1. Executive Summary (Fashion & Apparel M&A)

‍

Industry overview (macro + sector-specific)

Fashion & apparel is heading into 2025–26 with a “cautiously constructive” setup. Macro tailwinds (cooling inflation in many regions, gradual easing in financing conditions) are helping stabilize demand, but uncertainty around tariffs, uneven discretionary spending, and choppy public markets are keeping management teams selective. Within the sector, strength remains concentrated in pockets with durable consumer pull and pricing power—luxury, athleisure/performance, footwear, off-price/value retailers—while mid-market, wholesale-dependent brands face heavier promotional pressure and slower traffic.

Recent M&A momentum (deal count, value)

• 2024 rebound: Global apparel M&A posted a clear recovery in value and a modest recovery in count. GlobalData estimates ~304 deals in 2024 (+7% YoY) and ~$22B of deal value (+~90% YoY), driven by a return of megadeals and sustained platform/add-on activity.
  
  
• 2025 selective slowdown: Early 2025 saw volume soften as buyers reassessed consumer risk and tariff exposure. PitchBook-based reporting shows Q2’25 deal count down ~40% YoY (66 vs. 109 in Q2’24), and Capstone similarly puts H1’25 activity at ~78 announced/completed deals (-14% YoY).
  
  
• But quality still clears: Even with fewer processes, high-quality assets (especially luxury and scalable brand IP) continue to attract competitive bidding, keeping headline value elevated versus run-rate volume.
  
  

High-level multiples & key trends

Valuations are bifurcated, reflecting a “winners vs. challenged models” market:

• Median LTM EV/EBITDA (Q1’25):
  
  
  
  • Active lifestyle / athleisure: ~10.6x
    
    
  • Fashion brands (broad set): ~9.9x
    
    
  • Fast fashion retail: ~16.1x
    
    
  • Off-price retail: ~14.9x
    
    
• Key trend: buyers are paying up for category resilience (footwear, athleisure), value positioning (off-price/fast fashion), and asset-light royalty models, while compressing multiples for brands with weak margins, heavy wholesale mix, or fading relevance.
  
  

Major players / consolidators

The most consistent consolidators fall into two archetypes:

1. Brand management / licensing roll-ups acquiring IP and shifting to royalty-led economics:
   Authentic Brands Group (ABG), WHP Global, BlueStar Alliance, Marquee Brands. Recent deals (Dockers, Vera Wang, Palm Angels, Laura Ashley, Dickies) underscore continued appetite.
   
   
2. Strategic portfolio scalers, often via carve-outs or targeted category expansion:
   Prada (Versace), Caleres (Stuart Weitzman), Pepkor (Retailability brands) alongside broader strategic refocusing by multi-brand groups.

‍

Summary of Key Metrics

2. Industry M&A Market Overview (Fashion & Apparel)

‍

Deal activity trends (Y/Y and Q/Q)

Backdrop: After a clear value-led rebound in 2024, 2025 has been a volume-light but strategically active market.

• 2024 recovery: GlobalData estimates ~304 apparel & accessories deals in 2024 (+7% YoY) and ~$22B of announced value (+~90% YoY). Value outpaced count due to the return of larger transactions and continued PE add-ons.
  
  
• 2025 selective slowdown: PitchBook data summarized by Modern Retail shows Q2’25 global deal count down ~40% YoY (66 deals vs. 109 in Q2’24). This aligns with broader “wait for clarity” behavior on rates, tariffs, and consumer demand. (Modern Retail)
• 2025 stabilization signs: Lincoln International’s Q1 and Q3 2025 sector reviews describe activity as tempered but showing early recovery, with well-capitalized strategics and sponsors selectively targeting resilient brands and categories. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC)
  
  

What’s driving the pattern

1. Macro uncertainty (trade policy, uneven discretionary spend) extends diligence and compresses average deal size. (Vogue, McKinsey & Company)
2. Valuation gaps persist for mid-tier assets, limiting broad market clearing. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC)
3. Strong assets still attract competition: luxury, footwear, athleisure, off-price/value retail, and scalable brand IP continue to see processes. (Vogue, Lincoln International LLC)
   
   

‍

Notable megadeals

Megadeals are back, but more surgical than cyclical:

• Prada → Versace
  
  
  
  • EV: €1.25B (~$1.37B), announced April 2025.
    
