From the field to the market: sports brands torn between premium and structural crisis

Jannik Sinner against Alexander Zverev and against Matteo Berrettini. Or in basketball LeBron James against James Harden and against LaMelo Ball. Or in football, Cristiano Ronaldo against Lionel Messi and against Neymar Jr. Sports brands have always challenged each other for sponsorship, starting with Nike, Adidas and Puma, who in each sport have tried to secure a champion in order to gain market shares worth millions of dollars. In recent years, however, these brands have in turn had to face periods of rationalisation and relaunch in a not always easy context of consumer trends. The global sportswear sector today continues to show a growing polarisation between high-margin premium players and incumbent players struggling with growth and profitability pressures. The latest available quarterly figures show an increasingly marked gap in operating fundamentals.

The direct-to-consumer and premium models continue to lead the segment. Lululemon Athletica ended the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2025 (ending January 2026) with revenues of around USD 3.2 billion, up 12%, and an operating profit of around USD 700 million, confirming margins that are among the highest in the industry. Solid performance also for the Chinese Anta Sports Products, which last January bought 29.06% of Puma from the French holding Artémis, controlled by the Pinault family, in a EUR 1.5 billion (EUR 35 per share) deal. The group, which also has Salomon, Arc'teryx, Fila and Wilsonche in its portfolio, reported revenues of around USD 8.7 billion in the financial year 2025, up by 10%, and an operating profit of more than USD 1.7 billion, supported by the contribution of premium brands. This trend continued in the first months of the current year. Also accelerating strongly was Asics, which reported first quarter 2026 revenues of around $25.2 billion, up 9%, and operating profit up significantly over $2.8 billion, driven by the high-performance running segment.

In the middle group of the market are players in transition, who are trying to overcome difficulties with inventories and lacklustre sales. The German Adidas ended the quarter with revenues of about EUR 5.5 billion and an operating profit in the range of EUR 300 million, which improved due to the reduction of promotions and the normalisation of inventories. More complex is the situation of Nike, which in the third quarter of the current financial year (ending February 2026) reported revenues of around USD 12.4 billion and an operating profit of around USD 1.2 billion, declining year-on-year due to promotional pressure. JD Sports Fashion also showed moderate growth, with full-year 2025 revenues at £10.5 billion and operating profit in the region of £1.1 billion, but with margins under pressure in the retail channel.

On the opposite side, the more distressed players emerge. Puma ended Q1 2026 with revenues of around EUR 2.1 billion and an operating profit limited to EUR 60 million, reflecting compressed margins. Under Armour ended Q4 2025 with revenues of around USD 1.3 billion and an operating profit of only EUR 100 million, despite progress on the cost front. Finally, VF Corporation counted third-quarter 2026 (ending December 2025) revenues of about USD 3.0 billion and operating profit of about USD 300 million, penalised by the weakness of the Vans brand and a difficult demand environment.

Overall, the competitive framework of the sector today appears to be defined more by business model than by size scale: groups focused on direct channels and premium positioning continue to show greater resilience and ability to generate high margins, while operators more exposed to wholesale and promotional dynamics are more vulnerable to pricing and demand pressures.