Wall Street is keeping tabs on Under Armour Inc.’s bottom line, and so far it likes the direction the company is headed.
Under Armour’s decision to part with Stephen Curry is part of a restructuring plan that will see the apparel and shoe firm focus on its own UA brand.
When Under Armour reported second quarter results for the period ended Sept. 30 — a net loss of $18.8 million on revenue of $1.33 billion — a week ago, Williams Trading analyst Sam Poser said second quarter results and its earnings call show that the company “is on the right track.”
“Our propietary checks with retailers match what [Under Armour] management says about its business. We continue to believe that the more cautious stance taken by retailers as tariffs loomed, will serve the Under Armour brand well in the long run,” Poser concluded.
And the Williams Trading analyst said his retail checks indicate that consumers, particularly young consumers, have begun to “gravitate to the Under Armour brand.” What the company is lacking at the moment is innovative marketing.
So why end the Stephen Curry partnership now?
“The announcement comes as a surprise following mixed second-quarter results, yet we are encouraged, overall, by the company’s action in getting ahead of future headwinds,” noted William Blair analyst Dylan Carden. “The decision to part ways with the Curry brand sits in line with management’s stated goal to elevate [Under Armour] with a tighter assortment of goods sold at full price and with better storytelling to regain customer engagement and brand identity.”
Under Armour and the basketball star are set to part ways in 2026 as part of a move along with other restructuring initiatives — contract terminations and employee costs — that could give the company incremental savings in the range of $45 million to $50 million. Curry and Under Armour inked their partnership 13 years ago, and he has been viewed by consumers as one of the key faces of the brand. But analysts also see the Curry brand as much smaller than it was when the partnership was first signed.
“Even with Mr. Curry likely being towards the end of his playing career — currently 37 years old — Under Armour will have to replace the intangible benefits he’s brought to the brand since first partnering with [the company] 13 years ago,” noted Needham analyst Tom Nikic, who added that the Curry brand is “fairly small” at this point of the partnership a likely between $75 million to $100 million of revenue and significantly off its peak years. He said Under Armour will continue to sell Curry products for the near term, and that the separation is “not expected to have a material impact” on Under Armour’s P&L (profit and loss) beyond that.
Under Armour’s total basketball business is about 2 percent of total revenue, or between $100 million to $120 million in the current fiscal year. Nikic noted that Under Armour grew its footwear business by $600 million during the first two years of the partnership, with Curry likely the biggest driver of the company’s footwear growth.
The analyst said the 12-year partnership with the basketball star’s sub-brand Curry was at its peak years ago, and was probably still generating a “few hundred million dollars of revenue” even eight years ago. But now he’s estimating that Curry revenues are down “at least 50 percent from peak, if not more.”
“Between the lower gross margin for footwear relative to apparel, the operating overhead required to run a sub-brand, advertising for the brand, and the royalties owed to Mr. Curry, the sub-brand is probably minimally profitable at best — and potentially unprofitable,” Nikic said.
Jefferies analyst Randal Konik described that restructuring initiatives as founder Kevin Plank move towards “getting back to basics [and] we like it.”
“Parting ways with Curry makes so much sense. He’s a great athlete, but we always questioned his marketability and believed the Curry shoes and apparel products never resonated with a wide audience,” Konik said.
The Jefferies analyst said fundamentals and market share losses for Under Armour are “starting to hit bottom” as Plank and the company shift to an elevated focus and discipline and getting back to the core of what made the company special more than 20 years ago.
What else would Konik like to see? A reduction in its factory/outlet footprint because while the channel helps to drive revenue, it also hurts brand equity. For the same reasons, he also would like to see a reduction in product flow to the off-price channel. And Konik said Under Armour should decrease its stock-keeping units in footwear because “less is more.” Other areas should be to win back the gym participant before the casual wearer of the Under Armour product, as well as an exit from Kohl’s because distribution needs to be cleaned up “in full” and shrinking will help the brand grow again.
Telsey Advisory Group’s Cristina Fernández said the separation of Curry was “more of a headline and reputational risk for Under Armour than a financial one,” noting that the separation could pave the way for difficulties signing other notable athletes in the future. But she also said that the partnership was generally successful because it helped Under Armour develop its shoe business, “we felt [the Curry partnership] never materialized to its full potential.”
She said Under Armour is scheduled to release the final shoe of the partnership, the Curry 13, in February 2026, with additional colors and apparel collaborations available through October 2026.
Elsewhere in the portfolio, Under Armour this summer unveiled its new UA Halo Collection for the brand’s footwear line. It’s Unless x Under Armour regenerative sneaker collaboration also hit the market in September, reflecting how shoe firms are eyeing environmentally friendly production options. And the brand has garnered additional consumer awareness after 2025 Boston Marathon winner Sharon Lokedi placed second a week ago at the 2025 New York City Marathon. She wore Under Armour’s Velociti Elite 3 shoes made to her specifications.