DINE BRANDS GLOBAL INC (DIN)

Sector: Consumer Discretionary

    Home/Companies/DIN/Annual Meeting

2026 Annual Meeting Analysis

DINE BRANDS GLOBAL INC · Meeting: May 14, 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

2

Directors AGAINST

8

Say on Pay

FOR

Auditor

FOR

Director Elections

Election of Directors

2 FOR/8 AGAINST

Against Analysis

✗ AGAINST
Howard M. Berk3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold for negative absolute TSR; 5yr return -65.0% vs peer median -46.4%, gap of -18.6pp does not exceed 20pp threshold — 5yr mitigant does NOT apply (gap exceeds threshold)

Dine Brands' stock has lost about 56% over three years while the median peer lost about 25%, a gap of roughly 31 percentage points that exceeds the 20-point trigger for companies with negative absolute returns; the five-year record does not provide relief because that gap also exceeds the policy threshold, so an AGAINST vote is warranted for directors with sufficient tenure.

✗ AGAINST
Michael C. Hyter3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Mr. Hyter has served long enough that the three-year stock underperformance trigger applies; the stock's roughly 31-percentage-point gap versus the peer median under a negative absolute return qualifies for an AGAINST vote, and the five-year record does not clear the threshold needed to override it.

✗ AGAINST
Douglas M. Pasquale3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Mr. Pasquale has a tenure that meaningfully overlaps the underperformance period; the company's stock lagged the peer median by about 31 percentage points over three years against a negative absolute return, triggering the AGAINST vote, and the five-year data does not provide a mitigating offset.

✗ AGAINST
John W. Peyton3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply; CEO-director subject to same TSR trigger independently of Say on Pay vote

As CEO and a board member, Mr. Peyton is subject to the same director TSR trigger as all other directors; the stock has declined about 56% over three years while peers declined about 25%, a gap that far exceeds the 20-point policy threshold, and the five-year record does not clear the mitigant bar.

✗ AGAINST
Martha C. Poulter3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Ms. Poulter's tenure overlaps the full underperformance period; Dine Brands' stock trailed the peer median by roughly 31 percentage points over three years under a negative absolute return, meeting the trigger for an AGAINST vote, with no five-year relief available.

✗ AGAINST
Matthew T. Ryan3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Mr. Ryan has served long enough to be held accountable for the three-year period; the approximately 31-percentage-point underperformance gap versus peers under a negative absolute return triggers the policy's AGAINST vote, and the five-year comparison does not satisfy the mitigant condition.

✗ AGAINST
Arthur F. Starrs3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Mr. Starrs has sufficient tenure to be subject to the TSR trigger; with the stock down about 56% over three years versus a peer median decline of about 25%, the 31-percentage-point gap exceeds the 20-point threshold, and the five-year data does not provide a mitigating override.

✗ AGAINST
Lilian C. Tomovich3yr TSR trigger: DIN 3yr return -55.8% vs peer median -24.7%, gap of -31.1pp exceeds 20pp threshold; 5yr mitigant does not apply

Ms. Tomovich's tenure covers the underperformance period; Dine Brands' stock underperformed the peer median by about 31 percentage points over three years on a negative absolute return basis, meeting the trigger, and the five-year comparison does not clear the mitigant threshold.

For Analysis

✓ FOR
Amanda Clarknew director — first-time nominee, exempt from TSR trigger (joined within 24 months)

Ms. Clark is standing for election for the first time and is a new nominee, so she is exempt from the TSR underperformance trigger under the policy's 24-month new-director exemption.

✓ FOR
Enrique Silvanew director — first-time nominee, exempt from TSR trigger (joined within 24 months)

Mr. Silva is standing for election for the first time and is a new nominee, so he is exempt from the TSR underperformance trigger under the policy's 24-month new-director exemption.

Eight of the ten nominees trigger the TSR underperformance policy: Dine Brands' stock fell about 56% over three years while the disclosed peer group median fell only about 25%, a gap of roughly 31 percentage points that exceeds the 20-point policy threshold for companies with negative absolute returns. The five-year record (-65% vs. peer median -46%, gap of -18.6pp) does not exceed the 20pp threshold needed to trigger the mitigant — meaning the mitigant does NOT downgrade the AGAINST votes to FOR. The two new nominees (Amanda Clark and Enrique Silva) are exempt as first-time nominees within the 24-month new-director window and receive FOR votes.

