Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
FRESH Analysis Report
Aug 12, 2026
1 day ago · 100% complete
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-13): Designation Gem · Cairn score +48 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 79 · Value 23 · Sentiment -64 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $115.26 vs $91.20 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Deckers Outdoor Corporation

DECK NYSE
Consumer Cyclical · Footwear & Accessories
Goleta, CA 93117, United States deckers.com Updated Aug 12, 12:11am
Price
$93.84
Market Cap
$12.8B
Employees
4,800
Beta
1.17
Avg Volume
2,147,352
CEO
Mr. Stefano Caroti

Deckers Outdoor Corporation is a global footwear and apparel company that designs, markets, and distributes products for both casual lifestyle use and high-performance activities. Its portfolio centers on well-known brands including UGG, which offers premium footwear, loungewear, and accessories; HOKA, focused on performance and lifestyle running shoes and athletic apparel; and Teva, known for sandals and outdoor-oriented footwear. The company serves a broad customer base through a combination of wholesale channels, international distributors, and a direct-to-consumer network that includes e-commerce platforms and branded retail stores. Deckers Outdoor Corporation sells its products across multiple regions worldwide, positioning its brands in sectors such as outdoor, athletic performance, fashion, and comfort-focused lifestyle. Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Goleta, California, the company plays a significant role in the global footwear and athleisure markets by leveraging distinct brand identities that appeal to both performance-driven and style-conscious consumers.

Runs with full report Generated: Jul 30, 2026 7:07pm
Earnings Schedule
Checked daily · calendar updated Aug 13
No upcoming print on the calendar yet — companies typically confirm a few weeks ahead. Last print was Jul 23, 2026.
EPS surprise history — vs analyst consensus · 5 prints of vendor history
+20.2%
Jan '26
+168.8%
Feb '26
-150.0%
Mar '26
+15.7%
May '26
+6.8%
Jul '26
Print date EPS est. EPS actual Revenue est. Revenue actual
Jul 23, 2026 $0.88 $0.94 +6.8%
May 21, 2026 $0.83 $0.96 +15.7%
Mar 24, 2026 $-0.40 $-1.00 -150.0%
Feb 25, 2026 $0.16 $0.43 +168.8%
Jan 29, 2026 $2.77 $3.33 +20.2%

Green = beat the estimate, red = missed. An earnings print is the fastest way a thesis changes — our designations should be re-read after each one.

Recent SEC Filings
Filed Form Document
Jul 30, 2026 10-Q View
Jul 24, 2026 ARS View
Jul 24, 2026 DEFA14A View
Jul 24, 2026 DEF 14A View
Jul 23, 2026 8-K View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View
Jun 2, 2026 4 View

Filings link to the SEC’s EDGAR system. Annual/quarterly reports (10-K, 10-Q, 20-F) carry the full story; 8-K/6-K current reports are the fastest signal that something material happened.

Price Overview
Price at report time
$93.39
as of Aug 12, 11:29am (1d ago)
Change · Aug 12
-0.45 (-0.48%)
Day Range
$92.53 – $94.37
52-Week Range
$78.91 – $125.45
50-Day MA
$104.10
200-Day MA
$102.07
Volume
51,070.00
Right now · live
loading…
 
Real-time — the change above is the move since the report (over 1d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 136,725,491.00
Float 132,709,217.00
Free Float 97.1%
High free float — 97.1% of shares trade freely, ~2.9% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:38am (1d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:37am (1d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 13, 2026 12:19am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
13.30
Stock Price: $93.84
EPS (Diluted): 7.02
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
5.45
Stock Price: $93.84
Total Equity: $2.50B
Shares: 145,805,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
8.73
Market Cap: $12.78B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.91B
EBITDA: $1.34B
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$11.7B
Market Cap: $12.78B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.91B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
57.7%
Gross Profit: $3.16B
Revenue: $5.47B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
23.1%
Operating Income: $1.26B
Revenue: $5.47B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
18.7%
Net Income: $1.02B
Revenue: $5.47B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
41.0%
Net Income: $1.02B
Total Equity: $2.50B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
164.6%
Operating Income: $1.26B
Tax Rate: 22.8%
Equity: $2.50B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.91B
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
3.54
Current Assets: $2.85B
Current Liabilities: $804.07M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $2.50B
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$37.53
Revenue: $5.47B
Shares: 145,805,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$17.14
Total Equity: $2.50B
Shares: 145,805,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$7.53
Operating CF: $1.18B
CapEx: -$84.62M
Shares: 145,805,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
Last Dividend: $0.00
Stock Price: $93.84
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $1.02B
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 13, 2026 12:19am
Compares DECK against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:37am (1d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue $3.2B $3.6B $4.3B $5.0B $5.5B
Cost of Revenue $1.5B $1.8B $1.9B $2.1B $2.3B
Gross Profit $1.6B $1.8B $2.4B $2.9B $3.2B
Operating Expenses $1.0B $1.2B $1.5B $1.7B $1.9B
Operating Income $564.7M $652.8M $927.5M $1.2B $1.3B
Net Income $451.9M $516.8M $759.6M $966.1M $1.0B
EBITDA $607.6M $700.6M $985.1M $1.2B $1.3B
EPS $3.29 $3.90 $4.89 $6.36 $7.04
EPS (Diluted) $3.25 $3.87 $4.86 $6.33 $7.02
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:29am (1d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Cash & Equivalents $843.5M $981.8M $1.5B $1.9B $1.9B
Total Current Assets $1.8B $1.9B $2.4B $2.9B $2.9B
Total Assets $2.3B $2.6B $3.1B $3.6B $3.7B
Current Liabilities $541.7M $497.4M $720.0M $769.9M $804.1M
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $793.4M $790.5M $1.0B $1.1B $1.2B
Total Equity $1.5B $1.8B $2.1B $2.5B $2.5B
Retained Earnings $1.4B $1.6B $1.9B $2.3B $2.2B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:37am (1d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Operating Cash Flow $172.4M $537.4M $1.0B $1.0B $1.2B
Capital Expenditure -$51.0M -$81.0M -$89.4M -$86.2M -$84.6M
Free Cash Flow $121.3M $456.4M $943.8M $958.4M $1.1B
Acquisitions (net)
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $0 $0
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks -$356.7M -$297.4M -$414.9M -$567.0M -$1.1B
Net Change in Cash -$245.8M $138.3M $520.3M $387.1M $18.1M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 11:37am (1d ago)
Metric 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue Growth +15.1% +18.2% +16.3% +9.8%
Gross Profit Growth +13.5% +30.7% +21.0% +9.4%
Operating Income Growth +15.6% +42.1% +27.1% +7.1%
Net Income Growth +14.4% +47.0% +27.2% +6.0%
EBITDA Growth +15.3% +40.6% +26.7% +7.2%
Deep Analysis
Last run: Aug 13, 2026 9:36:56 am

