DOMINOS PIZZA INC (DPZ)

Sector: Consumer Discretionary

    Home/Companies/DPZ/Annual Meeting

2026 Annual Meeting Analysis

DOMINOS PIZZA INC · Meeting: April 21, 2026

Policy v1.2high confidenceView Filing ↗
For informational purposes only. This AI-generated analysis applies a published voting policy to publicly available proxy filings. It does not constitute investment advice, proxy voting advice, or a solicitation of any kind. AI analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate — always review the actual filing and make your own independent decision.

Directors FOR

8

Directors AGAINST

0

Say on Pay

FOR

Auditor

FOR

Director Elections

Election of Directors

8 FOR
✓ FOR
David A. Brandon

Brandon has served since 1999 and DPZ's 3-year return of +30.6% is strong positive; the gap versus the company-disclosed peer median is only -4.1pp, well below the 50pp threshold required to trigger a vote against, so no TSR concern applies; he holds one outside public board seat (DTE Energy), below the overboarding limit; no other policy flags.

✓ FOR
Andrew B. Balson

Balson has served since 1999; the 3-year peer-group gap of -4.1pp is far below the 50pp trigger threshold for a strong-positive-TSR company; no overboarding, attendance, or independence concerns identified.

✓ FOR
Corie S. Barry

Barry has served since 2018; the 3-year peer-group underperformance gap of -4.1pp is well below the 50pp trigger; she is a sitting CEO (Best Buy) holding one outside public board seat at Domino's, which is within the policy limit of fewer than two outside seats for sitting CEOs; no other flags.

✓ FOR
Diane L. Cafritz

Cafritz joined the board in April 2025, which is less than 24 months ago, so she is fully exempt from the TSR trigger under the new-director exemption; no other policy flags.

✓ FOR
Richard L. Federico

Federico has served since 2011; the 3-year peer-group gap of -4.1pp is far below the 50pp trigger threshold; he chairs the Audit Committee and is designated an audit committee financial expert, meeting the policy's financial expertise requirement; no overboarding or attendance concerns.

✓ FOR
Stephen H. Kramer

Kramer joined in June 2025, less than 24 months ago, so he is exempt from the TSR trigger; as a sitting CEO (Bright Horizons) he holds one outside public board seat at Domino's, within the two-seat limit; no other flags.

✓ FOR
Patricia E. Lopez

Lopez has served since 2018; the 3-year peer-group gap of -4.1pp is well below the 50pp trigger threshold; she holds one outside public board seat (Aramark), within the overboarding limit; no other policy flags.

✓ FOR
Russell J. Weiner

Weiner has served as a director since 2022; DPZ's 3-year absolute return is +30.6% (strong positive) and the peer-group gap is only -4.1pp, well below the 50pp trigger threshold, so the TSR trigger does not fire; he holds one outside board seat (Clorox), within the limit; no other policy flags.

All eight director nominees pass the policy screens. DPZ's 3-year stock return of +30.6% is in the strong-positive tier, and the company's underperformance versus its disclosed peer group median is only -4.1 percentage points, far below the 65pp ETF threshold and the 50pp named-peer threshold required to trigger a vote against any director. Two new directors (Cafritz and Kramer) joined in 2025 and are exempt from the TSR trigger. No overboarding, attendance, independence, or qualification concerns were identified for any nominee.

Say on Pay

✓ FOR

CEO

Russell J. Weiner

Total Comp

$10,696,081

Prior Support

~95%%

CEO total compensation of approximately $10.7 million is within a reasonable range for a consumer-cyclical company of Domino's size (~$12.9B market cap), and the company explicitly states that CEO pay was set below the relevant market median, reducing concern about excessive pay levels. The pay structure is strongly performance-oriented — approximately 91% of the CEO's target total pay is variable and tied to financial results or stock price — well above the 50-60% threshold the policy requires for variable compensation. Prior year say-on-pay support was approximately 95%, reflecting strong shareholder endorsement, and the AIP payout of 100% of target is directly tied to the company meeting its pre-established Incentive Adjusted EBITDA goal, with long-term awards using multi-year PSUs with a relative TSR modifier, demonstrating genuine pay-for-performance alignment.

Auditor Ratification

✓ FOR

Auditor

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Tenure

N/A

Audit Fees

$1,916,000

Non-Audit Fees

$115,000

Non-audit fees (audit-related fees of $113K plus all other fees of $2K = $115K) represent approximately 6% of audit fees ($1,916K), well below the 50% threshold that would raise independence concerns. PricewaterhouseCoopers is a Big 4 firm appropriate for a company of Domino's size. Auditor tenure is not disclosed in the proxy, so the tenure trigger does not fire per policy. No material financial restatements were identified.