    
  • Strategic consolidation of Italian luxury; Prada expands brand portfolio and global scale. (PradaGroup, Le Monde.fr, The Guardian)
• Guess take-private / brand-IP partnership activity
  
  
  
  • 2025 saw renewed interest in take-private and IP separation structures, reflecting the attractiveness of brand monetization under private ownership. (Investors, Vogue)
• Footwear/retail category megadeals referenced in mid-2025 press (e.g., large athletic/value retail combinations) reinforce category resilience as a key determinant of size-able deals. (Vogue)
  
  

‍

Private equity vs. strategic acquirer share

• 2024: PE was a major driver of deal count through platform build/add-on rollups, while strategics re-entered in H2 as cost of capital stabilized. (Capstone Partners)
• 2025: Financial sponsors appear more cautious early in the year (volume down), but they remain active where underwriting is clearer (asset-light brands, footwear, value retail). Strategics are relatively more visible in carve-outs and IP acquisitions (e.g., Prada/Versace; brand-management transactions). (Modern Retail, Vogue, Lincoln International LLC)
  
  

Interpretation: buyer mix is shifting from broad PE-led volume → strategic “quality-first” activity plus niche sponsor rollups.

‍

Capital availability

• Strategic balance sheets are strong: sector strategics entered 2025 with meaningful cash and a desire to prune/upgrade portfolios. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC)
  
  
• PE dry powder remains a latent tailwind, but underwriting has tightened: buyers demand clearer paths to margin durability, inventory discipline, and tariff/sourcing resilience. (Modern Retail, Vogue)
  
  
• Credit conditions are improving at the margin vs. 2023, supporting the expectation of a more active H2’25 and 2026 pipeline if policy/consumer signals stabilize. (Lincoln International LLC, Meridian Capital)

‍

M&A Volume/Value by Year

3. Valuation Multiples & Comps (Fashion & Apparel)

‍

Median EV/Revenue and EV/EBITDA by sub-sector

Public-market and private-market clearing multiples remain category-driven. Using Lincoln International’s Q1’25 sector trading snapshot as an anchor (and cross-checking against broader public comps), medians show a clear resilience premium for value retail, fast fashion, and active categories.

Read-through: Multiples compress quickly when a brand is stuck in promo dependence, weak gross margins, or wholesale-heavy distribution, while scarcity/growth models retain premiums.

‍

Historical multiple ranges (3–5 year view)

The last five years show a cycle trough in 2023 and recovery through 2024, followed by bifurcation in early 2025:

• Broad apparel EV/EBITDA medians stepped up from ~8.6x (2023) to ~9.7x (2024), reflecting improving margin expectations and lower inventory risk versus the 2022–23 reset.
  
  
• 2025 pattern: premium categories (luxury, active, value retail, footwear) stayed near 10–16x+, while challenged mid-tier lifestyle brands drifted toward the 7–9x zone or lower as growth visibility weakened.
  
  

Interpretation: The multiple range has widened. In practice, deal pricing now depends more on category resilience + operating model (DTC vs. wholesale, asset-light licensing vs. owned retail) than on “fashion” as a single sector.

‍

Comparison to S&P 500 / related industries

• The S&P 500 median EV/EBITDA in 2025 sits in the mid-teens on most market datasets, with consumer discretionary typically below tech but still above many apparel names.
  
  
• Fashion/apparel overall trades at a discount to S&P 500, consistent with more volatile demand, shorter product cycles, and inventory/markdown risk.
  
  
• Exception: top luxury and elite sportswear brands with high ROIC and pricing power often trade at or above market multiples, which also sets precedent floors for private deals in those segments.

‍

Historical Valuation Multiples

Comps Table

4. Top Strategic Acquirers & Investors (Fashion & Apparel)

‍

Who’s buying right now (last 12–24 months)

Fashion M&A in 2024–25 has been dominated by two repeat buyer types:

1. Brand management / licensing platforms
   These groups acquire brand IP, then shift economics toward royalties, category extensions, and outsourced operations. They’re effectively running a roll-up playbook across heritage and contemporary labels. Lincoln’s Q1’25 and Q3’25 reviews name multiple transactions by these players as the most notable sector deals. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC, FashionUnited)
2. Strategic portfolio scalers (luxury, footwear, value retail, performance)
   These are operating companies buying for portfolio adjacency, category leadership, and geographic/channel leverage, often via carve-outs or targeted bolt-ons rather than mega-mergers. (Lincoln International LLC, Reuters, Reuters)
   
   

‍

Top acquirers / investors (directionally most active)

(Not exhaustive; focused on publicly visible repeat buyers and the largest disclosed transactions.)