Pre-flight intelligence scans the company first, then routes to the right analytical methods.

0 Company Classification — What type of company is this?
1 Industry Landscape — Where is the industry headed?
2 Company Momentum — Where is this company trending?
3 Forward Projection — 1Y & 2Y projected metrics (requires Layer 1 + 2)
4a DCF Valuation — Present value of future cash flows
4b Earnings Power Value — Floor value — worth with zero growth
4c Anchored PE — Industry PE adjusted for growth differential
4d Reverse DCF — What growth is the market pricing in?
4e Revenue-Based DCF — For growth/narrative companies (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4f Anchored P/S — Price-to-Sales peer comparison (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4g Scenario Analysis — Bull / Base / Bear (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4h Dividend Discount Model — For dividend/income stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4i Book Value Analysis — For deep value / turnaround stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4j Insider Activity — Are insiders buying or selling?
4f Cash Flow Quality — How trustworthy is the FCF?
4g Debt Maturity Risk — Can it handle its debt?
4h Macro Environment — Rates, market valuation, volatility
4i Sector Intelligence — How does this company compare within its sector?
4j Revenue Confidence — How reliable is the growth projection?
4k Sensitivity Analysis — How fragile is the fair value estimate?
4l Sector Demand Cycle — Is the sector in a boom, steady state, or contraction?
5 AI Investigation — Adaptive research engine (Claude)
5b Thesis Evaluation — What does the market believe? (narrative/platform stocks only)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
6 Valuation Synthesis — Weighted verdict from all methods (requires Layer 4)
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for DECK — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-12
The creme is there an opportunity here? Neutral
AI is a modest margin tailwind and a real competitive-entry headwind for Deckers - it is not the variable that decides this stock.
Exposure is genuinely low at 31: the product is physical, the revenue unit durable at 86, and the scarce assets (HOKA's run-specialty credibility, UGG's cultural franchise) are un-synthesizable, so the honest read is a mildly favorable 56 with a wide-ish 37-69 range driven mostly by consumer cycle, not automation. The two AI mechanisms worth underwriting are margin conversion at 61 - a 57.7% gross margin means creative, service and planning automation lands in operating income - against entrant compression at 40, where cheap design and content multiply challengers in HOKA's category. Watch DTC traffic-source mix and paid-acquisition efficiency: that is where an agentic-discovery toll would show up first, and it would matter far more than any AI initiative Deckers announces.
56
AI Position
Mildly favorable - low exposure is the finding
Cheap intelligence trims Deckers' creative, planning and service costs while the scarce assets - HOKA's running credibility, UGG's cultural franchise, and a physical supply chain - sit outside AI's reach; the real question is who controls discovery when shopping becomes agentic.
Exposure 31 Confidence 71 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

Deckers' cost of demand creation (creative production, localized campaign assets, DTC merchandising, customer service, demand planning across wholesale and 60+ markets) is highly automatable, and at 57.7% gross margin with pricing power those savings drop close to operating income rather than being handed back in price.

Primary Pressure

AI collapses the cost of launching and scaling a footwear brand - design iteration, 3D renders, ad creative, influencer-grade content, Asian contract-manufacturer sourcing - which raises the volume of credible challengers competing for the same running and comfort-lifestyle shelf space HOKA and UGG now occupy.

