Skip to content

Deere & Co

NYSE: DE · USD

Deere & Co (DE) Economic Moat Analysis50

Competitive advantages, dated evidence and erosion risks.

Uncertain economic moat

Deere’s brand and existing precision-equipment connectivity establish differentiation and plausible switching friction. The supplied passages do not establish the durability or customer dependence needed to confirm a moat. Realized pricing is meaningful but cyclical: strong fiscal-2023 increases and favorable 2026 pricing coexist with competitive discounting and inventory pressure in 2025. Integrated technology could deepen customer dependence, but demonstrated retention and comparative customer economics remain missing. Repair-access litigation introduces uncertainty; these passages disclose allegations and settlement discussions, not a completed settlement.

Switching costs

Existing telematics links equipment owners, managers and dealers with operational and maintenance information. This integration plausibly creates workflow switching friction, although its magnitude and effect on repeat purchases are unproven.

Durability
Potentially persists while customers use connected equipment and associated workflows. The catalog does not demonstrate migration costs, exclusive dependencies or sustained renewal behavior.
Competitors
AGCO Corporation, CLAAS KGaA mbH, CNH Industrial N.V., Kubota Tractor Corporation, Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, The Toro Company
Erosion risks
Technology-focused entrants could offer competing integrations. Repair-access litigation could change access to service resources, although the disclosed allegations do not establish an outcome.
What would invalidate the thesis
Evidence that customers can migrate operational workflows to competing systems without material disruption, or that connected users show no greater repeat demand, would undermine the switching-cost hypothesis.
Evidence (4) · Counterevidence (5)

Intangible assets

Deere identifies its brand recognition as a competitive factor. Realized pricing supports commercial differentiation, but does not isolate a brand premium or establish superiority over named rivals.

Durability
Brand recognition appears in both fiscal-2023 and fiscal-2024 disclosures. That continuity supports a current franchise advantage, but does not establish exceptional durability or a protected economic premium.
Competitors
AGCO Corporation, CLAAS KGaA mbH, CNH Industrial N.V., Kubota Tractor Corporation, Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, The Toro Company
Erosion risks
Expanding competitors, elevated used-equipment inventory and realized competitive incentives constrain pricing. Technology investment alone does not establish a defensible intangible asset.
What would invalidate the thesis
Persistent discounting across equipment segments, accompanied by loss of repeat demand or evidence that buyers attach no economic value to Deere’s brand, would undermine this advantage.
Evidence (5) · Counterevidence (3)

Changes since the previous analysis

  • Retain the uncertain verdict after reassessing current evidence; add explicit moat criterion grades without treating the verdict as a grading gate.
  • Remove prior proprietary-parts, separately renewable solutions and extended-warranty claims because their supporting disclosures are absent from this catalog.
  • Replace the prior completed repair-settlement description with the supplied disclosure of litigation and potential-resolution discussions.
  • Change contractual_freedom from 2 to null: current passages show incentive programs but do not establish contractual repricing or offset rights.
  • Retain the other pricing and management grades using current catalog citations; omit previously cited segment pricing percentages, shareholder-return totals and receivable-aging outcomes that are not established here.

Evidence limitations

  • The catalog consists of issuer disclosures. Existing operating results and compensation outcomes support numerical grades, while management descriptions of differentiation and intended customer benefits remain qualified assertions.
  • Named competitor coverage identifies agriculture and turf rivals; it provides no matched competitor pricing, customer economics, retention or financial comparisons and does not establish equivalent coverage for Construction & Forestry.
  • No demonstrated migration costs, equipment repurchase cohorts, technology renewal rates or quantified brand premium establish durable customer dependence. No network effect, relative cost advantage or efficient-scale barrier is demonstrated.
  • The repair litigation passages establish allegations, requested relief and discussions as disclosed in the second-quarter fiscal-2026 filing. They do not establish liability, a completed settlement or subsequent repair-access obligations.
  • Source dates are treated as filed dates, preserving their supplied dateKind. Operating periods and disclosure dates are distinguished; forecasts and conditional awards are not treated as achieved results.
  • Capital-discipline evidence uses consolidated cash flows that include Financial Services; acquisition returns and repurchase valuation are not demonstrated.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis

Calculated from annual filings. Missing data remains unavailable. Detailed financial charts remain in the other topics.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis
PeriodGross marginOperating marginROICFCF margin
2021—18.2%12.4%15.6%
2022—18.1%12.8%6.8%
2023—21.2%15.3%11.6%
2024—17.5%9.8%14.7%
2025———13.4%

Pricing power—

  • Pricing outcomes

    Fiscal-2023 price realization was 12 percent, and third-quarter fiscal-2026 pricing contributed $403 million pretax despite lower PPA shipments. However, fiscal-2025 inventory pressure reduced realization and competitive incentives constrained CF pricing. These are observed pricing outcomes, assessed separately from shipment volume and mix.