Brand/IP consolidators (most consistent deal engines)

1. Authentic Brands Group (ABG) – Bought Dockers IP; partnered on Guess take-private; active bidder for additional U.S. heritage brands. (Reuters, FashionUnited)
   
   
2. WHP Global – Acquired Vera Wang (Q1’25) and continues to pursue U.S. label IP (e.g., reported Lands’ End interest). (Lincoln International LLC, FashionUnited)
   
   
3. BlueStar Alliance – Acquired Palm Angels (Q1’25) and Dickies (Q3’25), highlighting aggressive IP roll-up posture. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC)
   
   
4. Marquee Brands – Acquired Laura Ashley (Q1’25), reinforcing its home + lifestyle brand aggregation strategy. (Lincoln International LLC)
   
   
5. Strategic licensing/JV capital partners (e.g., Story3 Capital) – backed minority growth investments such as Adanola (Q3’25). (Lincoln International LLC)
   
   

Why they’re acquiring:

• Asset-light cash flow: buy brands at moderate multiples, monetize via royalties.
  
  
• Global category expansion: handbags → footwear → beauty → home.
  
  
• Optionality in distress: ideal buyers for labels that struggle operationally but retain awareness. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC, The Wall Street Journal)
  
  

‍

Strategic operators (portfolio and category builders)

6. Prada Group – Acquiring Versace (€1.25B, announced Apr 2025; closing Dec 2025) to build an Italian luxury portfolio leader. Integration is now priority. (Reuters, PradaGroup, AP News)
   
   
7. Caleres – Acquired Stuart Weitzman from Tapestry (Q1’25) to move further into luxury footwear. (Lincoln International LLC, Lincoln International LLC)
   
   
8. Gildan Activewear – Acquired HanesBrands (Q3’25), a major scale play in basics/activewear. (Lincoln International LLC)
   
   
9. Pepkor (Africa value retail) – Acquired Retailability brands in SA to expand low-to-mid price apparel footprint.
   
   
10. Multiply Group (UAE) – Majority acquisition of Tendam (Spain) in 2025, signaling cross-border capital pushing into European apparel platforms. (Lincoln International LLC)
    
    
11. Scope Capital (Sweden / EU) – Took controlling stake in Stone Fashion (Netherlands), emphasizing EU heritage + manufacturing. (Lincoln International LLC)
    
    
12. Luxury conglomerates in portfolio-prune mode (LVMH, Kering, Richemont-adjacent) – While historically acquirers, 2024–25 features more selective divestitures/carve-outs, creating deal supply and inviting licensing platforms as buyers (e.g., Marc Jacobs sale talks). (The Wall Street Journal, The Business of Fashion)
    
    

Why they’re acquiring:

• Portfolio adjacency & aesthetic diversification (Prada/Versace: maximalist vs. minimalist smoothing cyclicality). (Reuters, Fortune)
  
  
• Category resilience (footwear, basics, athleisure outperforming). (Lincoln International LLC, Meridian Capital)
  
  
• Scale synergies in sourcing/logistics amid tariff and supply-chain shifts. (Lincoln International LLC, Meridian Capital)
  
  
• Channel leverage: roll acquired brands into owned DTC + global wholesale systems. (Lincoln International LLC)

‍

Logo Grid: Active Acquirers

Recent Deals by Acquirer, Value, and Rationale

5. Transaction Case Studies (Fashion & Apparel)

‍

Below are four representative deals from 2024–25 that illustrate the core deal archetypes in the sector: luxury consolidation, IP/brand-management rollups, strategic carve-outs, and scale plays in basics/activewear. Where valuation multiples are not disclosed, I explicitly note that and frame any commentary as directional (non-advisory).

‍

Case Study 1: Prada Group → Versace (Luxury consolidation & portfolio scale)

Announcement: April 10, 2025
Expected close: December 2, 2025 (per latest reporting) (Reuters, Le Monde.fr, ARHANA GAUR)

Deal size: €1.25B (~$1.37B) EV, debt- and cash-free (Le Monde.fr, ARHANA GAUR, MergerSight Group)

Strategic rationale

• Italian luxury champion: Combines two iconic houses, expanding Prada’s portfolio beyond Prada/Miu Miu and diversifying style positioning. (ARHANA GAUR, Reuters)
  
  
• Execution uplift: Capri struggled to fully re-accelerate Versace; Prada believes its operating playbook (product cadence, retail productivity, brand storytelling) can re-ignite growth. (ARHANA GAUR, Reuters)
  
  
• Scale synergies: Procurement leverage, shared back office, global retail/wholesale distribution efficiencies.
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not publicly disclosed. Deal is typically benchmarked off luxury precedent EV/EBITDA bands; any implied multiple is inference and not a stated fact. (ARHANA GAUR, MergerSight Group)
  
  

Expected synergies / value creation

• Revenue: broadened geographic reach and category adjacency (accessories, men’s, retail expansion).
  
  
• Cost: shared sourcing, logistics, and corporate costs; Prada CEO stated focus will be integration for ~3 years post-close. (Reuters)
  
  

Why it matters

• Signals that luxury M&A is back in a targeted way, with strategics buying to build multi-house platforms rather than pursuing cross-category mega-mergers.
  
  

‍

Case Study 2: Authentic Brands Group (ABG) → Dockers (from Levi Strauss)

Announcement: May 20, 2025
Deal size: $311M upfront + earn-out up to $80M (Lincoln International LLC)

Strategic rationale

• Levi’s sell-side logic: Monetize a slower-growth, non-core brand to sharpen focus on Levi’s core denim/lifestyle DTC strategy. (Lincoln International LLC)
  
  
• ABG buy-side logic: Classic brand-management/IP acquisition—ABG can expand Dockers via licensing partners across apparel categories and new geos.
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not disclosed. IP-style deals are often priced on royalty potential and brand durability rather than reported EBITDA multiples.
  
  

Expected synergies / value creation

• Asset-light model: shift toward licensing-led revenue with limited capital intensity.
  
  
• Category extension: menswear, casual bottoms, potentially adjacent lifestyle categories.
  
  

Why it matters

• Reinforces the dominant roll-up theme: operators divesting brands + IP platforms consolidating them.
  
  

‍

Case Study 3: Caleres → Stuart Weitzman (from Tapestry)

Announcement: Feb 19, 2025
Close: Aug 4, 2025
Deal size: $105M headline; net ~$108.7M after adjustments (Caleres Investor Relations, Reuters, SEC)

Strategic rationale

• Tapestry sell-side logic: portfolio simplification after the blocked Capri merger; Weitzman was small and loss-making relative to Coach/Kate Spade. (Reuters)
  
  
• Caleres buy-side logic: Adds a luxury footwear halo brand to a well-scaled footwear platform, allowing Caleres to move up-market and leverage its operating infrastructure. (Caleres Investor Relations, SEC)
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not publicly disclosed; given Tapestry noted losses at Weitzman, price reflects turnaround opportunity rather than peak-cycle multiples. (Reuters, SEC)
  
  

Expected synergies / value creation

• Cost: Caleres can absorb corporate overhead, sourcing, and logistics into a larger base.
  
  
• Revenue: expand distribution and digital reach using Caleres’ channels.
  
  

Why it matters

• A clean example of strategic carve-out M&A in 2025: large groups pruning, specialists buying.
  
  

‍

Case Study 4: Gildan Activewear → HanesBrands (Basics/activewear scale play)

Announcement: Aug 2025; shareholder approval Nov 25, 2025
Deal value: $2.2B equity consideration; ~$4.4B including debt (AP News, SGB Online, sginews.com)

Strategic rationale

• Scale in essentials: Gildan gains access to Hanes, Maidenform, and other mass-basics brands; Hanes gains a stronger low-cost manufacturing/blank-apparel backbone. (AP News)
  
  
• Supply chain + margin repair: Underwrite synergy from manufacturing efficiency and procurement scale. (AP News)
  
  
• Portfolio adjacency: strengthens Gildan’s position in underwear/active essentials and global wholesale.
  
  

Multiple paid

• Not fully disclosed publicly beyond headline consideration; precedent benchmarking is typical for basics/activewear but not stated here as fact.
  
  

Expected synergies / value creation

• Cost: manufacturing + sourcing leverage (core to thesis).
  
  
• Revenue: cross-distribution, broader retailer penetration, and category coverage.
  
  

Why it matters

• Shows that even in a softer 2025 deal-count environment, large strategic combinations happen where cost/scale logic is compelling.
  
  

‍

Cross-case takeaways

1. Barbell deal mix: premium strategic moves in luxury/footwear + value-driven IP rollups in heritage brands. (Lincoln International LLC, Reuters)
   
   
2. Divestiture-to-platform pipeline: big multi-brand operators are supplying assets; brand-management firms are the most repeat buyers. (Lincoln International LLC)
   
   
3. Synergy underwriting is tightening: buyers emphasize real, operational levers (sourcing scale, overhead absorption, DTC/retail productivity) over pure multiple arbitrage. (AP News, Reuters, Reuters)

‍

One-Page Snapshot Per Deal

6. Valuation Framework & Modeling (Fashion & Apparel)

‍

This section explains how fashion/apparel deals are typically priced, what valuation tools “carry weight” in processes today, and which modeling drivers matter most. I’m describing market practice and giving illustrative assumptions only—not investment advice.

‍

How deals are priced in this industry

In fashion & apparel, bankers and buyers almost always triangulate value using three lenses:

1. Trading Comps (public market multiples)
   
   
   
   • Used to set the baseline multiple range for the category (luxury vs. athleisure vs. value retail vs. mid-tier lifestyle).
     
     
   • Current processes heavily weight category-specific peers, because sector-wide averages are misleading given bifurcation.
     
     
   • Key adjustments:
     
     
     
     • Channel mix (DTC > wholesale)
       
       
     • Gross margin durability (pricing power, low promo dependence)
       
       
     • Inventory turns and working capital discipline
       
       
2. Precedent Transactions
   
   
   
   • Most persuasive when they share category + channel + geography + brand heat.
     
     
   • In 2025, precedents for IP/licensing transactions (ABG/WHP/BlueStar deals) are often valued off royalty potential, not EBITDA.
     
     
   • Adjustments typically include:
     
     
     
     • Cycle timing (2023 trough vs. 2024 rebound vs. 2025 selective market)
       
       
     • Distress vs. healthy growth
       
       
     • Deal structure (IP-only vs. operating company)
       
       
3. DCF / Multi-year Cash Flow Underwriting
   
   
   
   • Used for:
     
     
     
     • Luxury / premium brands with steadier long-term pricing power
       
       
     • Scaled DTC / athleisure where LTV/CAC economics can be modeled
       
       
     • Turnarounds where a buyer can credibly show margin normalization
       
       
   • Usually a cross-check—rarely the headline anchor unless the asset is large, high-quality, and cash-flow-visible.
     
     

Sponsor deals add a 4th lens: LBO returns, where leverage capacity depends on inventory volatility and cash conversion.

‍

Typical control premiums

Control premiums vary widely based on asset quality and process type:

• Healthy mid-market brands: often ~20–35% premium to unaffected trading (or equivalent private “step-up” vs. last round).
  
  
• Scarce / high-heat assets (luxury cult brands, high-growth athleisure): premiums can be higher, especially in competitive auctions.
  
  
• Distressed / carve-out assets: premiums can compress to low-teens or even trade below prior comps if earnings are impaired.
  
  

Reality check: In fashion, buyers care less about “premium %” and more about whether the model supports credible margin stability + cash conversion post-close.

‍

Key model drivers in Fashion & Apparel

The sector has a few deal-breaker variables that dominate valuation sensitivity:

1. Revenue growth quality
   
   
   
   • Not just top-line CAGR, but where growth comes from:
     
     
     
     • DTC share expansion
       
       
     • Category extensions (footwear, accessories, beauty, home)
       
       
     • Geographic whitespace
       
       
     • Price vs. unit growth split
       
       
2. Gross margin durability
   
   
   
   • Most important KPI in diligence.
     
     
   • Core questions:
     
     
     
     • How promo-dependent is the brand?
       
       
     • Are cost increases passed through to consumer?
       
       
     • Is mix shifting toward higher-margin categories?
       
       
3. EBITDA margin trajectory
   
   
   
   • Buyers underwrite path to steady-state margins, not just current print.
     
     
   • Common levers:
     
     
     
     • Supply chain optimization
       
       
     • SKU rationalization
       
       
     • Store closures / fleet productivity
       
       
     • Marketing efficiency
       
       
4. Inventory + working capital
   
   
   
   • Biggest difference vs. many other consumer verticals.
     
     
   • A brand with unstable inventory turns gets lower leverage capacity and a lower multiple—even if revenue is growing.
     
     
5. Channel mix (DTC vs wholesale/licensing)
   
   
   
   • DTC lift is often the principal “multiple-expansion story.”
     
     
   • Licensing shift (for heritage brands) can radically change valuation base because it reduces capex and working capital.
     
     

‍

Example modeling assumptions (illustrative, non-advisory)

Base-case ranges used in current processes (directional, refine per target):

Core fashion / lifestyle brands

• Revenue CAGR (5 yrs): 4–8%
  
  
• Gross margin: 50–60% (higher for premium)
  
  
• EBITDA margin exit: 10–14%
  
  
• Capex: 2–3% of sales
  
  
• Inventory turns: target +0.2–0.5 turns improvement post-close
  
  

Athleisure / activewear / performance

• Revenue CAGR (5 yrs): 8–15%
  
  
• EBITDA margin exit: 12–20%
  
  
• DTC penetration: expand +5–15 pts over plan
  
  
• Marketing: held flat-to-down as % of sales via efficiency
  
  

Luxury

• Revenue CAGR (5 yrs): 6–10%
  
  
• EBITDA margin exit: 15–25%+
  
  
• Pricing: low-single-digit annual price capture assumed
  
  
• Lower discount rate due to margin durability and pricing power
  
  

Again—these are structure examples, not recommendations.

‍

Sample DCF Input Summary

Sensitivity Analysis Table

7. Trends & Strategic Themes (Fashion & Apparel M&A)

‍

Sector-specific shifts shaping dealmaking

Fashion M&A in 2025 is less about broad “growth roll-ups” and more about surgical repositioning around profitability, supply-chain risk, and defensible consumer demand. Recent advisor and industry reviews describe a bifurcated market—fewer deals overall, but strong conviction for best-in-class assets. (Modern Retail, Capstone Partners, Lincoln International LLC)

Key shifts:

1. Cost of capital + volatility → “quality-first” underwriting
   
   
   
   • Buyers are prioritizing margin durability and cash conversion over pure revenue growth.
     
     
   • Processes are longer, with deeper diligence on inventory cycles, markdown risk, and demand elasticity. (Modern Retail, Capstone Partners)
     
     
2. Tariff and trade-policy uncertainty is becoming a core M&A driver
   
   
   
   • The U.S. de minimis rule tightening (ending duty-free treatment for many sub-$800 China/HK shipments effective May 2, 2025) raises landed costs for fast-fashion and cross-border e-commerce models. (Vogue, reidellawfirm.com, New York Magazine)
   • Expect more deals motivated by nearshoring, supplier diversification, and scale procurement to offset tariffs. (Modern Retail, Capstone Partners, Meridian Capital)
     
     
3. Portfolio pruning by strategics → steady carve-out supply
   
   
   
   • Large multi-brand groups are divesting to simplify and refocus, creating a consistent pipeline of non-core brand carve-outs for specialists and IP buyers. (Capstone Partners, Lincoln International LLC)
     
     

‍

Emerging models driving where buyers pay up

1. Brand-management / licensing rollups are the dominant consolidator model
   
   
   
   • Platforms like ABG, WHP, and BlueStar keep acquiring heritage and contemporary IP, then pivoting to asset-light royalty economics.
     
     
   • This model matches the current environment: less working capital, lower capex, and faster cash payback. (Capstone Partners, Lincoln International LLC)
     
     
2. B2B / platform consolidation in footwear, basics, and active
   
   
   
   • Footwear and essentials remain resilient categories; buyers pursue scale + sourcing synergies and repeat-purchase flywheels. Recent deals such as Steve Madden/Kurt Geiger underscore cross-border footwear platform logic. (The Guardian, Meridian Capital)
3. Circularity and resale adjacency
   
   
   
   • Strategics increasingly see resale and recommerce as margin-accretive customer-lifecycle extensions, making resale-enabled brands more attractive M&A targets. (Vogue, Capstone Partners)
4. Tech/AI enablement as a hidden diligence theme
   
   
   
   • Not a standalone “AI M&A wave” yet, but buyers now diligence:
     
     
     
     • demand forecasting & allocation algorithms,
       
       
     • personalization/CRM for DTC,
       
       
     • automated design/supply-chain planning.
       
       
   • These capabilities support higher confidence in inventory turns, which is valuation-critical in fashion. (Capstone Partners, Meridian Capital)
     (Inference based on advisor trend framing; not stated as a single quantified fact in sources.)
     