Critical Hinge

Whether footwear discovery migrates into AI assistants that rank on spec, fit-data and price versus brand desire. Watch DTC traffic mix, paid-search/social efficiency, and whether full-price sell-through holds as agentic shopping surfaces alternatives.

Hard to Reproduce

HOKA's earned authority with run specialty retailers and serious runners, UGG's decades-deep cultural association, and the tooling/factory/inventory infrastructure behind $5.47B of physical product - none of which cheap software manufactures.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 95
People will keep buying shoes regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
The need is physical footwear for running, outdoors and comfort-lifestyle wear; no amount of machine intelligence removes feet or weather. Demand risk here is discretionary-spend and fashion cycle, not automation.
Global footwear unit demand trends · Running participation rates · Discretionary apparel spend data
relevance 58 · confidence 90
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 83
Branded physical shoes remain the solution; only how they are discovered changes.
AI does not alter the product form - it alters marketing, assortment planning and the discovery path. The vulnerable part of Deckers' solution is the paid-media-plus-wholesale demand engine, not the shoe.
Wholesale vs DTC revenue mix · Full-price sell-through rate · Brand search volume trends
relevance 55 · confidence 78
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 54
Cheap AI is a cost tool for Deckers and an arming device for challengers.
Deckers gains from automated creative, localization and planning, but the same tools let small brands produce campaign and product-development output that previously required Deckers-scale spend. Neither side's advantage is proprietary.
Marketing spend as % of revenue · New performance-running entrants gaining shelf · Creative/agency cost disclosures
relevance 62 · confidence 68
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 41
Deckers is not paid to absorb liability or compliance risk.
No customer outsources a regulated obligation to a footwear brand; the only responsibility transferred is quality and fit assurance, which is thin protection but also barely AI-relevant.
Product recall or quality incidents · Return rate trends
relevance 14 · confidence 72
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 68
As content and design become abundant, earned brand meaning gets relatively scarcer.
When anyone can generate a plausible shoe and a polished campaign, the residual scarce assets are HOKA's credibility with run specialty and serious runners and UGG's multi-decade cultural position - neither of which can be synthesized.
Run specialty channel share for HOKA · UGG international brand-heat metrics · Athlete/community endorsement depth
relevance 72 · confidence 66
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 71
Consumers can't self-manufacture, but retail partners can accelerate private label.
The DIY risk sits with wholesale accounts, not end consumers: AI-assisted design and sourcing shortens the path for large retailers to substitute owned brands for Deckers' shelf space.
Key wholesale account private-label launches · Wholesale door count and mix · Concentration of top accounts
relevance 33 · confidence 70
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 43
Agentic and AI-summarized shopping could sit between Deckers and its buyer.
Roughly half of revenue flows through DTC where Deckers currently owns the funnel; if assistants and agents become the ranking layer, they arbitrate on spec and price and Deckers pays a new toll or loses premium framing.
DTC traffic source composition · Paid-search efficiency/CAC trend · Marketplace and agent-commerce partnerships
relevance 70 · confidence 58
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 46
Useful first-party fit and demand data, but not a defensible AI advantage.
Deckers' DTC order, size-curve and return data materially improves its own forecasting and fit models; it is not scarce enough or large enough to confer an advantage rivals or platforms cannot approximate.
DTC membership/loyalty file growth · Inventory turns and markdown rate · Return rate on e-commerce orders
relevance 42 · confidence 60
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 61
High gross margin plus brand pricing power means AI savings can stick as profit.
With 57.7% gross margin and 23% operating margin, savings in creative, service and planning land in operating income rather than being priced away, provided brand demand holds; competitive pressure could recycle part of it into more marketing volume.
SG&A ratio trend vs revenue growth · Gross margin durability at 57%+ · Markdown and promotional depth
relevance 66 · confidence 63
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 86
The monetized unit is a physical pair of shoes at a premium price point.
No seat count, per-task fee or intermediation take rate to be compressed by AI; the only durability question is whether the premium price per pair survives cheaper discovery of alternatives.
Average selling price per pair · Unit volume vs price contribution · Full-price mix by brand
relevance 60 · confidence 82
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 40
AI meaningfully lowers the cost of launching a credible competing footwear brand.
Design iteration, 3D visualization, sourcing communication and social-native content - the historical cost of brand launch - all get cheaper, multiplying niche competitors in exactly HOKA's and UGG's categories; scaling to Deckers' distribution and manufacturing capacity remains hard.
New running brand share in specialty · Time-to-scale of AI-native DTC brands · HOKA growth rate vs category growth
relevance 72 · confidence 64

AI Lens thesis

Deckers sells a physical good whose value rests on brand meaning and fit, so AI cannot substitute the product or the transaction; it reaches the P&L through three narrow channels - lower cost per unit of marketing and creative output, better inventory and size-curve forecasting across a hybrid wholesale/DTC model, and cheaper service on a growing e-commerce base - all margin-accretive against an already 23% operating margin. The offsetting mechanisms are competitive rather than technological: AI-native brands can reach niche running and comfort audiences at a fraction of historical marketing cost, wholesale partners can build private label faster, and if LLM-mediated shopping becomes the front door, the brand's paid-acquisition advantage and DTC price integrity erode. Net: modestly positive, low-magnitude, and the outcome is still decided by product cycles and consumer discretionary demand, not by AI.