  • Customer demand

    Connected operational and maintenance information supports continuing engagement and plausible switching friction indirectly. That warrants a mixed assessment of retention support for an equipment business. It does not establish actual renewal rates, repeat equipment purchases or customer loyalty independent of the installed equipment.

  • Margin resilience

    Third-quarter fiscal-2026 pricing contributed $403 million pretax against $126 million of higher production costs. The cost-of-sales ratio improved quarterly but worsened over nine months, and tariff recoveries helped the quarter. Pricing offsets therefore demonstrate mixed resilience rather than consistent protection from cost and cycle pressures.

  • Pricing freedom

    Early-order incentives and competitive incentive programs show commercial pricing activity, but do not disclose contractual authority to reset prices or terms. Repair-access discussions establish no final obligation. The supplied passages cannot establish either broad contractual discretion or binding constraints sufficient to grade this criterion.

Management63

  • Capital discipline

    First-nine-month fiscal-2026 consolidated operating cash generation exceeded property purchases, while external borrowings declined modestly. Working-capital absorption, Tenna spending with unproven returns and the fiscal-2025 battery impairment temper the assessment. Consolidated financing and leasing activities prevent treating operating cash less property purchases as complete industrial free cash flow.

  • Incentive alignment

    Disclosed incentives use operating returns, relative TSR and relative revenue growth; below-threshold growth actually produced zero fiscal-2025 PSU payout. Ownership requirements, recovery provisions and hedging restrictions reinforce alignment. Approved discretionary award increases temper confidence, and ownership requirements alone do not prove individual compliance.

  • Execution

    SAT achieved higher shipments, favorable pricing and improved operating results in third-quarter fiscal-2026, while PPA shipments and profit declined. Production efficiencies accompanied a worse nine-month cost-of-sales ratio, and relative revenue growth missed compensation thresholds. Execution is assessed indirectly from mixed operating outcomes that also reflect cyclical conditions.

  • Governance

    Independent standing committees except the Executive Committee, lead-director responsibilities, annual elections, proxy access and recovery provisions establish strong governance mechanisms. Shareholders actually approved compensation on an advisory basis. Combined chairman and CEO roles and unresolved litigation temper confidence; procedural safeguards do not demonstrate exceptional governance outcomes.

Sources and methodology

Current publication · Updated 22/10/2026 · Version 11

AI interpretation based on checked source excerpts. Issuer assertions and evidence limitations remain explicit.

Policy quality-scores-3: six equally weighted categories. The overall score requires full coverage. Missing inputs are not zero. Qualitative grades are sourced interpretations, not probabilities. 4/6 · 29/10/2026

Moat50

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

structural advantage · 2/4 · Existing telematics integration and recognized branding support differentiation and plausible switching friction. Named rivals and expanding technology competition limit the inference. The disclosures establish an operating franchise, but do not measure customer migration costs, a brand premium or sustained comparative superiority.

durability · 2/4 · Brand recognition appears across fiscal-2023 and fiscal-2024 disclosures, while connected operational workflows provide a plausible continuing relationship. However, competitor expansion and unresolved repair-access litigation make protection uncertain. This supports mixed durability of the observed advantages, without confirming a durable moat.

customer dependency · 2/4 · Telematics connects owners, managers and dealers to utilization, performance and maintenance information, embedding Deere in equipment workflows. Dependency is inferred indirectly from functionality. The passages do not show that customers cannot substitute competing systems or quantify the operational cost of switching.

erosion resilience · 2/4 · Favorable fiscal-2026 pricing despite lower PPA shipments shows some resilience. Realized fiscal-2025 inventory pressure and competitive incentives demonstrate limits, while technology entrants threaten differentiation. Repair-access litigation adds unresolved exposure rather than a proven loss of competitive protection.

