal Derivative Actions allege, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by making false or misleading statements or omissions concerning the Company’s cybersecurity controls, vulnerability to data breaches and the Company’s integration of Auth0. The California Federal Derivative Actions seek orders permitting the plaintiffs to maintain the actions derivatively on behalf of the Company, awarding unspecified damages allegedly sustained by the Company, awarding restitution from the individual defendants, and requiring the Company to make certain reforms to its corporate governance and controls. On February 22, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order consolidating the California Federal Derivative Actions, appointing co-lead counsel for plaintiffs, and staying the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions during the pendency of the motion to dismiss in the securities class action lawsuit. The consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions are captioned In re Okta, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, No. 3:22-cv-07480. On May 9, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order continuing the stay through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit and, on January 27, 2025, the court entered an order continuing the stay. On April 14, 2023, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Buono v. McKinnon et al., No. 1:23-cv-00413 (the “Buono Action”). On May 31, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and stay the Buono Action through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit. On January 25, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Nasr v. McKinnon, et al., No. 1:24-cv-00106 (together with the Buono Action, the “Delaware Federal Derivative Actions”). On March 18, 2024, the court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and stay the derivative action through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit. On July 1, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware (the “Delaware Chancery Court”) against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Grimaldi v. McKinnon, et al., C.A. No. 2024-0685-PAF (the “Grimaldi Action”). On July 19, 2024, the Delaware Chancery Court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and to stay the derivative action through final approval of the settlement in the securities class action lawsuit. On October 18, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the Delaware Chancery Court against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Duprat v. McKinnon, et al., C.A. No. 2024-1072-PAF (the “Duprat Action”). On November 8, 2024, the Delaware Chancery Court entered a stipulated order where the defendants agreed to accept service in the Duprat Action; the Grimaldi Action and the Duprat Action were consolidated (the “Delaware Chancery Actions”); and the Delaware Chancery Actions were stayed pursuant to the terms previously entered in the Grimaldi Action. On January 10, 2025, the Company and defendants agreed in principle to the non-monetary terms of a global resolution of the California Federal Derivative Actions, the Delaware Federal Derivative Actions, and the Delaware Chancery Actions (collectively, the “Derivative Actions”), and executed a Memorandum of Understanding in connection therewith containing the agreed-upon material, non-monetary terms of the proposed settlement. The parties in the Derivative Actions subsequently agreed that the Company would not oppose a fee award to plaintiffs’ counsel of $2.25 million, which the Company, as part of the final settlement documentation, agreed to cause its D&O insurers to pay. The parties in the Derivative Actions executed a Stipulation of Settlement on June 26, 2025, and the plaintiffs in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions filed a motion for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on July 1, 2025. On August 18, 2025, the court in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement. On October 22, 2025, the court in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions granted final approval of the settlement and entered a judgment dismissing the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions with prejudice. On November 24, 2025, the court in the Delaware Federal Derivative Actions entered orders dismissing those actions with prejudice pursuant to the terms of the settlement. On December 1, 2025, the court in the Delaware Chancery Actions entered an order dismissing that consolidated action pursuant to the terms of the settlement. Warranties and Indemnification The Company’s subscription services are generally warranted to perform materially in accordance with the Company’s online help documentation under normal use and circumstances. Additionally, the Company’s arrangements generally include provisions for indemnifying customers against liabilities if its subscription services infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights. Furthermore, the Company may also incur liabilities if it breaches the security or confidentiality obligations in its arrangements. To date, the Company has not incurred significant costs and has not accrued any material liabilities in the accompanying consolidated financial statements as a result of these obligations. The Company has entered into service-level agreements with a majority of its customers defining levels of uptime reliability and performance and permitting certain customers to receive credits for paid amounts related to subscription services when the Company fails to meet the defined levels of uptime. In very limited instances, the Company allows customers to early terminate their agreements in the event that the Company fails to meet those levels as they may constitute a breach of contract. If the customer did terminate, they would receive a refund of prepaid unused subscription fees. To date, the Company has not experienced any significant failures to meet defined levels of uptime reliability and performance as a result of those agreements and, as a result, the Company has not incurred significant costs and has not accrued any material liabilities in the accompanying consolidated financial statements as a result of these warranties. Agreements with customers and other third parties may include indemnification or other provisions under which the Company agrees to indemnify or otherwise be liable to them for losses suffered or incurred as a result of claims of intellectual property infringement, damages caused by us to property or persons, or other liabilities relating to or arising from the use of the Company’s platforms or other acts or omissions. The Company cannot reasonably estimate potential payment obligations as a result of indemnification claims because it cannot predict when and under what circumstances they may be incurred. As a result, no material liabilities have been recognized in the accompanying consolidated financial statements related to these indemnification obligations.

On May 20, 2022, a purported shareholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and certain of its executive officers, captioned In re Okta, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 3:22-cv-02990. The lawsuit asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, alleging that the defendants made false or misleading statements or omissions concerning the Company’s cybersecurity controls, vulnerability to data breaches, and the Company’s integration of Auth0, Inc. (“Auth0”). The lawsuit sought an order certifying the lawsuit as a class action and unspecified damages. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On March 31, 2023, the court dismissed in full the claims based on the plaintiff’s allegations related to the Company’s cybersecurity controls and vulnerability to data breaches, and dismissed in part and denied in part the claims based on allegations related to the Auth0 integration. On May 28, 2024, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement (the “Stipulation”) where, in exchange for the release and dismissal with prejudice of all claims, the Company agreed to pay and/or to cause its insurance carriers to pay a total of $60 million, which is covered through a combination of the Company’s Director & Officer (“D&O”) insurance and the balance of the Company’s $10 million retention on the primary D&O policy. The Stipulation does not constitute an admission of fault or wrongdoing by the Company or its executives. On November 19, 2024, the court granted final approval of the Stipulation and dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety, with prejudice.