     

‍

Antitrust / regulatory landscape

Regulatory scrutiny is now a real gating item, especially in U.S. “accessible luxury” and other narrow competitive sets.

• The FTC’s successful move to block the Tapestry–Capri merger in October 2024 is widely viewed as a precedent that raises risk for large horizontal deals in concentrated fashion segments. (www.hoganlovells.com, Fashion Law Journal, Clifford Chance)
• Practically, this pushes strategics toward:
  
  
  
  • smaller bolt-ons,
    
    
  • category adjacencies,
    
    
  • IP-only deals that avoid competitive overlap. (www.hoganlovells.com, Capstone Partners)
    
    

‍

Expert POV: what these themes imply for strategy

• Expect more “defensive consolidation.” Tariffs and logistics shocks reward scale in sourcing and distribution, so mid-market brands without procurement leverage become natural sellers. (Lincoln International LLC, Capstone Partners, reidellawfirm.com)
  
  
• The “IP vs. OpCo split” will accelerate. Strategics shed brands; IP platforms scoop them up; operators focus on fewer, stronger banners with clearer DTC economics. (Lincoln International LLC, Capstone Partners)
  
  
• Bifurcation will widen. Premium categories (luxury, athleisure, footwear, value retail) will keep clearing at higher multiples, while promo-dependent lifestyle brands face either distressed exits or licensing pivots. (Modern Retail, Capstone Partners, Meridian Capital)

‍

Timeline of Trend Emergence

8. 2025–26 Market Outlook (Fashion & Apparel M&A)

‍

Expected M&A drivers

Across advisor outlooks and 2025 year-end reviews, the sector setup for 2026 reads cautiously constructive: dealmakers expect volumes to improve even if the market stays quality-selective. (BDO, EY, Deloitte)

1. Improving macro + capital markets
   
   
   
   • Broad US M&A forecasts call for modest volume growth through 2026, with value supported by larger deals as confidence returns. (EY, Deloitte)
     
     
   • For fashion specifically, Lincoln and Capstone note that stability in rates and credit is a prerequisite for sponsors to re-accelerate platform activity. (Lincoln International LLC, Capstone Partners, Capstone Partners)
2. Bifurcation → consolidation of winners + restructuring of laggards
   
   
   
   • 2025’s lower deal count but sustained strategic interest implies 2026 will continue to reward best-in-class categories (luxury, athleisure, footwear, value retail). (Lincoln International LLC, Modern Retail, Capstone Partners)
     
     
   • Meanwhile, mid-tier lifestyle brands facing weaker pricing power are increasingly pushed toward take-privates, carve-outs, or IP-only exits. (KPMG, Reuters)
3. Tariffs / trade reconfiguration as a deal catalyst
   
   
   
   • Sector advisors emphasize that tariff clarity and sourcing re-orientation are central to underwriting; 2026 could see more nearshoring, supplier M&A, and scale sourcing plays. (Capstone Partners, McKinsey & Company, Solomon Partners)
4. Portfolio pruning by multi-brand strategics
   
   
   
   • Expect steady auction flow from large groups simplifying portfolios after recent regulatory and macro shocks. This keeps a reliable supply of carve-outs for specialists and IP platforms. (Lincoln International LLC, KPMG, The Wall Street Journal)
     
     
5. Brand-management / licensing rollups remain the most repeatable buyer model
   
   
   
   • IP aggregators will likely stay the highest-frequency acquirers in 2026, benefitting from divestitures and from the appeal of asset-light royalty economics in a volatile demand environment. (Capstone Partners, The Fashion Law, Reuters)

‍

Expected headwinds

1. Ongoing consumer pressure in discretionary
   
   
   
   • Even with macro stabilization, uneven discretionary spend keeps diligence heavy and elongates processes, especially for non-resilient categories. (McKinsey & Company, KPMG, Modern Retail)
2. Regulatory overhang for large horizontal deals
   
   
   
   • Post-FTC actions in fashion (e.g., blocked Tapestry–Capri) continue to steer buyers away from big like-for-like mergers. 2026 will skew to bolt-ons, adjacencies, and IP moves. (Modern Retail, Solomon Partners)
     
     
3. Valuation gaps for median assets
   
   
   
   • “Price discovery” remains hard for mid-quality brands, limiting broad market clearing unless earnings visibility improves. (Lincoln International LLC, Capstone Partners)
     
     

‍

Buy-side vs. sell-side expectations

Buy-side (strategic & PE):

• Want margin durability, inventory discipline, and proven brand heat.
  