Thesis breaker Sustained DTC gross-margin erosion alongside rising discount depth while marketing spend holds - that would signal discovery has been intermediated and brand pull is no longer converting. Conversely, opex ratio falling while full-price mix rises confirms the margin-conversion read.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside Fit and return prediction: footwear e-commerce returns run punitively high, and AI-driven size/fit matching on Deckers' own DTC order and return history is a direct, quantifiable gross-margin and freight-cost gain the market treats as a rounding error.

Downside Agentic and AI-summarized shopping rewards structured attributes over aspiration; UGG in particular monetizes desire rather than specification, and a discovery layer that answers 'best warm boot under $150' compresses exactly the premium Deckers charges.

Outcome range spread 32

37Bear case
56Central case
69Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-13 00:48:04
Verdict Fairly valued near $91 with modest downside skew — $133 composite overweights peak-cycle margins that Q1 FY27 already shows rolling over; wait for the December quarter before committing, fair value $95-105 not $130+.

The raw numbers show a company that just decelerated hard. Q1 FY27 (Jun-2026) revenue of $1.02B vs $964.5M prior year is +5.7% YoY — a sharp step-down from the 13% five-year CAGR and the 20%+ prints that defined FY24-25. More telling: net income of $130M vs $139.2M is actually *down* 6.6% YoY, and net margin compressed from 14.4% to 12.7% in what is seasonally the weakest quarter. Fiscal Q4 (Mar-2026) told a similar story: $1.12B revenue up ~10% but NI of $135.6M vs $151.4M is -10% YoY with margin down 270bps. The synthesis model's "+34% upside to $133" fair value leans heavily on trailing full-year numbers ($5.47B rev, 18.7% net margin, $1.02B NI) that the two most recent quarters suggest are the peak, not the run rate. If FY27 comes in at $5.7B with margins normalizing to 15-16%, you get ~$900M NI, and 13x on that is $11.7B — right at the current $12.4B cap.

The balance sheet is genuinely pristine — $1.91B cash, zero debt, $2.5B equity, 41% ROE, current ratio 3.5, $1.1B FCF on $84M capex. That's a fortress, and it's why the "fallen angel" narrative frame is defensible. But the market-forces model's flag on "unexplained cash hoarding" is the right question no one wants to ask: management is sitting on ~15% of the market cap in cash while the stock is 27% off highs and buybacks would be obviously accretive at 13x. Either they see something we don't (inventory build for a HOKA reset, an acquisition, tariff exposure) or capital allocation discipline has become capital allocation timidity. Neither is bullish in the near term.

I disagree with the synthesis "fair value $133" framing and side closer to the thesis-evaluation +32 "reasonable premium" read, but for different reasons than either model articulates. The bear case the narrative layer describes — HOKA decelerating, UGG fashion-cyclical — is not hypothetical anymore; it is showing up in the June quarter margin print. HOKA's competitive set (On Running growing 30%+, Nike reasserting in running, Asics resurgent) is materially tougher than 18 months ago, and DTC-heavy premium footwear brands historically compress margins fast when growth slows because the fixed-cost base of stores and marketing doesn't flex. The 57.7% gross margin and 23% operating margin are structurally at risk if the growth algorithm shifts from 20% to 6%. A careful contrarian would note that at peak-cycle margins, 13x looks cheap; at normalized margins, 13x on a decelerating consumer discretionary brand is roughly fair, and history says fashion-exposed footwear names (Skechers, Crocs pre-HeyDude, Under Armour) trade to 10-11x when the growth story cracks.

That said, dissenting fully from the bull case requires ignoring some real things: HOKA is still a genuinely differentiated brand with international runway (Asia-Pacific still <15% of mix), UGG's year-round positioning has actually worked (multiple summer quarters of growth), the balance sheet gives infinite optionality, and 41% ROE with zero leverage is rare. My read: fairly valued to modestly undervalued, but not the +34% asymmetric setup the composite claims. Fair value is $95-105 assuming FY27 EPS lands around $6.00-6.50 (vs consensus that probably still models $6.50+) at a deserved 15-16x multiple for a decelerating but high-quality brand. Below $85 the risk/reward gets genuinely interesting; at $91 you're paying roughly fair price for a story that needs the September/December quarters to confirm HOKA isn't rolling over. I'd wait for the next print rather than anchor to the $133 signal-adjusted number, which I think is mechanically overweighting a trailing margin peak. Partial agreement with synthesis directionally (not overvalued), dissent on magnitude (nowhere near +34%).

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-13 00:48:18
Verdict Undervalued at $91.2 — the market is pricing Deckers like a peak-margin fade, but current earnings power and cash generation support roughly $105-$110 absent a sharper slowdown.

At $91.2, Deckers looks mispriced on the cheap side because the market is valuing a debt-free, 19% net margin branded footwear business as if earnings are near a cyclical peak and about to roll over hard. The raw numbers do not show that. Fiscal 2026 revenue rose to $5.47B from $4.99B, up 9.6%, while net income still climbed to $1.02B from $966M, up 5.6%, after a huge prior-year base. Gross margin held at 57.7%, operating margin was 23.1%, and free cash flow reached $1.10B against only $84.6M of capex. With $1.91B of cash and no debt, enterprise value is only about $10.5B, or roughly 10.3x trailing earnings and 2.1x revenue. For a company compounding revenue at 13% and earnings at 16% over several years, that multiple is low unless you assume the brand portfolio is about to structurally deteriorate.

The quarterly pattern actually reinforces resilience more than decay. The latest quarter, June 2026, posted $1.02B of revenue versus $964.5M a year earlier, up about 5.8%, with net income of $130.0M versus $139.2M, a modest margin compression from 14.4% to 12.7%. That is not great, but it is far from collapse, especially after March 2026 revenue of $1.12B versus $1.02B a year earlier, nearly 9.8% growth, despite net income easing from $151.4M to $135.6M. What stands out is that revenue is still expanding while profits have flattened only slightly after a very strong multi-year margin expansion cycle. That looks like normalization, not impairment. On a trailing quarterly run-rate, the business has generated roughly $4.45B of revenue and about $1.01B of net income over the last four quarters, so the current equity value implies around 12.3x trailing quarterly-based earnings even before giving credit for the cash pile. For a business with ROE above 40%, current ratio 3.5, and no leverage, that is an undemanding setup.

I also think the market is over-penalizing Deckers for being a two-story company when the financials say the overall machine remains unusually efficient. A lot of consumer names can produce growth or margins; fewer can do both while staying asset-light enough to convert $1.18B of operating cash flow into $1.10B of free cash flow. Price-to-book at 5.3x looks high in isolation, but with ROA of 27.8% and no debt, book value is not the right anchor. This is a brand earnings stream, and the relevant question is whether a company earning about $1B annually deserves only a low-teens P/E despite still growing sales high single digits. My answer is no. Even assigning no multiple expansion and assuming earnings merely hold around $1.0B, the current valuation is already reasonable; if revenue continues growing 7-10% and margins settle only modestly below FY26 levels, the stock should support something closer to 15x earnings, which would point toward roughly $105-$110 on current earnings power, with upside beyond that if growth re-accelerates.

The best counterargument is straightforward and serious: the market may be right that FY2026 represented peak economics. The last two quarters show the warning signs bears want to see: March revenue up nearly 10% but net income down about 10%, then June revenue up 5.8% with net income down 6.6%. That says incremental growth is getting less profitable. Annual net margin also ticked down from 19.4% in FY2025 to 18.7% in FY2026 despite strong top-line growth, suggesting the operating leverage story has stalled. If HOKA is maturing faster than expected and UGG is entering a more pronounced fashion fade, then 13x earnings is not cheap for a business facing negative revisions. On that view, the cash balance is less a hidden asset than evidence management lacks better uses for capital, and the low multiple is a rational discount for brand cyclicality and possible earnings compression back toward, say, $800M-$850M. If that happens, today's valuation would look far less attractive.

What would change my mind is not a narrative update but a couple of hard prints. If the next two quarters show revenue growth falling below 5% while net margin drops another 150-200 bps year over year, I would conclude the market correctly sniffed out a de-rating from peak earnings and that fair value is closer to the low $80s. Conversely, if Deckers can sustain even 7-9% revenue growth with net income roughly flat to up, or demonstrate more decisive capital allocation with the $1.91B cash balance, then the current price will look too low for this quality level. The burden of proof for a bull case here is not heroic growth; it is simply showing that a $1B-earning, debt-free brand owner has not started a structural decline. The data so far still support that.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-13 00:49:04
Verdict Undervalued quality compounder at $91 — 13x earnings, ~9% FCF yield, fortress BS; fair value nearer $115–130 if growth stabilizes high-single-digit

The numbers describe a high-quality branded footwear franchise that the market has marked down to a mature-earner multiple while the cash engine is still compounding. Fiscal 2026 delivered $5.47B of revenue and $1.02B of net income on a 57.7% gross margin and 18.7% net margin, with operating cash flow of $1.18B converting into $1.10B of free cash flow after only $85M of capex. That is an 8.9% FCF yield at the $12.42B market cap and a trailing PE of roughly 13x—levels usually reserved for structurally impaired retailers, not a zero-debt balance sheet holding $1.91B in cash against $2.50B of equity and printing a 41% ROE. Annual revenue has scaled from $3.15B to $5.47B over four years (13% CAGR) and earnings from $452M to $1.02B (16% CAGR); the most recent year still grew top line nearly 10% and net income mid-single digits. Seasonality is loud and intact—December quarters alone throw off $1.8–2.0B of revenue at 25% net margins—so the softer March/June prints ($1.0–1.1B, 12–13% margins) are calendar, not collapse. What stands out is the disconnect: fortress liquidity, mid-teens historical growth, elite returns on capital, and a sub-13x earnings multiple that prices in a permanent step-down to low-single-digit growth and margin erosion that the income statement has not yet delivered.

