MW Tim Cook is back to buying Nike stock, four months after an ill-timed purchase
By Bill Peters
Cook and Nike CEO Elliott Hill boosted their stakes in the athletic-gear giant after the stock sank to a 12-year low
Apple CEO Tim Cook, a longtime Nike board member, spent $1 million of his own money to buy Nike's stock as it dipped to a 12-year low.
Shares of Nike rallied Wednesday after company CEO Elliott Hill and Apple CEO Tim Cook, a Nike board member, spent more of their own money to boost their stakes in the athletic-gear giant - offering a show of faith in the company amid fresh questions about its position as a sports "superpower."
Those purchases from Cook, who has been a Nike board member since 2005, and Hill were made after Nike's stock $(NKE)$ sank to a 12-year low in the wake of a disappointing earnings report and worries about Hill's leadership picks. They were also made four months after both Cook and Hill bought Nike stock in the open market for the first time, after a downbeat earnings report sent shares sinking.
Nike disclosed late Tuesday that on April 10, Cook spent $1.06 million to buy 25,000 shares at a price of $42.43 each. Hill followed that by spending $1 million to buy about 23,660 shares of Nike on April 13, at an average price of $42.265 per share.
Those purchases appear well timed, as the stock traded as low as $42.40 on April 20 before closing down 3.1% at $42.62 - its lowest close since October 2014. On April 13, the stock fell to an intraday low of $42.09 before bouncing to close at $42.91.
Cook now owns 130,480 common shares of Nike, or 0.01% of the shares outstanding. Hill owns 265,247 shares, or 0.02% of the shares outstanding.
Nike's stock rallied 2.8% in recent afternoon trading on Wednesday. While it had bounced 6.6% from its April 10 close, it was still down 28.7% so far this year. In comparison, rival Under Armour shares have run up 27.9% this year, while the S&P 500 index SPX has gained 2.2%.
While it's encouraging for Cook and Hill to express conviction, again, in Nike's outlook, their previous purchases show that being top company insiders doesn't mean they are good market timers.
The last time Cook bought Nike shares, it was on Dec. 22 at a price of $58.97 each. A week later, Hill bought stock at $61.10.
The stock had rallied after those purchases, to a peak closing price of $66.30 on Jan. 13. By early March, however, it had dropped below both of those purchase prices. At current prices, Cook would be down $677,000 on his December trade, and Hill would be down about $256,800.
Under Hill, who became CEO in 2024, Nike has tried to make more products tailored toward athletes. But it has struggled with consumers who have grown pickier about purchases in the face of rising prices.
Against that backdrop, Nike's sportswear sales have flagged. Demand in China has been wobbly, and the company has been trying to sell off piles of unwanted casual sneakers, like Dunks and Air Force 1s. The company last week announced the departure of its chief innovation officer, who had been on the job for less than a year.
Oppenheimer analysts, however, took this month's stock purchases from Cook and Hill as a vote of confidence in the company.
"Newly introduced, more innovative products are starting to sell well," they said in a note on Wednesday. "At the same time, [Nike] is working to address ongoing marketplace inventory challenges and geographic weak spots, namely China and Europe."
But UBS analyst Jay Sole, wrote in a note on Monday that investors were still wondering if Nike's stock had fallen enough to justify buying it. And he wondered if Nike had lost its status as a sporting "superpower."
Sole noted that Nike's sportswear accounts for more than half of its total sales. But roughly a decade ago, Nike had said sportswear should never comprise more than 30% of its sales mix, on worries that growing its fashion business too much risked diluting its reputation as a go-to for sports performance.
Executives justified that expansion over the past few years by arguing that the definition of sport had expanded, as athleisure blurred the lines between athletic and casual activity.
But Sole believes Nike had sold more fashion items simply for short-term growth. That approach, he said, ran in contrast to the one it took in years past, where it limited availability for its more fashionable products "to maintain an aura of coolness around the brand."
He also argued that increased competition from the likes of On $(ONON)$, Hoka $(DECK)$ and New Balance, along with lower-priced selling and questions about basketball's relevance and star power, had also eroded Nike's reputation.
In years past, NBA stars like Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant helped prop up Nike's image as a premium basketball brand. But Sole said weaker NBA Finals TV ratings since the Chicago Bulls' dominance of the 1990s suggested consumers weren't as focused on basketball today.
"The point is Nike's superpower is based in part on being able to maintain an image of being the best sports brand despite selling a lot of commodity products," Sole wrote. "Basketball was a vehicle for being able to do that. It's unclear whether Nike can use basketball in the same way today."
-Bill Peters
This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
April 15, 2026 13:58 ET (17:58 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Comments