Everton’s transfer window ended with plenty of criticism over the shape of David Moyes’ squad. Financially, though, the summer tells a rather different story.
The Everton squad changed substantially before the deadline.
Hayden Hackney, Tyrique George, Merlin Röhl, Christian Nørgaard and Ainsley Maitland-Niles arrived permanently, Brennan Johnson came in as part of the deal that took Dwight McNeil to Crystal Palace and Jack Grealish returned on loan.
Iliman Ndiaye and Beto were sold for significant fees, while Tim Iroegbunam and Nathan Patterson also left.
The failed attempt to sign Folarin Balogun inevitably dominated the final hours of the window, but the numbers across the summer are worth looking at in their own right.
What Everton spent
Sky Sports lists Everton’s permanent incoming business as follows:
Incoming player Reported fee
Hayden Hackney £24m
Tyrique George £24m
Merlin Röhl £19m
Christian Nørgaard £7m
Ainsley Maitland-Niles £4m
Brennan Johnson Swap
Jack Grealish Loan
Total disclosed permanent fees Around £78m
Those figures should be treated as headline transfer values rather than Everton’s precise cash or accounting cost.
Deals can include instalments, bonuses, sell-on clauses and other conditions. The Johnson-McNeil exchange also cannot sensibly be reduced to a simple zero-cost swap for accounting purposes.
But £78m gives us a reasonable published starting point.
What came back in
The two largest disclosed sales were comfortably enough to offset that headline expenditure.
Outgoing player Reported fee
Iliman Ndiaye £65m
Beto £15.4m
Tim Iroegbunam Undisclosed
Nathan Patterson Undisclosed
Dwight McNeil Swap
Adam Aznou Loan
Known disclosed fees £80.4m
On that narrow comparison, Everton brought in around £2.4m more than they spent on the disclosed permanent deals.
That is not the same thing as saying Everton made a £2.4m profit from the window.
It simply tells us that the major published transfer fees were broadly balanced.
The undisclosed Patterson and Iroegbunam deals would move the cash-transfer balance further towards Everton, while loan fees, wages, agent costs, bonuses and the accounting treatment of the Johnson-McNeil deal all sit outside that simple calculation.
Why net spend only tells part of the story
Football finance does not treat the purchase and sale of a player in the same way.
When a club buys a player, the transfer fee is generally written down over the length of his contract through amortisation.
A £25m player signing a five-year contract would therefore broadly create an annual £5m amortisation charge, before wages and other costs are considered.
When a player is sold, the club compares the transfer proceeds with the remaining value of that player’s registration in the accounts.
Any amount above that remaining value is booked as a profit on disposal.
That can make a major sale especially useful under financial regulations.
The Ndiaye sale
Ndiaye joined Everton from Marseille in July 2024 on a five-year contract. Everton did not disclose the fee they paid.
Two years of that contract had passed before his £65m move to City.
Whatever his exact remaining book value was this summer, a sale at that level would be expected to generate a substantial accounting profit.
Putting an exact figure on it without Everton’s internal registration value would be guesswork.
The broader point is straightforward: the £65m does more for Everton’s financial calculations than simply offsetting £65m of summer purchases.
Beto is a different calculation
Everton signed Beto from Udinese in 2023 for £25.75m on a four-year contract.
He was sold to Fiorentina this summer for a reported £15.4m.
By the time he left, three years of the original four-year deal had elapsed, so most of his original transfer fee should already have been amortised through Everton’s accounts.
Again, the exact book value is not public.
His sale nevertheless brought in a sizeable fee while removing the final year of his salary and the remaining amortisation attached to his registration.
Everton are no longer operating under PSR
Profitability and Sustainability Rules dominated Everton’s finances for several years.
The club suffered two separate points deductions in 2023/24.
The first sanction was initially 10 points before being reduced to six on appeal. Everton then received a further two-point deduction for a separate breach relating to the period ending 2022/23.
Those cases inevitably shaped the way supporters viewed every subsequent transfer window.
But the rules changed this season.
From the start of 2026/27, PSR was replaced in the Premier League by Squad Cost Ratio and Sustainability and Systemic Resilience rules.
How Squad Cost Ratio works
SCR limits spending on the playing side to 85% of a club’s football-related revenue plus its net profit or loss from player sales.