Quarterly trends do show deceleration—June revenue up only ~6% year-on-year versus the prior mid-teens run-rate, and recent earnings growth lagging revenue—which is exactly the factual ammunition behind the fallen-angel narrative. Yet absolute profitability remains exceptional: operating margin held at 23% for the full year, and the company continues to generate more than a billion dollars of unlevered free cash with negligible reinvestment need. At $91.2 the stock sits well below the composite fair-value anchors near $111–134 that the quantitative layer produced even after signal adjustment; the ~30% discount is almost entirely narrative—HOKA saturation fears and UGG cycle fatigue—rather than a visible break in cash-flow durability. With EV/revenue at 2.1x and no net debt, the downside is cushioned by the cash pile alone, while any stabilization of growth in the high-single-digit range would force a re-rating toward 16–18x, implying material upside from here.

The strongest counter-argument is that the deceleration is the new base case, not a soft patch. Revenue growth has stepped from 15–18% down to ~10% and the latest quarter is already mid-single digits; earnings growth has compressed to 6% year-on-year. If HOKA’s athletic share gains are saturating against Nike, On, and broader performance footwear and UGG’s fashion relevance is structurally rolling over rather than cycling, then mid-teens CAGRs are gone forever and a 13x multiple on flattening earnings is fair, not cheap. Macro headwinds for discretionary footwear amplify that risk, and the $1.91B cash hoard without a clear buyback or dividend step-up invites the charge of lazy capital allocation—exactly the “unexplained cash” flag in the market-forces layer. Thesis fragilities correctly weight HOKA fashion-cycle risk and UGG brand fatigue as the two largest threats; a couple more quarters of sub-5% growth or gross-margin slippage below 55% would validate the bear story that premium brand economics are mean-reverting and that the current multiple already embeds the right terminal growth.

I would flip to a fair-value or overvalued stance if the next two reported quarters show revenue growth sticking below 5% with operating margin compressing under 20% on a trailing basis, or if management signals that HOKA unit growth has structurally rolled over. Conversely, a return to double-digit organic growth, explicit large-scale capital returns, or gross margins re-expanding above 58% would push conviction higher and justify price targets back toward the $120–130 zone. Until one of those arrives, the raw cash generation and fortress balance sheet at 13x earnings and a near-9% FCF yield make the stock undervalued relative to its demonstrated earning power.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 7.7; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -2.7 vs panel · self: 5.0
GPT gpt-5.4 9.0
undervalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +1.3 vs panel · self: 7.0
Grok grok-4.5 9.0
undervalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +1.3 vs panel · self: 7.0
No second round needed — Panel agreed within band (spread 1: Claude: fairly_valued · GPT: undervalued · Grok: undervalued) — second round not warranted
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · four lenses
Four separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), and AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-12 11:41:10
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality — starter now, build on weakness 7/10
Fortress-quality two-brand footwear compounder at a modest 12% discount, but a live sector de-rating means I want a bigger margin of safety before pressing.
The cruxWhether HOKA's next print confirms it is still a compounder or ratifies the ONON-driven 'premium running is decelerating' narrative that is currently repricing the whole cohort.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from DECK's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionStable Share Count
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+79
Fortress
edge √Σ 151 · risk √Σ 43 · conf 8/10

The business trajectory is exceptional: revenue grew from 3.15B (FY22) to 5.47B (FY26), a ~15% CAGR, while gross margin expanded from 51.0% to 57.7% and operating margin from 17.9% to 23.1%. Net income more than doubled from 452M to 1.02B and FCF scaled from 121M to 1.10B, indicating operating leverage plus working-capital discipline. Cash conversion is clean (OCF/NI ~1x, accruals -0.8% of assets, Beneish M -2.64) and the Altman Z of 10.59 with 1.91B net cash and zero net debt places the balance sheet firmly in fortress territory. Dilution is well-contained: diluted share count went from 138.9M to 145.8M (roughly 1.2% CAGR, with some noise from a split-era count in FY24), SBC is only 0.8% of revenue, and buybacks run 15x SBC - per-share value is protected, not eroded. Insider tape shows only routine awards and tax-withholding; no directional buys or sales to read. Key qualitative risk not visible in the numbers is brand concentration (HOKA + UGG carry the franchise), which is a durability question the modules can't resolve.