Additionally, two purported shareholders filed derivative lawsuits on behalf of the Company in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against certain of its current and former executive officers and directors, captioned O’Dell v. McKinnon et al., No. 3:22-cv-07480 (filed Nov. 28, 2022), and LR Trust v. McKinnon et al., No. 3:22-cv-08627 (filed Dec. 13, 2022) (together, the “California Federal Derivative Actions”). The California Federal Derivative Actions allege, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by making false or misleading statements or omissions concerning the Company’s cybersecurity controls, vulnerability to data breaches and the Company’s integration of Auth0. The California Federal Derivative Actions seek orders permitting the plaintiffs to maintain the actions derivatively on behalf of the Company, awarding unspecified damages allegedly sustained by the Company, awarding restitution from the individual defendants, and requiring the Company to make certain reforms to its corporate governance and controls. On February 22, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order consolidating the California Federal Derivative Actions, appointing co-lead counsel

for plaintiffs, and staying the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions during the pendency of the motion to dismiss in the securities class action lawsuit. The consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions are captioned In re Okta, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, No. 3:22-cv-07480. On May 9, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order continuing the stay through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit and, on January 27, 2025, the court entered an order continuing the stay.

On April 14, 2023, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Buono v. McKinnon et al., No. 1:23-cv-00413 (the “Buono Action”). On May 31, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and stay the Buono Action through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit.

On January 25, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Nasr v. McKinnon, et al., No. 1:24-cv-00106 (together with the Buono Action, the “Delaware Federal Derivative Actions”). On March 18, 2024, the court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and stay the derivative action through the close of discovery in the securities class action lawsuit.

On July 1, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware (the “Delaware Chancery Court”) against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Grimaldi v. McKinnon, et al., C.A. No. 2024-0685-PAF (the “Grimaldi Action”). On July 19, 2024, the Delaware Chancery Court entered a stipulated order whereby the defendants agreed to accept service and to stay the derivative action through final approval of the settlement in the securities class action lawsuit.

On October 18, 2024, another shareholder filed a substantially similar derivative lawsuit in the Delaware Chancery Court against certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, captioned Duprat v. McKinnon, et al., C.A. No. 2024-1072-PAF (the “Duprat Action”). On November 8, 2024, the Delaware Chancery Court entered a stipulated order where the defendants agreed to accept service in the Duprat Action; the Grimaldi Action and the Duprat Action were consolidated (the “Delaware Chancery Actions”); and the Delaware Chancery Actions were stayed pursuant to the terms previously entered in the Grimaldi Action.

On January 10, 2025, the Company and defendants agreed in principle to the non-monetary terms of a global resolution of the California Federal Derivative Actions, the Delaware Federal Derivative Actions, and the Delaware Chancery Actions (collectively, the “Derivative Actions”), and executed a Memorandum of Understanding in connection therewith containing the agreed-upon material, non-monetary terms of the proposed settlement. The parties in the Derivative Actions subsequently agreed that the Company would not oppose a fee award to plaintiffs’ counsel of $2.25 million, which the Company, as part of the final settlement documentation, agreed to cause its D&O insurers to pay. The parties in the Derivative Actions executed a Stipulation of Settlement on June 26, 2025, and the plaintiffs in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions filed a motion for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on July 1, 2025. On August 18, 2025, the court in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement. On October 22, 2025, the court in the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions granted final approval of the settlement and entered a judgment dismissing the consolidated California Federal Derivative Actions with prejudice. On November 24, 2025, the court in the Delaware Federal Derivative Actions entered orders dismissing those actions with prejudice pursuant to the terms of the settlement. On December 1, 2025, the court in the Delaware Chancery Actions entered an order dismissing that consolidated action pursuant to the terms of the settlement.

The Company’s subscription services are generally warranted to perform materially in accordance with the Company’s online help documentation under normal use and circumstances. Additionally, the Company’s arrangements generally include provisions for indemnifying customers against liabilities if its subscription services infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights. Furthermore, the Company may also incur liabilities if it breaches the security or confidentiality obligations in its arrangements. To date, the Company has not incurred significant costs and has not accrued any material liabilities in the accompanying consolidated financial statements as a result of these obligations.

The Company has entered into service-level agreements with a majority of its customers defining levels of uptime reliability and performance and permitting certain customers to receive credits for paid amounts related to subscription services when the Company fails to meet the defined levels of uptime. In very limited instances, the Company allows customers to early terminate their agreements in the event that the Company fails to meet those levels as they may constitute a breach of contract. If the customer did terminate, they would receive a refund of prepaid unused subscription fees. To date, the Company has not experienced any significant failures to meet defined levels of uptime reliability and performance as a result of those agreements and, as a result, the Company has not incurred significant costs and has not accrued any material liabilities in the accompanying consolidated financial statements as a result of these warranties.

Agreements with customers and other third parties may include indemnification or other provisions under which the Company agrees to indemnify or otherwise be liable to them for losses suffered or incurred as a result of claims of intellectual property infringement, damages caused by us to property or persons, or other liabilities relating to or arising from the use of the Company’s platforms or other acts or omissions. The Company cannot reasonably estimate potential payment obligations as a result of indemnification claims because it cannot predict when and under what circumstances they may be incurred. As a result, no material liabilities have been recognized in the accompanying consolidated financial statements related to these indemnification obligations.