Pricing power—

Insufficient evidence for every rubric criterion; no category score is inferred.

realized pricing · 2/4 · Fiscal-2023 price realization was 12 percent, and third-quarter fiscal-2026 pricing contributed $403 million pretax despite lower PPA shipments. However, fiscal-2025 inventory pressure reduced realization and competitive incentives constrained CF pricing. These are observed pricing outcomes, assessed separately from shipment volume and mix.

retention · 2/4 · Connected operational and maintenance information supports continuing engagement and plausible switching friction indirectly. That warrants a mixed assessment of retention support for an equipment business. It does not establish actual renewal rates, repeat equipment purchases or customer loyalty independent of the installed equipment.

margin resilience · 2/4 · Third-quarter fiscal-2026 pricing contributed $403 million pretax against $126 million of higher production costs. The cost-of-sales ratio improved quarterly but worsened over nine months, and tariff recoveries helped the quarter. Pricing offsets therefore demonstrate mixed resilience rather than consistent protection from cost and cycle pressures.

contractual freedom · — · Early-order incentives and competitive incentive programs show commercial pricing activity, but do not disclose contractual authority to reset prices or terms. Repair-access discussions establish no final obligation. The supplied passages cannot establish either broad contractual discretion or binding constraints sufficient to grade this criterion.

Predictability80

5 consecutive published annual periods. Equal weights: nondeclining revenue frequency; revenue-growth volatility (5–40pp); positive FCF frequency; FCF-margin volatility (3–20pp). Stability indicator, not a growth forecast.

Nondeclining revenue years (%)
50.00
Revenue growth volatility (pp)
15.88
Positive FCF years (%)
100.00
FCF margin volatility (pp)
3.12
observedAnnualPeriods
5.00

Financial strength—

Missing required inputs: currentRatioGrade. Equal-weight grades: debt/FCF (1–8x), net debt/earnings before interest and tax (0–5x), interest service (1–12x), current ratio (0.75–2x). Earnings use reported operating income, an original issuer-reported unadjusted EBIT reconciled to net income, income tax and signed net interest, or reported pretax profit plus reported gross interest expense. Reported EBIT is distinct from GAAP operating income and gross interest. Interest service uses earnings/interest expense; if unavailable, it uses reported operating cash flow/cash interest paid, without relabeling cash paid as accrued expense. Nonpositive cash flow/earnings score 0 for their service component; reported zero interest with a positive numerator scores 100. Net cash scores 100 for net leverage. Missing disclosures remain unavailable. General nonfinancial-company rubric, not a credit rating; exceptional and nonoperating gains are not normalized out. IFRS finance-cost and cash-flow classifications retain their reported scope.

debtFcfGrade
0.00
netDebtEbitGrade
0.00
interestCoverageGrade
17.94
Debt / FCF (x)
9.40
Net debt / operating income (x)
5.20

Capital allocation88

Three-year equal-weight indicators: pretax return on average invested capital (0–25%; equity + debt − cash, each year and its prior year), share-count growth (0–5%, lower better), share-based cost/revenue (2–20%, lower better), consolidated FCF/net income (0–1x). Return uses reported operating income, an original issuer-reported unadjusted EBIT reconciled to net income, income tax and signed net interest, or EBIT calculated from reported pretax profit plus reported gross interest expense; the issuer-reported EBIT is distinct from GAAP operating income and gross interest; exceptional/nonoperating gains are not normalized out. Share-based cost uses the reported cash-flow add-back or, if absent, separately reported recognized compensation expense; the latter never becomes an FCF adjustment. Nonpositive net income scores 0 for cash conversion; absent income/FCF stays unavailable. ROIC remains undefined for nonpositive invested capital; the explicit asset-return alternative does not change the ROIC chart. Missing financial inputs alone never trigger an alternative. Does not establish acquisition quality or buyback timing.

3-year pre-tax operating return (%)
15.00
3-year average dilution (%)
-3.81
3-year average SBC / revenue (%)
0.31
cashConversionGrade
93.22

Management63

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

capital discipline · 2/4 · First-nine-month fiscal-2026 consolidated operating cash generation exceeded property purchases, while external borrowings declined modestly. Working-capital absorption, Tenna spending with unproven returns and the fiscal-2025 battery impairment temper the assessment. Consolidated financing and leasing activities prevent treating operating cash less property purchases as complete industrial free cash flow.

incentive alignment · 3/4 · Disclosed incentives use operating returns, relative TSR and relative revenue growth; below-threshold growth actually produced zero fiscal-2025 PSU payout. Ownership requirements, recovery provisions and hedging restrictions reinforce alignment. Approved discretionary award increases temper confidence, and ownership requirements alone do not prove individual compliance.

