Last week, Juventus’ controlling shareholder Exor rejected a takeover bid from crypto company Tether, which already owns a stake of 11.5% in the club. The proposal implied an equity valuation of approximately €1.1bn, or €1.4bn Enterprise Value (EV) when considering the net debt position of the club. The offer was dismissed within hours, with Exor reaffirming its long-standing commitment to club ownership.
Juventus is a rare case within European football. Controlled by the Agnelli family for more than a century, the club combines exceptional ownership continuity with the governance structure of a listed company, a combination that impacts how external interest is assessed.
In that context, the Tether approach serves as a useful reference point to look more closely at how Juventus is currently priced by the market, how that pricing compares with underlying valuation benchmarks, and why the implied valuation was not considered sufficient to even engage in any discussions with Exor, the majority owner.
In this analysis, we explore these factors and provide a broader background to the valuation considerations of a listed club like Juventus FC.
Market pricing and the valuation implied by the offer
Juventus’ share price evolution over 2025 is central to understanding how Tether arrived at its implied valuation. Over the past 12 months, the share price peaked at €3.55 on 16 May, following qualification for the UEFA Champions League, before declining steadily over the subsequent months. On 9 December, the share price hit a year-low of €2.17, closely aligning with Tether’s strategic offer made after market closure on Friday, 12 December.
At that price level, a valuation derived from market capitalisation inevitably reflected a moment of depressed pricing rather than a broader assessment of the club’s underlying value. By contrast, at the mid-May peak, the same methodology would have implied an equity value comfortably above €2bn.
With a free float of around 17%, Juventus’ share price reflects minority pricing rather than the value of control. As such, market capitalisation at a specific point in time offers only a partial view of the club’s underlying value, particularly in the context of ownership discussions.
Unsurprisingly, following the rejection of the offer, Juventus’ share price recorded a sharp increase, closing at EUR 2.60 on 15 December, up 19% compared to the previous closing price.
Value evolution and context
Football Benchmark valued Juventus at an Enterprise Value of €1.65bn as of 1 January 2025, a metric that includes net debt (unlike equity value), marginally down from €1.70bn in 2024 and below the €1.79bn peak recorded in 2023. To put this in context, a decade ago, the combined EV of AC Milan and FC Internazionale did not reach that of Juventus. Today, both clubs are valued above the Bianconeri.
Since 2016, Juventus’ EV has increased by approximately 68%, reflecting long-term growth alongside periods of volatility. Over the same timeframe, the two other Serie A giants have experienced significantly stronger relative growth. AC Milan’s EV rose from €545m in 2016 to €1.81bn in 2025 (+232%), while Inter’s more than quadrupled, from €399m to €1.72bn.
Juventus’ recent financial trajectory provides important context for its current valuation. The club has recorded eight consecutive seasons of net losses, with a cumulative loss of €999m over this period. While operating revenues peaked at €464m in 2018/19, the first season of Cristiano Ronaldo at the club, they only stood at around €420m in the most recent financial year. Four capital increases totalling approximately €900m since 2019 underline the scale of shareholder support during a period of structural and sporting transition.
Football Benchmark’s valuation methodology is based on an adjusted revenue-multiple approach, incorporating factors such as profitability, popularity, sporting potential, broadcasting rights and stadium ownership. Juventus continues to score strongly on several of these dimensions, notably brand popularity and full stadium ownership, while recent financial and sporting performances have weighed on others, with the club’s last domestic league title won in 2019/20. On-pitch underperformance has had a direct impact on financial evolution, as success, particularly in international competitions, drives player values, enhances sponsor appeal, and generates income directly through matchday and prize-money revenues.
Valuations also reflect market dynamics and future expectations. Anticipated growth in UEFA competition broadcasting revenues, the significant expansion of commercial revenues among globally branded clubs, and UEFA’s latest regulations have all supported higher club valuations and increased investor interest in recent years.
As a result, Juventus’ valuation remains underpinned by solid fundamentals, but its relative positioning versus Milan and Inter reflects how sustained sporting momentum, financial stabilisation and future expectations can materially influence EV over time.
Transaction benchmarks and valuation expectations
Recent transactions involving elite European clubs help frame expectations around valuation and ownership change. Manchester United’s implied Enterprise Value of €6.1bn, Chelsea’s €2.9bn, Atlético de Madrid’s €2.5bn, and AC Milan’s €1.2bn illustrate the range at which “trophy assets” have changed hands in recent years.
While each transaction reflects its own context and is significantly influenced by the size of the acquired stake, as well as the assumption of control, it is difficult to reconcile a valuation for Juventus that would place it at only a fraction of Manchester United’s implied EV, particularly given United’s similarly modest sporting results over the past decade. Atlético de Madrid offers a particularly relevant comparison, given similarities in revenue scale and ownership of key infrastructure assets.
Against these benchmarks, an implied Enterprise Value at around €1.4bn sits well below the levels typically associated with control of a club of Juventus’ stature.
Reading the signal behind the bid
The Tether approach appears less as a concrete attempt to acquire control and more as a tactical, positioning move. It generated immediate media visibility, increased exposure for Tether’s stablecoins, particularly in emerging markets, and signalled financial capacity, while placing Juventus at the centre of valuation discussions at a moment of subdued market pricing and heightened fan pressure. For Exor, the swift response reaffirmed a long-term ownership stance and a clear refusal to engage in discussions at the proposed valuation.
The episode is best understood as a signal rather than a turning point. It reflects the growing diversity of capital interested in football assets and the limitations of market-based valuation references when applied to clubs where ownership, identity and emotion play a significant role. It also highlights the changing presence of cryptocurrency firms in the industry, shifting from pure sponsorship deals to a long-term growth interest.
At the same time, history shows that even assets with a strong emotional component can change hands at the right price. Any serious discussion around Juventus would require valuations to move well beyond current market references, with EV expectations exceeding the €2bn threshold. While this particular approach was quickly dismissed, interest in Juventus cannot necessarily be considered closed.
Football Benchmark supports clubs and investors with independent valuation analysis, financial and market intelligence. Our work helps decision-makers understand how value is created in football, and how factors such as sporting performance, financial structure, domestic and international market dynamics shape valuation assumptions.
