Nike will be removed from the S&P 100 index this Monday, marking the end of its 18-year presence in the benchmark of America’s largest companies. The athletic apparel giant’s decline has been notable: its stock price has fallen by nearly 80% from its 2021 peak, while revenue has dropped approximately 10% since reaching a high of $51.36 billion two years ago.

The company’s struggles are tied in part to its historic branding and corporate culture, which some critics say failed to connect with female consumers despite women driving the majority of apparel purchasing decisions. Nike’s identity has long been associated with a masculine, competitive ethos exemplified by its iconic “Just Do It” slogan, which initially resonated primarily with male athletes. However, industry observers point out that Nike never fully adapted its approach to better serve women, who account for nearly 90% of athletic apparel decisions within households.

Several high-profile controversies involving female athletes under Nike’s sponsorship have further highlighted issues within the company. Allyson Felix, a decorated American track athlete, publicly challenged Nike’s policies after facing sponsorship pay cuts during her pregnancy. Similarly, Mary Cain, a former Nike Oregon Project athlete, described a toxic environment marked by weight monitoring and physical abuse from her coach, which contributed to the premature end of her running career. Internally, reports have surfaced of a workplace culture at Nike’s headquarters that marginalized women through harassment, inappropriate behavior, and career stagnation unless employees conformed to a male-dominated “boys’ club.”

These revelations led to the departure of senior male executives and an apology from then-CEO Mark Parker, although the company’s leadership and reputation suffered long-term damage. Critics argue that Nike’s promotion of a “pro-woman” image primarily functioned as marketing, without substantial shifts in corporate culture or product strategy. The brand was slow to embrace women’s lifestyle trends such as yoga and the demand for versatile, everyday performance wear—a market that competitors like Lululemon capitalized on successfully.

In recent years, Nike’s strategic focus shifted toward a younger, more affluent direct-to-consumer customer base, while scaling back distribution through mainstream retailers frequented by women and families. This move, coupled with an overemphasis on limited-edition collaborations targeting trend-conscious men, contributed to the company losing ground to competitors like Hoka and On Running.

Nike’s 2023 marketing campaign featuring social media personality Dylan Mulvaney in women’s running apparel sparked further backlash for being perceived as out-of-touch with core female consumers. Observers contend that such efforts were more about political signaling than genuine engagement with women’s athletic needs.

Since Elliott Hill returned as CEO in late 2024, Nike has sought to reconnect with female customers through sponsorships and new partnerships, but analysts caution that reversing years of distribution missteps and product stagnation will be challenging.

Industry experts describe Nike’s decline as a cautionary tale of what can happen when a company neglects key consumer groups and rigidly adheres to outdated brand positioning. For now, the company faces the difficult task of regaining trust from a female market that feels overlooked and dismissed.