execution · 2/4 · SAT achieved higher shipments, favorable pricing and improved operating results in third-quarter fiscal-2026, while PPA shipments and profit declined. Production efficiencies accompanied a worse nine-month cost-of-sales ratio, and relative revenue growth missed compensation thresholds. Execution is assessed indirectly from mixed operating outcomes that also reflect cyclical conditions.

governance · 3/4 · Independent standing committees except the Executive Committee, lead-director responsibilities, annual elections, proxy access and recovery provisions establish strong governance mechanisms. Shareholders actually approved compensation on an advisory basis. Combined chairman and CEO roles and unresolved litigation temper confidence; procedural safeguards do not demonstrate exceptional governance outcomes.

Evidence

Advancements such as precise global navigation satellite systems technology, advanced connectivity and telematics, on-board sensors and computing power, automation software, digital tools, applications, and analytics provide seamless integration of information designed to improve customer decision-making and job execution.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, business: precision-technology integration · Filed 12/12/2024

Our advanced telematics systems remotely connect equipment owners, business managers, and dealers to equipment in the field.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, business: existing telematics connections · Filed 12/12/2024

This connection provides real-time alerts and information about equipment location, utilization, performance, and maintenance to improve productivity and efficiency, as well as to monitor agronomic job execution.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, business: operational and maintenance information · Filed 12/12/2024

John Deere’s brand recognition is a competitive factor in North America and many other parts of the world.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, competition: brand recognition · Filed 12/12/2024

The competitive environment for the agriculture and turf operations includes some global competitors, such as AGCO Corporation, CLAAS KGaA mbH, CNH Industrial N.V., Kubota Tractor Corporation, Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, and The Toro Company.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, competition: named agriculture and turf competitors · Filed 12/12/2024

The agricultural equipment industry continues to change and is becoming even more competitive through the emergence and global expansion of many competitors.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, competition: emergence and expansion of competitors · Filed 12/12/2024

As technology increasingly enables enhanced productivity in agriculture, the industry is also attracting non-traditional competitors, including technology-focused companies and start-up ventures.

Fiscal-2024 Form 10-K, competition: technology-focused entrants · Filed 12/12/2024

Legal Proceeding – On January 15, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), along with the Attorneys General of the States of Illinois and Minnesota filed a lawsuit against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Western Division.

Second-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, legal proceedings: January 15, 2025 lawsuit · Filed 28/05/2026

Plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction and other equitable relief to allow owners of our equipment, as well as independent repair providers, access to our repair tools and any other repair resources available to authorized John Deere dealers.

Second-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, legal proceedings: requested repair-access relief · Filed 28/05/2026

We are in discussions with the FTC and plaintiff states with respect to a potential resolution.

Second-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, legal proceedings: potential-resolution discussions · Filed 28/05/2026

John Deere’s brand recognition is a competitive factor in North America and many other parts of the world.

Fiscal-2023 Form 10-K, competition: brand recognition · Filed 15/12/2023

An explanation of the cost of sales to net sales ratio and other significant statement of consolidated income changes follows: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Deere & Company ​ 2023 ​ 2022 ​ % Change ​ Cost of sales to net sales ​ ​ 67.9% ​ ​ 73.7% ​ -8 ​ + Price realization ​ Favorable ​ (-) Production costs ​ Unfavorable ​ Price realization was 12 percent driven by strong demand.

Fiscal-2023 Form 10-K, MD&A: cost-of-sales ratio and 12 percent price realization · Filed 15/12/2023

In 2025, elevated used inventory levels in late model-year machines impacted demand for our products in North America resulting in lower price realization and actions to reduce our inventory level.

Fiscal-2025 Form 10-K, inventory risk discussion: realized North American demand and pricing pressure · Filed 18/12/2025

and Canada due to incremental incentive programs deployed to address pressures from the competitive environment and was flat outside the U.S.

