Footwear Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 21

←→Full screen

CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY › CONSUMER DURABLES AND APPAREL › FOOTWEAR

Footwear: The Premium Sits with Profitable Growth

How the listed footwear set is priced on forward earnings, what separates the two ends of the range, and what the transaction record shows buyers have paid for brands.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 21 · CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY › CONSUMER DURABLES AND APPAREL › FOOTWEAR

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY › CONSUMER DURABLES AND APPAREL › FOOTWEAR

   This is the cover page for NeuraCap's September 2026 footwear sector outlook.

   We built this report to show how the listed footwear sector prices growth and margin as of September 2026. Over the sections that follow, we walk through the market map, valuation drivers and the precedent transaction record that frame where the multiple sits today.

   Everything on this page

   CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY › CONSUMER DURABLES AND APPAREL › FOOTWEAR Footwear: The Premium Sits with Profitable Growth How the listed footwear set is priced on forward earnings, what separates the two ends of the range, and what the transaction record shows buyers have paid for brands. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   This slide lists the report's five sections plus the appendix.

   We've structured this report so section one carries the full story — a reader who stops there still leaves with the whole argument. The sections that follow build the evidence: the landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions, and strategic implications. Use the contents to jump straight to what matters most to you.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line The Whole Story of Footwear Pricing on One Page 02 The Landscape Four Business Models Sit Under the Footwear Label 03 Valuation & Situations The Range Runs Wide on CY2027E Earnings 04 Precedent Transactions Precedent Transactions Have Cleared the Public Range 05 Strategic Implications What Moves a Footwear Multiple from Here 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Footwear Is Four Businesses Under One Label, and Branded Wholesale Holds Most of the Weight

   This slide summarizes the deck's central finding: footwear splits into four business models priced apart on forward earnings, with branded wholesale carrying the most weight.

   We find that nine of the eleven footwear names carry a forward EBITDA estimate, and this group spans from 6.8x at the bottom of the range to 9.3x at the top against a sector median of 7.6x. Branded wholesale accounts for 55% of the set and prices at 8.2x, above the median, which tells us the market rewards brand ownership over retail distribution. The faster-growing half of the rated names holds a higher multiple — 8.8x versus 7.3x for the slower half — so growth already visible in the estimates is showing up in the price. Precedent buyers have agreed to pay above this range for the trademark itself, with one disclosed deal at 10.9x, which points toward licence architecture as a driver of value beyond the public market's own bar.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Footwear Is Four Businesses Under One Label, and Branded Wholesale Holds Most of the Weight The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (9 of 11 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 Valuation Tracks Earnings Across This Set, and the Range Is Wide 9 of the 11 names carry a forward EBITDA estimate, and the middle of that group sits at 7.6x on CY2027E. The top of the range sits at 9.3x against 6.8x at the bottom, a gap wide enough to matter in any financing or ownership conversation. 2 The Faster-Growing Names Hold the Higher Multiple Split the 9 names with a forward EBITDA estimate at the middle of revenue growth and the faster 5 sit at 8.8x against 7.3x for the slower 4. A forward multiple already credits the growth in the estimates, so a premium that survives it reads as durability rather than one strong season. 3 Branded Wholesale Is the Pool Buyers Fish In Branded footwear and accessories wholesale covers 6 of the 11 names, 55% of the set, and that group sits at 8.2x — above the middle of the range. Footwear retail chains and multi-brand houses sit below it, so brand ownership and retail distribution of the same pair of shoes are priced differently across this set. 4 Buyers Have Agreed Prices Above the Public Range in Deals That Carry the Trademark Authentic Brands Group LLC agreed to acquire Guess?, Inc. in Aug-2025 at 10.9x EBITDA, above where this set trades on forward earnings. The agreed price suggests brand-management buyers are valuing the trademark and the royalty stream, which points to licence architecture and full-price selling discipline as what shows up in the number. 7.6x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 9 rated of 11 companies 9.3x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 6.8x at the discount end top quartile (n=3) against bottom quartile (n=3) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 7 Transactions with disclosed terms 26 recorded in this tier · 2 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   This is a section divider introducing the market map and landscape of footwear business models.

   Four business models sit under the footwear label, and this section shows who does what and where each group is priced.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Four Business Models Sit Under the Footwear Label Who does what, and where each group is priced. 02 of 06 Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Branded Wholesale Holds Most of the Names and Prices Above the Middle

   This slide maps 11 approved companies into business segments and shows the median EV/EBITDA per group as of September 2026.

   We group the approved universe into business segments and find branded wholesale holds the most names, pricing at 8.2x against a sector median of 7.6x. This tells us that where a company sits in the value chain — owning the brand versus operating the stores — is already priced into the multiple. Retail-facing segments sit below that line, which is a useful anchor before we get into what drives the spread name by name.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Branded Wholesale Holds Most of the Names and Prices Above the Middle 11 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 BRANDED FOOTWEAR AND ACCESSORIES WHOLESALE 6 cos median 8.2x NKE DECK ONON CROX BIRK WWW The core of the sector: own-brand economics, futures order book visibility and distribution segmentation, and where most of the set sits. FOOTWEAR RETAIL CHAINS AND DOOR-LEVEL DISTRIBUTION 2 cos median 7.4x CAL GCO Door-level operators whose value rests on productivity, full-price sell-through and inventory turns rather than owned brand heat. MULTI-BRAND FOOTWEAR AND APPAREL HOUSES 2 cos median 7.8x VFC PVH Portfolio owners that buy category gaps and sell non-core brands as focus tightens, making them a recurring source of assets. LUXURY FOOTWEAR AND LEATHER GOODS HOUSES 1 cos no rated names LANV Heritage and atelier-led makers, where craft, last-making and trademark provenance are the assets luxury and family groups buy.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Four Business Models Sit Under the Footwear Label, at Different Multiples

   This slide compares the four footwear business models on their median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E).

   Branded wholesale, footwear retail chains, multi-brand apparel houses and luxury leather goods makers each carry a distinct median multiple on forward earnings. Branded wholesale sits at 8.2x, above the sector median of 7.6x, while the other groups price below it. This spread confirms the business model itself — not just company-specific execution — is a meaningful part of how the market prices footwear today, which sets up the company-level detail in the sections that follow.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Four Business Models Sit Under the Footwear Label, at Different Multiples Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Branded footwear and accessories wholesale 6 55% 8.2x NIKE, Inc. (NKE) · Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) · +4 more The core of the set. 6 of the 11 names sit here, 55% of the set, including NIKE, Inc. (NKE), On Holding AG (ONON) and Birkenstock Holding plc (BIRK). Buyers underwrite own-brand pricing, the futures order book and how tightly distribution is segmented across doors. Footwear retail chains and door-level distribution 2 18% 7.4x Caleres, Inc. (CAL) · Genesco Inc. (GCO) Doors rather than brands. Caleres, Inc. (CAL) and Genesco Inc. (GCO) sit here, with a median of 7.4x. Value rests on door productivity, full-price sell-through and inventory discipline rather than owned brand heat, and the market prices that closer to the bottom of the range. Multi-brand footwear and apparel houses 2 18% 7.8x V.F. Corporation (VFC) · PVH Corp. (PVH) Portfolios and carve-out supply. V.F. Corporation (VFC) and PVH Corp. (PVH) sit here, with a median of 7.8x. Portfolio houses are persistent sellers of non-core brands as focus tightens, which keeps this group a recurring source of assets for the rest of the sector. Luxury footwear and leather goods houses 1 9% — Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV) Craft and provenance. Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV) is the single name in this group and is shown without a multiple. Value in this corner rests on heritage, last-making craft and trademark provenance — the assets European luxury and family-controlled groups have historically bought.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   This is a section divider introducing the range of valuations across CY2027E earnings.

   The range runs wide on CY2027E earnings, and this section shows where each name sits and what separates the top of the range from the bottom.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Range Runs Wide on CY2027E Earnings Where each name sits, and what separates the top from the bottom. 03 of 06 Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   The Top of the Range Holds Its Premium Even on Forward Earnings

   This slide ranks all nine rated companies by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against a sector median of 7.6x.

   Sorting the nine rated companies by forward multiple shows a range running from 9.3x at the top to 6.8x at the bottom, against a sector median of 7.6x. The top of the range holds its premium even on an earnings basis that already credits forward growth, which tells us the premium is not simply a function of near-term estimates. That durability is what we probe next, by testing whether growth and margin explain where a name sits in the range.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Top of the Range Holds Its Premium Even on Forward Earnings EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 9 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 7.6x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (9 of 11 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 9.3x CORE · median 7.6x DISCOUNT · median 6.8x Sector median 7.6x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top holds 9.3x. The three names at the top of the range sit at 9.3x on CY2027E EBITDA against 6.8x for the three at the bottom. The lens is forward, so the estimates already credit expected growth; a premium that survives that test reads as durability rather than one good season. High margin sits at both ends. Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) carries a 23% EBITDA margin with 8% revenue growth and still sits at the bottom of the range, while Caleres, Inc. (CAL) sits there on a 5% margin. Profitability is associated with the multiple across the set, but the bottom of the range holds both kinds of business. Brand mix travels with the premium. Two of the three names at the top come from branded footwear and accessories wholesale, where own-brand pricing and distribution segmentation are underwritten directly. The third, V.F. Corporation (VFC), is a multi-brand house with a portfolio a buyer can re-cut.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   The Faster-Growing Half of the Set Holds the Higher Multiple

   This slide splits rated names into growth and margin cohorts and compares their median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E).

   Splitting the rated names at the covered median for revenue growth, the faster-growing half holds 8.8x against 7.3x for the slower half. We see a similar pattern on margin, where the higher-margin cohort carries the stronger multiple. These are associations in the data we've been given, not a claim that growth or margin causes the premium — but the pattern is consistent enough to inform how we frame the situation map next.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS The Faster-Growing Half of the Set Holds the Higher Multiple Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=5; slower n=4; higher-margin n=5; lower-margin n=4). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 2% · EBITDA-margin split at 11% Growth Above 2% Travels with a Higher Multiple Splitting the 9 names with a forward EBITDA estimate at 2% revenue growth, the faster 5 sit at 8.8x and the slower 4 at 7.3x. That is an association, not proof of cause — cohort composition, scale and differences in estimate coverage could explain part of it. Margin on Its Own Does Not Line up as Cleanly Crocs, Inc. (CROX) runs a 25% EBITDA margin and Birkenstock Holding plc (BIRK) a 30% margin, and neither sits at the top of the range on the lens; BIRK is shown without a forward EBITDA estimate. Across this set, high profitability alone is not matched by a higher multiple. Buyers Test Whether Growth Is Full-Price or Sell-in On Holding AG (ONON) pairs 18% revenue growth with a 20% EBITDA margin, the kind of combination the premium end of the range has carried. In diligence the question is where that growth sits: full-price DTC and replenishment, or sell-in and off-price absorption. The two carry different margin durability. Franchise Concentration Is the Next Thing Tested Revenue resting on one silhouette tends to be read as cycle risk; carry-over economics on a lead product franchise are read as a platform. This screen does not measure that split, so it is the first question a buyer asks about any name near the top of the range.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Four Names Hold Both the Premium and the Pace; Three Sit Below on Both

    This slide places rated names on a grid of EV/EBITDA versus revenue growth, both cut at their respective medians.

    Cutting the rated set on the sector median multiple of 7.6x and the covered median growth rate of 2%, four names hold both the premium and the pace, while three sit below the median on both measures. This is an observation about where each name currently sits, not a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The split gives us a clean starting point for asking what separates the two groups operationally.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Four Names Hold Both the Premium and the Pace; Three Sit Below on Both Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (7.6x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (2%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Premium and Pace Together Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 4 names NIKE, Inc. (NKE) · V.F. Corporation (VFC) · On Holding AG (ONON) · +1 more NIKE, Inc. (NKE), V.F. Corporation (VFC), On Holding AG (ONON) and Wolverine World Wide, Inc. (WWW) sit above the middle of the set on both the lens and revenue growth. The work here is showing that heat behaves like a platform with carry-over economics, since the multiple already assumes it holds. Premium Without the Pace Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 1 names Genesco Inc. (GCO) Genesco Inc. (GCO) holds an above-middle multiple with growth below the middle of the set. That combination usually rests on door productivity and inventory discipline, and it is a position exposed to a soft season at key accounts. Pace Without the Premium Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 1 names Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) sits below the middle of the set on the lens at 6.5x while growing faster than the middle. That pattern is consistent with the market pricing some reversion into the forecast, so evidence on full-price sell-through and pipeline depth beyond the lead franchise is what narrows the gap. Below the Middle on Both Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 3 names Crocs, Inc. (CROX) · PVH Corp. (PVH) · Caleres, Inc. (CAL) Crocs, Inc. (CROX), PVH Corp. (PVH) and Caleres, Inc. (CAL) sit below the middle of the set on both measures. Crocs, Inc. (CROX) carries strong profitability within that group, so the question there is growth quality; for the other two the near-term lever reads as mix and cost rather than a demand recovery.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Three of the Nine Rated Names Clear Both the Growth and Margin Bars

    This slide plots nine rated companies on revenue growth versus EBITDA margin, split into quadrants with median EV/EBITDA per quadrant.

    Cutting the nine rated names at the covered medians of 2% growth and 11% margin, three names clear both bars and sit in the balanced quadrant. That balanced group is where the strongest median multiple concentrates, which reinforces the pattern we saw on the ranked list and the growth-cohort split. It's a consistent, not a proven causal, pattern across three separate cuts of the same data.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Three of the Nine Rated Names Clear Both the Growth and Margin Bars Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2026E, y-axis) · 9 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (2% growth, 11% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=3; margin-only n=2; growth-only n=2; neither n=2). Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 5% 10% 15% 10% 20% MARGIN ONLY median 7.1x BALANCED median 8.2x NEITHER median 7.4x GROWTH ONLY median 11.0x CAL GCO PVH CROX NKE VFC WWW DECK ONON x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2026E) HOW TO READ THIS Read it as two bars: revenue growth above 2% on one axis and an EBITDA margin above 11% on the other. The 3 names clearing both — Wolverine World Wide, Inc. (WWW), Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) and On Holding AG (ONON) — sit at 8.2x. The 2 names clearing growth alone sit at 11.0x, the 2 clearing margin alone at 7.1x, and the 2 clearing neither at 7.4x. Each cell rests on two or three names, so treat the pattern as a direction rather than a rule. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 0 of 9 names clear it.

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Where a Footwear Owner Can Move the Multiple from Here

    This slide frames the operating questions a footwear owner can use to move the multiple from here.

    Having seen where the premium sits, we turn this into a set of questions an owner or acquirer should resolve — on mix, category strategy, distribution and licence architecture. These are NeuraCap's directional views grounded in the cohort data shown earlier, not recommendations to transact. They're the practical agenda for the next planning cycle.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Where a Footwear Owner Can Move the Multiple from Here NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Push Mix Toward Full-Price Selling Across this set the names above the middle of the range pair growth with margin. Full-price sell-through, a disciplined markdown cadence and contained off-price participation are the levers that show up in an earnings multiple rather than in a single season's revenue. What changes the answer: Off-price participation rising while the futures order book is flat. Settle Build-Versus-Buy on the Second Franchise Buyers test how much of a brand rests on one silhouette. Category extension into apparel and accessories, or acquiring a second franchise, is the choice — and the transaction record shows brand houses paying above the public middle of the range to fill a category gap. What changes the answer: The lead product franchise taking a rising share of revenue season over season. Weigh International Whitespace Against More Doors at Home Distribution segmentation protects positioning, and adding doors in a mature market is the shorter route to markdown pressure. International expansion with a credible local go-to-market can carry the same revenue at less cost to brand position. What changes the answer: Door growth running ahead of sell-through at existing accounts. Put Trademark and Licence Architecture in Order Registrations by territory and category, counterfeiting exposure, and the renewal and change-of-control terms in inbound and outbound licences frequently shape deal structure in footwear. Where a licensing platform is the buyer, that architecture is the asset being priced. What changes the answer: A licence renewal or consent landing inside the next planning cycle.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    This is a section divider introducing the precedent transaction record.

    Precedent transactions have cleared the public range, and this section walks through the seven transactions in the record, five of which carry a disclosed EBITDA multiple.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Precedent Transactions Have Cleared the Public Range Seven transactions in the record, five with a disclosed EBITDA multiple. 04 of 06 Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Footwear Brands, Against What the Public Set Trades At

    This slide compares two disclosed precedent transactions against where the public set trades today.

    Of the seven transactions in the record, two carry fully disclosed terms that we walk through as case studies, including Authentic Brands Group LLC's agreement to acquire Guess?, Inc. at 10.9x EBITDA. That price sits above where the public set trades on forward earnings, which suggests brand-management buyers are pricing the trademark and royalty stream rather than the operating business alone. The remaining transactions without disclosed value or multiple sit in the companion workbook, so this page focuses on the deals we can compare cleanly.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Footwear Brands, Against What the Public Set Trades At 2 of 7 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 19 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Aug-2025 $2.3B Authentic Brands Group LLC Authentic Brands Group LLC agreed to buy Guess?, Inc. — a trademark bought rather than an operating business. EV / LTM revenue 0.7x EV / LTM EBITDA 10.9x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Authentic Brands Group LLC is a brand-management and licensing platform, and Guess?, Inc. brings a global trademark with an established wholesale and licence footprint. The transaction suggests the buyer was pricing the royalty stream and the licence architecture rather than the day-to-day design, sourcing and distribution operation. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The deal is recorded at $2.3B enterprise value, 0.7x revenue and 10.9x EBITDA, announced in Aug-2025. That earnings multiple sits above where this set trades on CY2027E EBITDA, which is the kind of number a licensing model can underwrite when the trademark carries the value. Sep-2022 $270M Oxford Industries, Inc. Oxford Industries, Inc. moved for JW Holdings, LLC in a bolt-on portfolio addition. EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Oxford Industries, Inc. runs a multi-brand apparel portfolio, and JW Holdings, LLC is the kind of smaller label such platforms add to fill a category gap or reach a consumer group they do not serve organically. The scale of the transaction suggests a bolt-on that can be run through an existing sourcing and distribution base. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The transaction is recorded at $270M of enterprise value in Sep-2022, the smaller of the two disclosed values in this record. At that size a buyer is pricing a brand it can fold into infrastructure it already owns.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    This is a section divider introducing the strategic implications of current pricing.

    What moves a footwear multiple from here is an operating agenda, and this section sets out what this pricing asks of an owner over the next twelve months.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What Moves a Footwear Multiple from Here The operating agenda sitting behind the pricing. 05 of 06 Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    What This Pricing Asks of a Footwear Owner

    This slide sets out what today's pricing asks of footwear owners, boards and acquirers.

    For owners, the growth the estimates can already see is priced in, so holding a premium rests on the durability of the lead franchise and clean inventory. For boards, four of the nine rated names sit above the median on both the multiple and growth, and three sit below on both — the first job is agreeing honestly which group describes the business. For acquirers, the transaction record has cleared the public range, with carve-outs from multi-brand houses a recurring source of assets. These are NeuraCap's directional views, not recommendations to transact.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What This Pricing Asks of a Footwear Owner NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS The Growth the Estimates Can See Is Already in the Price The names above the middle of the set on the lens are also above it on revenue growth, and the lens is forward. Holding a premium from here rests on the durability of the lead product franchise and clean, full-price inventory rather than on the next quarter's sell-in. FOR BOARDS Agree Honestly Which Half of the Market the Company Sits In Four of the 9 names with a forward EBITDA estimate sit above the middle on both the lens and growth, and 3 sit below on both. The operating agenda differs sharply between those two positions, and the first job is settling which one describes the business. FOR ACQUIRERS The Transaction Record Has Cleared the Public Range Four of the 5 transactions with a disclosed EBITDA multiple sit above where this set trades on CY2027E earnings. Carve-outs from multi-brand houses remain a recurring source of assets, and transition services covering shared distribution, sourcing offices and systems are the practical gate.

17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    This is a section divider introducing the full comparables universe, methodology and sources.

    This final section carries the comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This appendix lists all rated and unrated public comparables on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E).

    This table carries all nine rated companies plus the two names without an eligible multiple, each linked back to its underlying source. Shading marks names above or below the sector median of 7.6x, so the tier structure used throughout the deck is fully traceable here. Use this page, alongside the companion workbook, as the reference for any figure a client wants to check.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (7.6x); amber marks below · 9 rated companies; 2 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 9 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥8.8x · median 9.3x · 3 companies NIKE, Inc. NKE Branded footwear and accessories wholesale $57.0B 13.2x 2% 8% 12 Wolverine World Wide, Inc. WWW Branded footwear and accessories wholesale $2.3B 9.3x 6% 11% 17 V.F. Corporation VFC Multi-brand footwear and apparel houses $9.8B 8.8x 4% 10% 15 CORE — 7.3x–8.8x · median 7.6x · 3 companies On Holding AG ONON Branded footwear and accessories wholesale $8.4B 8.2x 18% 20% 39 Genesco Inc. GCO Footwear retail chains and door-level distribution $796M 7.6x 1% 4% 5 Crocs, Inc. CROX Branded footwear and accessories wholesale $7.8B 7.4x 2% 25% 28 DISCOUNT — <7.3x · median 6.8x · 3 companies Caleres, Inc. CAL Footwear retail chains and door-level distribution $1.3B 7.3x -3% 5% 4 PVH Corp. PVH Multi-brand footwear and apparel houses $7.1B 6.8x 1% 12% 13 Deckers Outdoor Corporation DECK Branded footwear and accessories wholesale $9.4B 6.5x 8% 23% 31