Strengths 4
m85
Margin expansion with scale
Gross margin 51.0% to 57.7% and operating margin 17.9% to 23.1% while revenue grew ~74% over four years - genuine operating leverage, not accounting flattery.
m80
Fortress balance sheet
1.91B liquid cash, zero net debt, Altman Z 10.59. Business is self-funding with 1.10B annual FCF; no reliance on capital markets.
m75
Clean earnings quality
OCF/NI ~1.0x, accruals -0.8% of assets, Beneish M -2.64. FCF (1.10B) exceeds net income (1.02B) in FY26 - reported earnings are cash-backed.
m60
Disciplined capital return
SBC only 0.8% of revenue; buybacks are 15.6x SBC, so gross issuance is more than offset. Diluted share count actually declined from 156.3M (FY24) to 145.8M (FY26).
Concerns 3
m35
Brand/category concentration risk
Growth is driven by HOKA and UGG; a footwear-and-accessories house whose durability rides on two brands is inherently more fragile than a diversified consumer staple. Not visible as damage in the numbers yet, but limits the ceiling.
m20
Growth deceleration at the margin
Revenue growth cooled from ~18% (FY24) and 16% (FY25) to ~9.6% (FY26), and operating margin ticked down from 23.6% to 23.1%. Early, contained, but worth watching for a plateau.
m15
No open-market insider signal
Tape shows only A-awards and F-tax withholding; no P buys to corroborate management conviction, though no S sales either.
This is a genuinely high-quality business by the numbers: fortress balance sheet, real margin expansion, cash-backed earnings, and shareholder-friendly capital allocation with per-share value actually improving. The one asterisk that keeps me from pushing into the 92+ tier is that it's fundamentally a two-brand footwear house in a category (HOKA especially) that has been on a multi-year hot streak - durability across a full consumer cycle and against fashion rotation is unproven. On what the data shows today, though, this reads as Fortress with a small durability discount.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • HOKA vs UGG revenue mix and growth rates in the 10-K segment disclosure
  • Wholesale vs DTC channel mix and any customer concentration
  • Inventory levels and days-on-hand trend vs FY26 revenue growth
  • International revenue trajectory and FX sensitivity
  • Any long-lived assets, lease commitments, or off-balance-sheet obligations that soften the net-cash picture
  • 10b5-1 plan disclosures and CEO/CFO ownership levels given absent open-market activity
Valuation / Mispricing
+23
Modestly Cheap
edge √Σ 79 · risk √Σ 56 · conf 6/10
Price $93.39 vs deserved ~$105, roughly 11-12% margin of safety - modestly cheap, not a fat pitch. attractive below $82.00

Price is $93.39 against a composite fair value of $104.90 (roughly 12% upside) and a signal-adjusted FV of $125.84 (35%). The DCF pegs it at $109.15 and the anchored PE at $133.39, while the EPV floor sits at $67.90 - meaning even a no-growth, steady-state view still supports roughly 73% of today's price. That EPV floor is the important sanity check: you are not paying a heroic multiple for future HOKA growth; you are paying about a 38% premium to steady-state earnings power for a business that is actually still growing and expanding margins. Earnings quality is high (score 2), so no haircut is warranted on the reported numbers.

Cheap signals 3
m55
Composite FV ~12% above price
Composite $104.90 vs $93.39 price; DCF $109.15 corroborates. A real but modest gap, consistent with a quality business trading at a small discount rather than a dislocation.
m45
EPV floor covers ~73% of price
EPV of $67.90 means steady-state earnings alone justify most of today's cap; you are only paying ~$25/share for future growth on a business still compounding.
m35
High earnings quality, no haircut
Earnings-quality score 2 means the reported profits backing the FV models are cash-supported; deserved value does not need to be trimmed for accruals or one-offs.
Rich / priced-in 3
m40
Signal-adjusted FV looks generous
Signal-adjusted $125.84 and anchored PE $133.39 embed continued HOKA-caliber growth; if HOKA normalizes to a mature footwear grower, the anchored-PE method is the one that breaks first.
m30
Two-brand concentration risk in the multiple
Deserved multiple should be shaded lower than a diversified branded-goods comp because HOKA plus UGG carry essentially all the value - fashion/category risk is a real drag on deserved value.
m25
De-rating narrative is live
Market is actively repricing DECK from hyper-growth compounder to normal footwear operator; further multiple compression could easily eat the 12% gap before fundamentals catch up.
Modestly cheap but not a fat pitch. The composite $105 vs $93 gives me about 12% of margin on a Fortress-quality business, and the EPV floor at $68 keeps me from feeling I'm paying up for hope. That said, the signal-adjusted $126 and anchored-PE $133 lean on HOKA staying hot, which I do not want to underwrite. I'd want it in the low-$80s before I'd call it a real opportunity; here, I am fine owning it, not eager to press.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • HOKA wholesale vs DTC growth split and any guidance on FY revenue growth deceleration
  • UGG international (Asia/EMEA) growth to confirm the non-HOKA leg is still expanding
  • Gross margin trajectory and any promotional/inventory commentary that would signal margin give-back
  • Buyback pace vs share issuance - per-share value depends on continued net reduction
  • Any input-cost or tariff exposure flagged in the next print
General Sentiment
-64
Headwind
tail √Σ 46 · head √Σ 122 · conf 7/10

The immediate pressure on DECK is negative and sector-driven. ON Holding just posted its worst day ever (-20%) after cutting growth targets, and financial media is openly lumping Nike, Lululemon, DECK and ONON together as a 'struggling footwear sector.' That is exactly the read-through that hurts DECK most: the bull case rests on HOKA being a genuine performance-running compounder, and ONON's guide-down attacks that same premium-running-shoe narrative. With beta 1.17 and a discretionary-consumer footprint, DECK absorbs sector risk-off harder than the tape suggests.