Fiscal-2025 Form 10-K, Construction & Forestry results: competitive incentive programs · Filed 18/12/2025

Net income increased $90 in the third quarter primarily due to favorable price realization of $286 ($403 pretax), partially offset by unfavorable tax impacts of $114 and increased production costs of $89 ($126 pretax), primarily from higher material costs.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, MD&A: price realization and production-cost effects · Filed 27/08/2026

An explanation of the cost of sales to net sales ratio and other significant statements of consolidated income changes follows: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Three Months Ended ​ Nine Months Ended ​ ​ ​ August 2 ​ July 27 ​ % ​ August 2 ​ July 27 ​ % ​ Deere & Company ​ 2026 ​ 2025 ​ Change ​ 2026 ​ 2025 ​ Change ​ Cost of sales to net sales ​ ​ 72.2% ​ ​ 73.1% ​ ​ ​ ​ 73.1% ​ ​ 71.3% ​ ​ ​ • Material costs ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Unfavorable ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Unfavorable ​ • Tariffs, net of recoveries ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Favorable ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Unfavorable ​ • Production efficiencies ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Favorable ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Favorable ​ Higher material costs driven by inflationary pressures.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, MD&A: quarterly and nine-month cost-of-sales ratios · Filed 27/08/2026

The favorable tariff impact for the quarter was due to recognition of recoveries (see Global Trade Policies section in Additional Trends).

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, MD&A: quarterly tariff recoveries · Filed 27/08/2026

Third Quarter 2026 Compared to Third Quarter 2025 $ in millions ​ ​ 5 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Small Agriculture & Turf ​ Third Quarter ​ $ in millions ​ 2026 ​ 2025 ​ % Change ​ Net sales $ 3,383 $ 3,025 12% ​ Operating profit ​ $ 622 ​ $ 485 ​ 28% ​ Operating margin ​ ​ 18.4% ​ ​ 16.0% ​ ​ ​ Small Agriculture & Turf sales increased for the quarter as a result of higher shipment volumes and favorable price realization.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 earnings release: Small Agriculture & Turf shipment, pricing and operating results · Filed 20/08/2026

$ 3,998 $ 4,273 -6% ​ Operating profit ​ $ 527 ​ $ 580 ​ -9% ​ Operating margin ​ ​ 13.2% ​ ​ 13.6% ​ ​ ​ Production & Precision Agriculture sales decreased for the quarter as a result of lower shipment volumes, partially offset by favorable price realization and foreign currency translation.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 earnings release: Production & Precision Agriculture shipment decline · Filed 20/08/2026

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Provision for credit losses ​ ​ 205 ​ 258 ​ Depreciation and amortization ​ ​ 1,787 ​ 1,668 ​ Impairments and other adjustments ​ ​ ​ ​ 29 ​ Share-based compensation expense ​ ​ 116 ​ 104 ​ Credit for deferred income taxes ​ ​ (61) ​ (102) ​ Changes in assets and liabilities: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Receivables related to sales ​ ​ (1,252) ​ (494) ​ Inventories ​ ​ (443) ​ (526) ​ Accounts payable and accrued expenses ​ ​ (266) ​ (717) ​ Accrued income taxes payable/receivable ​ ​ (119) ​ (147) ​ Retirement benefits ​ ​ (367) ​ (813) ​ Other ​ ​ (152) ​ 266 ​ Net cash provided by operating activities ​ ​ 3,250 ​ 3,464 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Cash Flows from Investing Activities ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Collections of receivables (excluding receivables related to sales) ​ ​ 19,922 ​ 19,712 ​ Proceeds from maturities and sales of marketable securities ​ ​ 389 ​ 359 ​ Proceeds from sales of equipment on operating leases ​ ​ 1,479 ​ 1,408 ​ Cost of receivables acquired (excluding receivables related to sales) ​ ​ (19,139) ​ (18,962) ​ Acquisitions of businesses, net of cash acquired ​ ​ (455) ​ (89) ​ Purchases of marketable securities ​ ​ (361) ​ (598) ​ Purchases of property and equipment ​ ​ (716) ​ (852) ​ Cost of equipment on operating leases acquired ​ ​ (1,933) ​ (2,009) ​ Collections of receivables from unconsolidated affiliates

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, consolidated cash flows: operating cash, working capital and investment spending · Filed 27/08/2026

Borrowings. Total external borrowings decreased by $100 in the first nine months of 2026 and decreased $2,810 compared to a year ago, generally corresponding with the level of the receivable and lease portfolio, as well as other working capital requirements.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 Form 10-Q, liquidity: external borrowing reductions and portfolio context · Filed 27/08/2026

(2) Special Items Impairment In the third quarter of 2025, the company recorded a non-cash charge of $61 million pretax ($49 million after-tax), primarily related to the trade name and customer relationship assets of external overseas battery operations.

