Converse Drives 20% of Nike's Sales Decline on Just 2.5% of Revenue

Converse generated just 2.5% of Nike's sales last quarter — yet it accounted for 20% of the company's sales decline. Two years into CEO Elliott Hill's tenure, the 118-year-old maker of the Chuck Taylor has become a measurable drag on a turnaround that is not coming together. Converse sales fell 28% in the most recent quarter, and analysts are openly questioning whether Nike will keep the brand in its portfolio.

The core problem, according to analysts: Converse cannot innovate beyond a single silhouette. The Chuck Taylor's vulcanized rubber sole and heavy, stiff profile are out of step with current trends, and the brand is enduring an unusually long, deep cold streak.

How bad is the slump?

The numbers frame it plainly. Converse peaked in 2023 with all-time-high sales of $2.43 billion. Last fiscal year, revenue had more than halved to $1.17 billion. If the current rate of decline continues through the rest of the fiscal year, sales will fall below $1 billion for the first time since 2010.

That would mark Converse's worst stretch since the 1990s. The brand's trajectory is steep: from record high to near-halving in roughly two fiscal years.

Matt Powell, a footwear industry veteran and senior advisor to BCE Consulting, puts the blame on concentration risk. "They're far too dependent on one item and when that one item cools off, like it is now, there's no place to hide," Powell says. "It's a fashion business and nothing lasts forever."

Converse operates separately from Nike, with its own CEO reporting to Hill. It sells other models — the Jack Purcell, named for a 20th-century Canadian badminton star, is having some success — but Chuck Taylors account for the lion's share of the business. VF Corp's Vans has suffered a similar fate for the same reason: over-reliance on checkered-pattern skater shoes.

Why can't Converse defend its turf?

Converse sits between casual footwear, fashion sneakers, and lifestyle shoes — a space that has become crowded. On Running, APL, Deckers Brands' HOKA, and New Balance have all managed to meet shifting consumer tastes in recent years.

Powell points to Adidas as a template: the German brand kept its classic Samba hyper-relevant by introducing new variations, including a recent slip-on version. Converse, by contrast, has not refreshed its flagship.

The scale of the erosion is what troubles analysts. "We've never seen a 44% decline in demand for a brand," BNP Paribas Equity Research senior analyst Laurent Vasilescu wrote, citing the fiscal quarter ended November 2025. He said he would not be surprised if Nike ultimately decided to sell off Converse.

Will Nike sell its last acquisition?

Nike bought Converse for $305 million in 2003, betting it could rehabilitate an iconic brand that had filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001 after dominating athletic footwear for decades. Founded in 1908 as a rubber shoe maker, Converse introduced its first basketball shoe in 1916 and the All-Star in 1917; the Chuck Taylor redesign arrived in 1932 and generations have worn the style since, from Kurt Cobain to Charli XCX.

Nike has since sold off nearly every brand it acquired — Cole Haan, Umbro, Starter, Bauer, and Hurley — leaving Converse as the last one standing. Vasilescu argues it could meet the same fate, given its performance and Nike's need to focus on other ailing units, including sales in China and the Jordan brand.

Hill said last month he is focused on getting Converse "back to financial health." A Nike spokesperson said, "Converse remains an important part of the portfolio" and declined to give specifics, saying the company would provide an update at Nike's investor day next month. The promise of detail, notably, is deferred — nothing concrete on revival plans is on the record yet.

Powell, for his part, sees life left in the brand, within Nike or outside it — especially if it launches lighter, more flexible, more breathable versions. "If and when this shoe hits again, it's going to be ridiculously successful," he says. Whether Nike still owns it when that happens is now an open question.