Tailwinds 2
m35
Risk-on tape and constructive technical chatter
Regime is +47 risk-on and a Zacks-style 'hammer + upward estimate revisions' piece is circulating. This cushions the downside but is not strong enough to offset a sector narrative crack.
m30
Steady-compounder archetype, low cult
DECK is not a meme or story stock; the narrative is moderate-durability and moderate-intensity, so it is not exposed to a euphoric-unwind the way ONON was. That limits the tail risk of the sector contagion.
Headwinds 4
m78
ONON blowup contaminates the HOKA narrative
ONON -20% on decel and a growth-target cut directly undermines the 'premium running is a durable compounder' story that supports DECK's multiple. Investors will extrapolate HOKA deceleration whether or not it is warranted.
m65
Footwear cohort under active de-rating
Press is framing Nike, LULU, DECK, ONON as a broken group ('worst to first' rankings). That kind of sector labeling drives fund outflows and multiple compression across the whole basket regardless of company-level results.
m55
Discretionary consumer + 1.17 beta into a stretched market
Market PE 26 and 10y 4.72% mean any wobble in discretionary demand gets punished harder here than in defensives. DECK's above-market beta amplifies every sector-risk-off tick.
m40
Analyst fair-value drift lower
Model fair values ticking down (126.86 to 122.81) with 'mixed outlook' language signals sell-side tone is quietly softening, not defending the name into the sector storm.
Net pressure is a real headwind, not a catastrophe. The tape itself is fine, but the active narrative crack is in premium running shoes, which is DECK's growth engine, and the market is currently pricing every footwear name off ONON's print. Until DECK gives its own number, sentiment guilt-by-association dominates. I lean Headwind with medium-high conviction; a Strong Headwind label would require DECK-specific guide risk, which we do not yet have.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Whether HOKA-specific channel checks or a DECK pre-announce follow ONON's guide-down
  • Sell-side target revisions on DECK in the next 2 weeks post-ONON
  • Whether the footwear cohort trades as a bloc or DECK decouples on the next tape day
  • Asia/ME UGG demand commentary from peers or luxury names
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+26
Mildly favorable - low exposure is the finding
opp √Σ 83 · thr √Σ 14 · conf 7/10

Deckers sells a physical good whose value rests on brand meaning and fit, so AI cannot substitute the product or the transaction; it reaches the P&L through three narrow channels - lower cost per unit of marketing and creative output, better inventory and size-curve forecasting across a hybrid wholesale/DTC model, and cheaper service on a growing e-commerce base - all margin-accretive against an already 23% operating margin. The offsetting mechanisms are competitive rather than technological: AI-native brands can reach niche running and comfort audiences at a fraction of historical marketing cost, wholesale partners can build private label faster, and if LLM-mediated shopping becomes the front door, the brand's paid-acquisition advantage and DTC price integrity erode. Net: modestly positive, low-magnitude, and the outcome is still decided by product cycles and consumer discretionary demand, not by AI.

AI opportunities 6
m52
Underlying Need Persistence
People will keep buying shoes regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
m36
Solution Persistence
Branded physical shoes remain the solution; only how they are discovered changes.
m26
Scarcity Migration
As content and design become abundant, earned brand meaning gets relatively scarcer.
m14
Customer DIY Preference
Consumers can't self-manufacture, but retail partners can accelerate private label.
m15
AI Margin Conversion
High gross margin plus brand pricing power means AI savings can stick as profit.
m43
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit is a physical pair of shoes at a premium price point.
AI threats 1
m14
Entrant Compression
AI meaningfully lowers the cost of launching a credible competing footwear brand.
AI is a modest margin tailwind and a real competitive-entry headwind for Deckers - it is not the variable that decides this stock. Exposure is genuinely low at 31: the product is physical, the revenue unit durable at 86, and the scarce assets (HOKA's run-specialty credibility, UGG's cultural franchise) are un-synthesizable, so the honest read is a mildly favorable 56 with a wide-ish 37-69 range driven mostly by consumer cycle, not automation. The two AI mechanisms worth underwriting are margin conversion at 61 - a 57.7% gross margin means creative, service and planning automation lands in operating income - against entrant compression at 40, where cheap design and content multiply challengers in HOKA's category. Watch DTC traffic-source mix and paid-acquisition efficiency: that is where an agentic-discovery toll would show up first, and it would matter far more than any AI initiative Deckers announces.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Run specialty channel share for HOKA
  • UGG international brand-heat metrics
  • Athlete/community endorsement depth
  • New running brand share in specialty
  • Time-to-scale of AI-native DTC brands
  • HOKA growth rate vs category growth
  • DTC traffic source composition
  • Paid-search efficiency/CAC trend
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Four lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for DECK. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
Data via Financial Modeling Prep · Cached for performance · twelvedata
v1.1.530 · 761561a2 · 2026-08-12 19:06:35