Third-quarter fiscal-2026 earnings release, special items: fiscal-2025 battery intangible impairment · Filed 20/08/2026

The purchase price, net of cash acquired, was $439 million.

Second-quarter fiscal-2026 earnings release, acquisition note: Tenna purchase price · Filed 21/05/2026

The performance-based portion is based on OROA, OROS, and ROE in the STI program, and three-year relative TSR (50%) and relative revenue growth (50%) in the PSUs, which represent 50% of the total LTI award.

2026 proxy statement: short-term and long-term performance compensation metrics · Filed 14/01/2026

As discussed above, for the PSUs with a performance period ending in fiscal 2025, actual performance on annualized revenue growth relative to the performance peer group was below the threshold level, resulting in zero payout on the PSUs, clearly demonstrating the rigor of our targets and alignment between pay and performance.

2026 proxy statement: below-threshold relative revenue growth and zero fiscal-2025 PSU payout · Filed 14/01/2026

May $1,697,280 $3,394,560 $7,400,000 $3,700,000 $3,700,000 $19,891,840 % of LTI ​ ​ 50% 25% 25% ​ % of Overall Total 8% 17% 37% 19% 19% 100% To further reinforce alignment of the interests of the NEOs with those of the Company and shareholders, all NEOs are subject to the Company’s Incentive Compensation Recovery Policy and stock ownership and holding requirements, which require the CEO to hold stock equivalent to 6.0 times base salary and each of the other NEOs to hold stock equivalent to 3.5 times base salary.

2026 proxy statement: fiscal-2025 CEO target compensation and executive stock-holding requirements · Filed 14/01/2026

We are committed to sound governance practices, including those described below: INDEPENDENCE ​ ◾ All of our director nominees, except our Chairman and CEO, are independent ◾ The independent Lead Director has a role with significant governance responsibilities ◾ All standing Board committees other than the Executive Committee are composed wholly of independent directors ◾ Independent directors meet regularly in executive session without management present BEST PRACTICES ​ ◾ Directors may not stand for re-election after their 75th birthdays, absent Board approval provided in rare circumstances ◾ Directors may not serve on more than three other public company boards, and sitting public company CEOs may not serve on more than one other public company board ◾ Directors may not serve on the audit committee of more than three public companies, including Deere’s Audit Review Committee ◾ Directors rotate committee membership periodically, as approved by the Board ◾ Our recoupment policy requires an executive to return any incentive compensation found to have been awarded erroneously in the event of a financial restatement ◾ Directors and executives are subject to stock ownership requirements ◾ Directors and executives are prohibited from hedging or pledging their Deere stock ACCOUNTABILITY ​ ◾ All directors are elected annually ◾ In uncontested elections, directors are elected by majority vote ◾ The Board and each active Board committee conducts an annual performance self-evaluation ◾ Shareholders have the ability to include nominees in our proxy statement (so-called proxy access rights) RISK OVERSIGHT ​ ◾ The Board oversees Deere’s overall risk management structure ◾ Individual Board committees oversee certain risks related to their specific areas of responsibility ◾ We have robust risk management processes throughout the Company ​ OUR VALUES Our actions are guided by our core values: Integrity, Quality, Humanity, Commitment, and Innovation.

2026 proxy statement: independence, annual elections, recovery policy and stock restrictions · Filed 14/01/2026

The Committee approved adjustments to base-level award values ranging up to 20% to recognize the accomplishments of the CEO and individual NEOs.

2026 proxy statement: approved discretionary increases to base-level equity awards · Filed 14/01/2026

The shareholders approved, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers with the following vote: Shares Voted For Proposal Shares Voted Against Proposal Abstain Broker Non-Votes 190,345,717 16,140,154 694,694 30,832,733 ​ 3.

Form 8-K filed February 27, 2026: actual advisory compensation vote · Filed 27/02/2026

For certain equipment, we offer early order programs, which can include incentives to retail customers who place orders well in advance of the use season.

Fiscal-2025 Form 10-K, business: early-order incentive programs · Filed 18/12/2025

Publication history

Publication history
VersionUpdatedCompetitive advantage
1129/10/2026uncertain
1028/10/2026uncertain
924/10/2026uncertain
823/10/2026uncertain
722/10/2026uncertain
619/10/2026uncertain
519/10/2026uncertain
418/10/2026uncertain
318/10/2026uncertain
218/10/2026uncertain

Sources

Research methodology and limitations · What is an economic moat?