With the long-rumored acquisition of Puma by Anta Sports now settled, it is worth revisiting how the deal came together and what it signals for both companies.
As previously reported, Anta has signed an agreement with Groupe Artemis to acquire a 29.06% stake in Puma at EUR 35 (USD 42) per share. The transaction values the stake at approximately EUR 1.506 billion (USD 1.8 billion) and, once completed, will make Anta Puma’s largest shareholder. The deal is expected to close before the end of 2026 and will be funded entirely from Anta’s internal cash reserves.
Just two weeks earlier, Reuters reported that negotiations between Anta and the Pinault family, which controls Groupe Artemis, had stalled over valuation differences. The family was said to be seeking no less than EUR 40 (USD 48) per share. Accordingly, the agreed price of EUR 35 appears to reflect extended bargaining. On the trading day before the announcement, Puma shares closed at EUR 21.63 (USD 26), meaning the offer still represents a premium of more than 60%.
Even so, Puma’s valuation remains subdued by industry standards. The stock is trading at roughly 0.39 times sales on the secondary market. Including the premium implied by the deal, the price-to-sales ratio would rise to about 0.63, still well below Nike’s 2.07, Adidas’ 1.06, and Anta’s own 2.63. At its core, Puma’s discount reflects weaker profitability rather than a lack of brand recognition.
Puma’s roots date back to the early 20th century. The German sportswear company was originally part of the same business as Adidas, founded by brothers in the Dassler family who later split after falling out over strategy and philosophy.
In the decades that followed, Puma built its reputation through athlete and team sponsorships, developing particular strength in football and track and field. In 2007, Kering acquired Puma for EUR 5.9 billion (USD 7.1 billion). As part of a diversified portfolio that included Gucci, the brand weathered the global downturn triggered by the US subprime mortgage crisis in 2008.
Under Kering’s ownership, however, Puma struggled to define a stable identity. The brand often appeared caught between performance sportswear and fashion. In 2016, after losing Cristiano Ronaldo as a brand ambassador, Puma shifted toward a high-profile partnership with Rihanna. The collaboration delivered a short-term sales boost but drew criticism for weakening the brand’s professional sports positioning.
In 2018, as Kering sharpened its focus on luxury, it spun off Puma, distributing roughly 70% of the shares to its largest shareholder, the Pinault family. Groupe Artemis later acquired the remaining approximately 29% stake. Following the pandemic-driven economic downturn, the decision to sell Puma appears to be the final step in shedding non-core assets to concentrate fully on luxury.
From Anta’s perspective, the deal could rival its 2019 acquisition of Amer Sports in terms of impact.
Ding Shizhong, Anta’s chairman and CEO, said becoming Puma’s largest shareholder marked an important milestone in advancing the company’s global multi-brand strategy. The environment today, however, differs sharply from the one Anta faced when it acquired Amer. For mature sportswear brands, slower growth has become the prevailing trend.
Data from Wind show that since the start of 2026, Puma’s price-to-sales ratio has consistently remained below 0.5, a level generally viewed as low within the industry and reflective of cautious market sentiment. Operationally, the company remains under pressure and is in the midst of a broad strategic overhaul.
Recent financial results underline the challenge. In the third quarter of 2025, Puma’s revenue fell 10.4% year-on-year on a currency-adjusted basis to EUR 1.96 billion (USD 2.4 billion). Revenue for the first nine months declined 4.3%. The company posted a net loss of EUR 62 million (USD 74.4 million) for the quarter, compared with a profit of EUR 128 million (USD 153.6 million) a year earlier.
On the earnings call, newly appointed CEO Arthur Hoeld was blunt about the road ahead. He said the brand currently lacks momentum. Market research commissioned by the company found that Puma has slipped behind competitors in consumers’ minds and is no longer among the top three choices for many shoppers. Hoeld cited an overly complex product lineup that has made it harder for the brand to stand out.
Distribution remains another pressure point. According to prior disclosures, about 70% of Puma’s revenue comes from wholesale channels, compared with an industry benchmark of roughly 60%. More notably, three of the company’s top ten global customers are supermarkets, a channel mix that has weighed on brand perception. By the end of the third quarter, inventories had climbed 17% year-on-year to EUR 2.1 billion (USD 2.5 billion).
In response, Puma has pushed through reforms, including layoffs and channel adjustments. Last month, it opened its largest European flagship store in London. Under Hoeld’s plan, 2026 is framed as a transition year, with a return to above-average industry growth unlikely before 2027.
Anta’s track record with Fila and Amer suggests that brand rebuilding and a shift toward direct-to-consumer channels are among its strengths. While Puma is expected to retain independent governance and cultural oversight, Anta’s support is likely to extend beyond capital alone.
One constant is Puma’s position in football.
On the product side, while Nike rolled out Flyknit and Adidas developed Boost, Puma has continued to refine its EVA (ethylene vinyl acetate) midsole technology. Although its product refresh cycles have lagged behind rivals, footwear has consistently accounted for a large share of Puma’s total revenue.
Footwear remains central to how sportswear brands are judged, both in terms of technical credibility and consumer mindshare. Puma, however, missed the recent revival of German-style training shoes. In 2023, after Adidas hired away Puma’s former CEO Bjorn Gulden, Adidas quickly leveraged the Samba to regain momentum following its split with Kanye West. Puma failed to capitalize on the trend.
Also worth noting are Puma’s partnerships with football clubs including Manchester City and AC Milan, with 2026 set to be a World Cup year.
Through this deal, Anta is positioning itself on the same global stage as Adidas. Before that ambition can be realized, however, both Anta and Puma will likely have to navigate a difficult and prolonged transition.
KrASIA Connection features translated and adapted content that was originally published by 36Kr. This article was written by Xie Yunzi for 36Kr.