Why Is Under Armour’s Sales Decline Pushing It to Cut Its Product Range?

What Under Armour’s results and strategy actually show

Under Armour’s first-quarter fiscal 2027 release reported revenue down 3%, North American revenue down 9% and ecommerce revenue down 12%. The quarter ended on 30 June 2026, and the release was issued on 7 August. The overall revenue decline was 4% on a constant-currency basis, distinct from the reported 3% figure.

Management described simplifying the business and investing in a sharper product portfolio, with clearer storytelling and the aim of earning demand at full price. The release does not quantify a product-count reduction or identify individual styles to remove. Reading this as a call for assortment discipline is reasonable; presenting a specified range cut as an announced fact would go further than the evidence.

Source: Under Armour’s official Q1 fiscal 2027 results, filed with the SEC.

A sharper range needs a reason for every option

Assortment rationalisation means deciding which product options deserve space, stock and future investment. The aim is a range with a clear customer purpose and appropriate depth behind it. Removing options without understanding their role can leave the retailer with fewer choices but the same buying mistakes.

A low-selling style might have weak demand, poor availability, the wrong size mix or a limited selling window. A style with many sales might be relying on discounting. Those are different problems. Before simplifying the range, ask what the product contributes and whether customers could actually buy the relevant sizes at the intended price.

For Merchmix, this connects three questions: Atlas helps read the trading evidence; Core turns the assortment choice into a merchandise plan; Core Plus supports a specific allocation or replenishment response. A report is evidence for a decision, rather than an automatic instruction to cut a product.

Use Atlas to separate volume from full-price demand

Atlas is Merchmix’s analytics product, with reports, filters and dashboards for reviewing retail performance. Compare products over the same period, location scope and unit basis. Read sell-through with stock remaining and recent sales, then examine the price basis behind those sales.

In a separate activewear example, not Under Armour records, Training Tee received 240 units and sold 180 across four completed weeks, leaving 60. Graphic Tee received 240 and sold 72, leaving 168. Running Short received 160 and sold 96, leaving 64. Assume no returns, transfers or later receipts within this reporting window.

Those figures give sell-through of 75%, 30% and 60%. Training Tee sold 162 of its 180 units at full price, or 90%; Graphic Tee sold 36 of 72 at full price, or 50%; Running Short sold 72 of 96 at full price, or 75%. These are separate measures: full-price share uses units sold as its denominator, while sell-through uses units received.

The illustrated Atlas report combines the supplied report-layout patterns with these worked measures. It does not claim that the video established a particular configured full-price report or that analytics has changed an operational record.

Check the stock behind the assortment decision

The latest completed week recorded 20 Training Tee sales, 12 Graphic Tee sales and 16 Running Short sales. Held stock therefore represents three, fourteen and four weeks of cover respectively. Cover here is stock on hand divided by that latest weekly rate; it is a current comparison, not a promise that future demand stays constant.

Graphic Tee combines lower sell-through, more stock and a lower full-price sales share. That is a reason to investigate additional buying and its future range role, not enough evidence to declare the design unwanted. Check availability, presentation, season and promotional exposure before deciding whether to retain, revise or remove the option.

Training Tee’s stronger full-price share also needs context. Its latest 20-unit week is below the earlier weeks in the reporting window. A retailer should test whether the current pace supports another intake, rather than assume a strong cumulative result will continue unchanged.

Turn the range choice into Core’s MFP/WSSI plan

Core is Merchmix’s planning product, including assortment planning and MFP/WSSI. It gives the buyer a place to connect option choices with the weekly sales, stock and intake assumptions behind them. A narrower proposed range should lead to a coherent stock plan, not simply a shorter list of style names.

For Training Tee, suppose the next three-week forecast is 20, 24 and 28 units, with 48 confirmed incoming before week-two sales. Starting from 60 held gives projected closing stock of 40, 64 and 36. The 72 forecast sales and the receipt timing must be tested against current demand; the earlier full-price share alone does not establish that outlook.

For Graphic Tee, a three-week outlook of 12 units each week, with an existing 24-unit receipt before week two, leaves 156, 168 and 156. A proposed hold on further intake can be considered while that existing commitment remains included. Reviewing its future range role does not erase current stock or cancel an order.

The two profiles need different decisions. Protecting depth behind a retained option and limiting additional exposure in another can coexist. Core makes the stock implication of each proposal explicit without claiming that the proposed assortment has already been approved.

Use Core Plus for the local availability question

Core Plus supports allocation and replenishment by store and size. A product can deserve a place in the range and still be in the wrong location. Treat the local stock response separately from the decision to retain the product or place a new supplier order.

Training Tee’s 60 held units are split between Downtown, with 12 at a latest weekly rate of 12, and Suburb, with 48 at a rate of eight. That is one week of cover versus six. A proposed transfer of 18 units, split small three, medium nine and large six, would leave 30 at each location before any intervening sales.

At the stated rates, Downtown would have 2.5 weeks of cover and Suburb 3.75. The total remains 60. Check the available sizes, transit timing and source protection before authorising the move. The separately committed 48-unit receipt stays in the weekly plan; the transfer does not create additional network stock.

Keep full-price ambition separate from a price assumption

A retained product should have a clear commercial role. If Training Tee has a $40 ticket price and a $16 unit cost, one full-price unit produces $24 gross profit, or a 60% gross margin before other expenses. At a proposed $32 price, gross profit becomes $16 and gross margin 50%, with cost held unchanged.

That comparison isolates the price effect. It does not establish how many units either price would sell. Full-price sales share helps describe past trading; a new sales forecast still needs its own evidence. A proposed range reduction cannot by itself guarantee demand, margin or lower discounting.

Keep the decisions connected: Atlas provides the performance read, Core carries the resulting assortment and MFP/WSSI assumptions, and Core Plus addresses a scoped local supply need. Each has a different role in supporting a commercially justified range.

Test whether the sharper range is working

The next trading read should test the reason for each proposed action. Did Training Tee sell near the weekly profile? Were the intended sizes available where demand existed? Did Graphic Tee’s stock exposure reduce through genuine demand or through a changed price? Did the transfer arrive in time to help without weakening the source store?

Range simplification is a strategy to test, not a substitute for customer evidence. The lesson from Under Armour’s stated direction is to make product choices, stock depth and full-price assumptions explainable together. This article does not imply that Under Armour uses Merchmix or that a particular platform would reverse its reported decline.