  
• Increasingly structure deals around earn-outs or IP splits to manage uncertainty. (Capstone Partners, Reuters)
  
  

Sell-side (brands / conglomerates / sponsors):

• Motivated sellers include:
  
  
  
  • Conglomerates pruning non-core banners. (The Wall Street Journal, KPMG)
    
    
  • Sponsors seeking exits after holding periods extended through 2023–24. (Financial Times, BDO)
  • Operators facing tariff/sourcing shocks who need scale partners. (Capstone Partners, McKinsey & Company)
    
    

Net: 2026 likely sees more processes, but only a subset clears at premium multiples.

‍

Funnel of Deal Types by Strategic Priority

Outlook grid: short / mid / long term

9. Appendices & Citations

‍

9.1 Deal Tables (CSV-ready)

A) Representative disclosed deals (2024–25)

9.2 Data Sources (hyperlinked list)

Market activity / deal flow

• GlobalData – Apparel M&A themed quarterly analysis (deal volume/value by quarter, megadeals). (GlobalData, Research and Markets)
• Lincoln International – Fashion & Apparel Market Update Q1 2025 (category multiples, investor tone). (Lincoln International LLC)
• Lincoln International – Fashion & Apparel Quarterly Review Q3 2024 (PDF) (historical deal context, activity vs. 2021 peak). (Lincoln International LLC)
• Capstone Partners – Apparel, Footwear & Accessories M&A report (market commentary and trend framing). (Capstone Partners)

Deal-specific primary sources

• Prada Group press release on Versace acquisition (EV, structure, announcement). (PradaGroup)
• Reuters – Prada/Vesace close timing & integration posture (latest status). (Reuters)
• Levi Strauss investor release on Dockers sale to ABG (value, earn-out). (investors.levistrauss.com)
• Reuters / Investopedia coverage of Dockers deal (deal rationale, timing). (Reuters, Investopedia)

Broader valuation context

• Siblis Research – EV/EBITDA multiple overview (cross-sector benchmarking guidance). (Siblis Research)

‍

9.3 Methodology (what’s included, what’s not)

Scope

• Industry: Fashion & Apparel, including luxury, active/athleisure, fast fashion, off-price/value retail, footwear, and brand-management/licensing platforms.
  
  
• Geography: Global, with emphasis on North America and Europe where disclosure is highest.
  
  

Definitions

• Deal count/value: Announced M&A transactions where target is primarily in fashion/apparel/footwear/accessories.
  
  
• Multiples:
  
  
  
  • Trading comps: Median LTM EV/EBITDA by sub-sector from Lincoln Q1’25 snapshot. (Lincoln International LLC)
    
    
  • Precedent multiples: Used where disclosed; otherwise discussed directionally to avoid unsupported precision.
    
    
• Megadeals: Transactions >$1B (per GlobalData convention). (GlobalData, Research and Markets)
  
  

Modeling posture

• All DCF and sensitivity ranges are illustrative market-practice templates, not investment advice.
  
  
• Where data is undisclosed or paywalled, I do not impute exact values—only note the trend and cite the source.
  
  

Limitations

• Some full-year 2024/2025 aggregates are proprietary (PitchBook/Refinitiv/CapIQ). This report uses public summaries and avoids fabricating precise totals.
  
  
• IP-only deals often lack EBITDA disclosure, so valuation is framed around royalty/brand durability logic, not hard multiples.
  

‍

Disclaimer: The information on this page is provided by MergersandAcquisitions.net for general informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, tax, or professional advice, nor an offer or recommendation to buy or sell any security, instrument, or investment strategy. All content, including statistics, commentary, forecasts, and analyses, is generic in nature, may not be accurate, complete, or current, and should not be relied upon without consulting your own financial, legal, and tax advisers. Investing in financial services, fintech ventures, or related instruments involves significant risks—including market, liquidity, regulatory, business, and technology risks—and may result in the loss of principal. MergersandAcquisitions.net does not act as your broker, adviser, or fiduciary unless expressly agreed in writing, and assumes no liability for errors, omissions, or losses arising from use of this content. Any forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain and actual outcomes may differ materially. References or links to third-party sites and data are provided for convenience only and do not imply endorsement or responsibility. Access to this information may be restricted or prohibited in certain jurisdictions, and MergersandAcquisitions.net may modify or remove content at any time without notice.

‍