Stockholder Proposals

2 proposals submitted by shareholders

Proposal 4

Shareholder Proposal: Directors Who Fail to Obtain A Majority Vote

✓ FOR
Filed by:Not named in the filing excerpt (individual shareholder)Individual ActivistGovernance
Board recommends: AGAINST
governance structural improvementcredible individual activist filercompany already has majority voting policy but with 120-day board discretion rather than mandatory exit

This proposal comes from what appears to be an individual governance activist — a filer type the policy treats seriously — and asks for a straightforward governance improvement: if a director fails to get majority support in an uncontested election, that director must leave within nine months rather than the board having up to 120 days to decide whether to accept the resignation. Mandatory departure policies ensure that shareholder votes on directors are actually respected rather than advisory, which is a mainstream governance improvement consistent with shareholder interests. While the company argues its current policy is consistent with most S&P 500 peers, the existing structure allows the board to effectively ignore a majority 'no' vote by rejecting the tendered resignation, which undermines the purpose of majority voting; supporting this proposal would give shareholder votes on directors real teeth.

Proposal 5

Shareholder Proposal: Requirement for an Independent Board Chair

✓ FOR
Filed by:The Accountability BoardOtherGovernance
Board recommends: AGAINST
governance structural improvementcredible filer with specific performance-based rationaleDomino's previously cited independent chair as a governance highlight before abandoning the practice in 2022

The Accountability Board is a credible shareholder filer — not an ideological advocacy group — and has raised a substantive governance concern: Domino's previously promoted its independent chair structure as a governance strength but eliminated it in 2022 by creating an Executive Chairman role, and the stock has not returned to its 2021 highs since then. An independent board chair is a mainstream governance improvement that strengthens the separation between board oversight and management, and the company's own prior proxy statements acknowledged this benefit. While the board argues its current Lead Independent Director provides sufficient independent oversight, the Lead Independent Director has materially weaker authority than a full independent chair, and requiring an independent chair going forward — prospectively, with flexibility for transition — is a reasonable structural safeguard that aligns with shareholder interests.

Actual Vote Results

Meeting held April 21, 2026

View 8-K ↗

Director Elections

Nominee% FORVotes ForWithheld / AgainstResult
Stephen H. Kramer
99.8%
27.0M55,662✓ Elected
Russell J. Weiner
99.2%
26.8M223,919✓ Elected
Patricia E. Lopez
98.8%
26.8M311,164✓ Elected
Diane L. Cafritz
98.0%
26.5M547,789✓ Elected
Corie S. Barry
97.7%
26.4M636,489✓ Elected
Richard L. Federico
96.9%
26.2M842,885✓ Elected
David A. Brandon
96.5%
26.1M949,629✓ Elected
Andrew B. Balson
95.6%
25.9M1.2M✓ Elected

Broker non-votes: 2.6M

Say on Pay

93.9%

For 25.4M · Against 1.6M · Abstain 20,709

✓ Passed

Auditor Ratification

96.3%

For 28.6M · Against 1.1M · Abstain 17,390

✓ Passed

Other Proposals

Proposal 4

Shareholder proposal regarding departure of directors who fail to obtain a majority vote

15.6%
✗ Failed

Proposal 5

Shareholder proposal regarding an independent board chair requirement

39.8%
✗ Failed

Overall Assessment

The 2026 Domino's annual meeting ballot is straightforward: all eight director nominees pass policy screens given strong absolute TSR and minimal peer underperformance, the auditor ratification is clean with non-audit fees at just 6% of audit fees, and the say-on-pay vote merits support given strong pay-for-performance alignment and ~95% prior-year shareholder approval. Both shareholder proposals — mandatory director departure after a failed majority vote and an independent board chair requirement — are supported as genuine governance improvements submitted by credible, non-ideological filers.

Filing date: March 10, 2026·Policy v1.2·high confidence

Compensation Peer Group

15 companies disclosed in 2026 proxy filing

CMGChipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
DRIDarden Restaurants, Inc.
HLTHilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
HHyatt Hotels Corporation
IHGInterContinental Hotels Group PLC
LULUlululemon athletica inc.
MARMarriott International, Inc.
QSRRestaurant Brands International Inc.
TXRHTexas Roadhouse, Inc.
WENThe Wendy's Company
ULTAUlta Beauty, Inc.
WINGWingstop Inc.
WHWyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
YUMYum! Brands, Inc.
YUMCYum China Holdings, Inc.