Combined brand value of the world’s top 50 football clubs reaches record high, as Arsenal overtakes Manchester City, Liverpool and Manchester United, while Tottenham drops out of the global top 10, according to new Brand Finance data
LONDON, 20 August 2026 – The world’s biggest football clubs are becoming increasingly valuable global commercial assets, with the combined brand value of the world’s top 50 football clubs reaching a record GBP21.1 billion, marking the strongest annual growth in the 15-year history of Brand Finance’s Football 50. According to a new report from Brand Finance, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy, the same 50 clubs have a combined enterprise value of GBP68.3 billion, underlining the scale of the businesses now built around the world’s most powerful sporting brands.
At the top of the English game, Arsenal FC has become the country’s most valuable and strongest football club brand for the first time, with brand value soaring 35% to GBP1.35 billion and its Brand Strength Index (BSI) reaching 94.0 out of 100. Arsenal has leapfrogged Manchester City FC, Liverpool FC and Manchester United FC to rank third globally, behind only Real Madrid CF and FC Barcelona.
Arsenal’s rise illustrates the increasingly direct relationship between sporting performance, fan perception and commercial value. Following a first Premier League title in 22 years, a Champions League final appearance and a standout contribution from Arsenal players at the FIFA World Cup 2026, the club has strengthened not only its results but how fans perceive the brand.
The proportion of respondents associating Arsenal with ambition rose from 53% to 62%, while associations with heritage increased from 58% to 71% and exciting football from 60% to 67%. That shift in perception is translating into commercial momentum: in August 2026, Arsenal and Emirates agreed a five-year sponsorship extension reportedly worth up to GBP70 million per season, extending one of football’s longest-running partnerships through to 2033.
The picture across North London could hardly be more different. Tottenham Hotspur FC’s brand value has fallen 25% to GBP501 million, sending the club out of the global top 10 and down to 13th place. Tottenham’s BSI score has fallen almost 10 points to 63.1 out of 100, while just 15% of domestic fans now associate the club with ambition, compared with 62% for Arsenal.
The contrast illustrates the two-way relationship between performance and brand value: sporting success can strengthen perceptions, commercial appeal and ultimately financial value, while sustained underperformance can erode all three. For clubs, the implication is that brand investment is not simply a marketing exercise; it can help convert periods of sporting success into longer-term commercial value and resilience.
Scott Moore, Head of Sports Services, Brand Finance, commented,
“A near 31-point gap now separates Arsenal and Tottenham on brand strength, but the story is bigger than the North London rivalry. What we are seeing is a clear relationship between performance, perception and brand value. Arsenal’s rise is not simply the result of winning on the pitch: fans are increasingly associating the club with ambition, heritage and exciting football, and those changes in perception are translating into a materially stronger brand.
“That matters because brand strength can create a virtuous cycle. When a club is performing well, investment in its identity, culture and commercial relationships can amplify that success and turn sporting momentum into lasting brand equity. Arsenal appears to be doing exactly that. The lesson extends well beyond football: brands that invest in relevance and reputation when performance is strong are better positioned to withstand periods when performance inevitably weakens, rather than having to rebuild goodwill once things go wrong.”
Premier League
The Premier League remains football’s dominant global brand ecosystem, with 18 of its 20 clubs featuring in the Football 50 and a combined brand value of GBP8.5 billion. Its strength is not simply concentrated among a handful of elite clubs: five Premier League teams rank among the world’s 10 most valuable football brands, demonstrating the depth of the league’s commercial power.
Brand Finance data shows the Premier League leads LALIGA on perceptions of having world-class clubs (56% vs 54%) and being competitive (69% vs 51%). This combination of elite brands and competitive intensity gives the Premier League a distinctive proposition: it is not simply home to some of the world’s biggest clubs, but to a league whose overall brand has become a powerful global commercial asset.
Manchester City (+9% to GBP1.30 billion), Liverpool (+11% to GBP1.29 billion) and Manchester United (+22% to GBP1.27 billion) all recorded notable brand value growth, although each slipped one place in the global ranking as faster-growing clubs elsewhere moved ahead. Chelsea (+5% to GBP840.4 million) completed the Premier League’s presence in the global top 10, retaining ninth place globally. Together, these results underline the pace at which the global football brand market is expanding, with even double-digit brand value growth no longer enough to guarantee a higher position among the world’s elite.
Brand Finance also calculates enterprise value for each club. Liverpool’s GBP4.4 (USD6) billion enterprise value ranks fifth highest among the clubs in the Football 50, providing timely context for news that a consortium including Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is acquiring a stake of around 30% in the club. The reported transaction would value Liverpool at approximately GBP4.4 billion, highlighting the extraordinary premium investors are prepared to place on football clubs with globally recognised brands, loyal international audiences and multiple commercial revenue streams.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance operates in over 25 countries. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 6,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on 6,000 brands, surveying more than 175,000 respondents across 41 countries and 31 industry sectors. By combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database — the largest brand value database in the world — Brand Finance equips ambitious brand leaders with the data, analytics, and the strategic guidance they need to enhance brand and business value.
In addition to calculating brand value, Brand Finance also determines the relative strength of brands through a balanced scorecard of metrics, compliant with ISO 20671.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm and a committed leader in the standardisation of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