19. 19
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This appendix lists all seven precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    This table carries the seven transactions with disclosed terms out of the fuller recorded set, each with its LTM multiple at announcement where disclosed. These multiples sit on a different basis than the CY2027E public comparison used elsewhere in the deck, so we don't claim a direct spread between the two. Transactions without a disclosed value or multiple are held in the companion workbook rather than listed here.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 7 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (26 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; no evidence record); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 19 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Aug-2025 Authentic Brands Group LLC → Guess?, Inc. $2.3B 0.7x 10.9x Authentic Brands Group LLC agreed to acquire Guess?, Inc. in Aug-2025, recorded as announced. Brand-management and licensing platforms buy the trademark and outsource design, sourcing and distribution — a different underwriting from an operating brand house. Feb-2025 Kontoor Brands, Inc. → CTC Triangle B.V. n/a n/a 16.8x Kontoor Brands, Inc. completed the purchase of CTC Triangle B.V. in Feb-2025 at 16.8x EBITDA. Value is shown as recorded in the filing with the unit unresolved, so read the multiple as the anchor rather than the headline size. Sep-2022 Oxford Industries, Inc. → JW Holdings, LLC $270M n/a n/a Oxford Industries, Inc. and JW Holdings, LLC, recorded Sep-2022 and shown as pending. A multi-brand apparel platform adding a smaller label is the category-gap move that keeps bolt-on supply circulating in this sector. Dec-2019 Aleris Corporation → Alberto Gozzi S.r.L. n/a n/a 7.2x Aleris Corporation and Alberto Gozzi S.r.L., announced Dec-2019 at 7.2x EBITDA. That sits close to where the public set trades on forward earnings today, a reminder that not every transaction in this record has cleared a premium. Jan-2015 Tapestry, Inc. → Stuart Weitzman Inc. n/a n/a 11.2x Tapestry, Inc. announced the acquisition of Stuart Weitzman Inc. in Jan-2015 at 11.2x EBITDA. Heritage and atelier-led footwear makers are bought for craft, last-making and trademark provenance, and that has been paid for above the public middle of the range. Jun-2011 V.F. Corporation → The Timberland Company n/a 12.9x 12.9x V.F. Corporation announced the acquisition of The Timberland Company in Jun-2011 at 12.9x EBITDA. It is one precedent in this record for a brand house paying outright for an outdoor franchise and a consumer cohort it could not reach organically. n/a n/a → PVH Corp. n/a 1.1x n/a PVH Corp. appears in the transaction record at 1.1x revenue, shown as recorded in the filing. On a revenue basis that is a modest reference point for a multi-brand house, consistent with where that group sits on forward earnings in this set.

20. 20
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    This slide explains the report's sources, valuation basis and data-quality treatment.

    Every figure in this report links back to the record it was taken from, and where no link exists, the appendix names the source and the basis on which it was read. This is where we set out what was included, what was excluded on plausibility grounds, and how a reader can trace any number in the deck. It's the page to return to if a specific figure needs verifying.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 20 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (9 of 11 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Footwear and it clears the coverage gate with 9 of 11 companies (82%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 9 of the 9 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 6 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 558 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (557) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

21. 21

    Across This Set, the Premium Has Sat with the Names Pairing Growth and Margin.

    This closing slide restates that the premium has sat with names pairing growth and margin.

    Across this set, the premium has sat with the names pairing growth and margin. That pattern holds across the ranked list, the growth-cohort split and the quadrant view, which is why we lead with it. The companion tables beside this deck carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure you'd like to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    Across This Set, the Premium Has Sat with the Names Pairing Growth and Margin. NeuraCap AI — Footwear Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Footwear Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21

More coverage in Consumer Discretionary

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Footwear Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Luxury Goods and Jewelry Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Leisure Facilities and Recreation Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Leisure Facilities and Recreation Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026