The costs covered include player and head-coach wages, transfer amortisation and impairment, and agents’ fees.
That is why Everton’s summer cannot be judged accurately by adding every incoming fee together.
A £24m signing does not necessarily hit the calculation as £24m in one season. The annual amortisation charge depends on the length and structure of the player’s contract.
At the other end, a profitable sale can feed directly into the available calculation.
The Premier League tests SCR during the season, with the main compliance assessment taking place on 1 March.
Everton have more room than the 85% figure suggests
The 85% level is known as the Green Threshold.
Clubs begin with an additional multi-year allowance of up to 30 percentage points, creating an initial Red Threshold of 115%.
A club above 85% but below its Red Threshold is not automatically facing a points deduction.
Further assessment follows and, where required, a levy can be applied.
Operating above 85% also reduces the amount of extra headroom available in future seasons through what the Premier League calls its Feedback Loop.
Going above the Red Threshold is the point at which a sporting sanction comes into play.
So 115% should not be read as Everton’s normal spending limit.
It is temporary headroom built into the system.
Everton’s finances were already moving in the right direction
The latest published accounts cover 2024/25 and show a club in a much better position than during its PSR problems.
Everton recorded turnover of £196.7m, the highest in the club’s history at that point, while the annual loss fell from £53.2m to £8.6m.
Profit from player trading was £31.3m and £52.4m was invested in squad development.
The wage-to-turnover ratio also fell from 81% to 74%.
There was a much wider financial reset after The Friedkin Group takeover.
Everton reported that £450.7m of shareholder loans had been converted into equity, while a £350m long-term stadium financing package was put in place.
Net assets increased to £393.3m.
That is a very different financial backdrop from the one Everton were working with during the worst of the PSR period.
Hill Dickinson Stadium changes the revenue equation
Everton’s new home gives the club scope to grow matchday and commercial income beyond what was possible at Goodison Park.
That includes hospitality, sponsorship, events and other stadium-related revenue.
Under SCR, rising football revenue gives a club greater capacity to carry squad costs.
That puts more emphasis on growing the club commercially, rather than simply reducing expenditure every time financial pressure appears.
It is one reason Everton’s stadium move and transfer strategy cannot really be separated when looking at the club’s medium-term finances.
Another set of tests…
The Premier League’s new framework also includes Sustainability and Systemic Resilience rules.
SSR looks at the wider financial health of clubs rather than only spending on the squad.
It includes tests covering short-term working capital, medium-term liquidity and positive equity.
The Positive Equity Test becomes progressively tighter, beginning with a permitted liabilities-to-adjusted-assets ratio of no more than 90% in 2026/27.
Everton’s debt restructuring under TFG therefore feeds into a completely different part of the regulatory picture from buying or selling players.
So what did the summer tell us?
Everton’s football window can still be criticised.
They sold Beto and failed to complete a deal for Balogun, leaving Moyes extremely light at centre-forward. The lack of specialist left-back cover is another obvious concern.
But that is separate from whether the club behaved recklessly financially.
The published transfer fees suggest the opposite.
Around £78m of disclosed permanent expenditure was broadly covered by the £80.4m received for Ndiaye and Beto alone, before the undisclosed Patterson and Iroegbunam sales are included.
Ndiaye’s departure should also produce a large accounting profit, while other exits remove wages and future squad costs.
None of that tells us Everton’s exact SCR position.
That figure depends on information we do not have: wages, bonuses, agent fees, contract structures, amortisation schedules, player book values and the club’s latest revenue forecasts.
But the picture is considerably clearer than it was a few years ago.
Everton are no longer trying to navigate PSR while carrying the same debt structure and revenue limitations that contributed to their previous problems.
The rules have changed, the ownership has changed and the stadium has changed.
After years when the financial conversation around Everton was about surviving restrictions, the next test is whether the club can turn a stronger base into a better football team.
For updates on the Toffees throughout the season, take a look at our LIVE! Premier League 2026/27 News, Transfers, Updates & Viral Moments page.
Everton’s new pecking order after transfer window chaos – the winners and losers
Everton’s new pecking order after transfer window chaos – the winners and losers
Everton player stats 2026/27: Appearances, goals, assists and clean sheets
Everton player stats 2026/27: Appearances, goals, assists and clean sheets