Say on Pay

✓ FOR

CEO

John Peyton

Total Comp

$5,417,315

Prior Support

92%%

CEO total compensation of approximately $5.4 million is reasonable for a consumer-sector franchisor of this market cap size, and the prior Say on Pay vote received about 92% support, well above the 70% threshold that would require scrutiny of whether the company responded to shareholder concerns. The pay structure is predominantly variable — the proxy states that 85% of the CEO's total direct compensation opportunity is linked to performance and/or stock value, which satisfies the policy's requirement that variable pay make up at least 50-60% of senior executive pay. While the company's stock performance has been poor, the long-term incentive payouts reflect that underperformance (the 2023-2025 Cash LTIP paid out at only 74.2% of target, and earlier cycles paid zero), demonstrating that the incentive structure is working as intended rather than rewarding executives while shareholders suffer losses.

Auditor Ratification

✓ FOR

Auditor

KPMG LLP

Tenure

N/A

Audit Fees

$1,349,000

Non-Audit Fees

$5,000

Non-audit fees (tax fees of $5,000) represent less than 1% of audit fees ($1,349,000), well below the 50% threshold that would raise independence concerns; auditor tenure is not disclosed in the filing so no tenure trigger fires, and there are no disclosed material restatements; KPMG is a Big 4 firm appropriate for a company of this size.

Stockholder Proposals

2 proposals submitted by shareholders

Proposal 4

An Advisory Vote to Provide Stockholders the Right to Call a Special Meeting of the Stockholders at a 25% Ownership Threshold

✓ FOR
Filed by:Board of Directors (management proposal)OtherGovernance
Board recommends: FOR
governance improvement — company currently has no special meeting right; 25% threshold is market-standard

Dine Brands currently gives shareholders no ability to call a special meeting at all, so adopting a 25% threshold would be a genuine improvement in shareholder rights even though it is a higher bar than the 15% threshold proposed in Proposal 5. A 25% threshold is the most common single threshold in the S&P 500 and falls within the acceptable range endorsed by major institutional investors including BlackRock and Vanguard. Supporting this proposal gives shareholders a meaningful new accountability tool while recognizing that some threshold is needed to prevent a tiny minority from forcing costly meetings.

Proposal 5

A Stockholder Proposal Regarding the Right of Stockholders to Call a Special Meeting of Stockholders at a 15% Ownership Threshold

✓ FOR
Filed by:The Accountability BoardOtherGovernance
Board recommends: AGAINST
credible governance ask — right to call special meetings is a mainstream shareholder right endorsed by ISS, Glass Lewis, BlackRock, and Vanguard15% threshold favored by major proxy advisorscompany currently has zero special meeting right — any improvement is meaningfulcompeting board proposal (Proposal 4) offers 25% threshold

The Accountability Board appears to be a credible governance-focused filer making a standard governance ask — the right to call special meetings — that is endorsed by ISS, Glass Lewis, BlackRock, and Vanguard; a 15% ownership threshold falls squarely within the range that major institutions support and would give a broader group of shareholders a meaningful accountability tool. Although the board is offering a competing 25% threshold in Proposal 4 (which we also support as an improvement over the status quo), a lower 15% threshold better aligns with best-practice governance standards and gives shareholders more effective oversight rights, particularly given Dine Brands' significant multi-year stock underperformance. Shareholders who prefer the board's 25% proposal can vote for Proposal 4; supporting Proposal 5 signals to the board that shareholders want the lowest reasonable threshold, and the two votes are not mutually exclusive since both are advisory and non-binding.

Overall Assessment

The 2026 Dine Brands ballot is dominated by director accountability concerns: eight of ten nominees trigger the TSR underperformance policy due to the stock's roughly 56% three-year decline against a peer median decline of only 25%, with no five-year mitigant available, resulting in AGAINST votes for all long-tenured directors including the CEO. The Say on Pay vote earns support because the pay structure is heavily performance-linked, incentive payouts have already been reduced to reflect poor results, and the prior year's shareholder vote showed 92% approval.

Filing date: March 27, 2026·Policy v1.2·high confidence

Compensation Peer Group

17 companies disclosed in 2026 proxy filing

BJRIBJ's Restaurants, Inc.
BLMNBloomin' Brands Inc.
EATBrinker International, Inc.
CHHChoice Hotels International, Inc.
CBRLCracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.
PLAYDave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc.
DENNDenny's Corporation
FWRGFirst Watch Restaurant Group, Inc.
JACKJack in the Box, Inc.
PZZAPapa John's International, Inc.
RRGBRed Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc.
SHAKShake Shack, Inc.
TXRHTexas Roadhouse, Inc.
CAKEThe Cheesecake Factory Incorporated
WENThe Wendy's Company
WINGWingstop Inc.
WHWyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc.