Who actually owns each F1 team?

Who is benefiting from the huge spike in Formula 1 team valuations? While writing my recent piece on why team valuations are ramping up so fast, I realised that I didn’t definitively know that answer for each team. 

With the interest in valuations, plus the ongoing story around Cadillac’s ownership and recent revelations around Aston Martin shareholding I thought I’d go down some rabbit holes and look into available shareholding information for each team. 

Available is a key word here. Depending on the type of ownership structure and where it is domiciled the strength and depth of the information differs. 

The answer to the seemingly simple question of ‘Who actually owns each F1 team’ is actually very complex. Having dug deep and thought about how we got here, there are three key reasons for people to want to own part of an F1 team. Those reasons do overlap but have undeniably shifted since the ‘owner/operator’ models of Frank Williams, Colin Chapman, Bruce McLaren and Ken Tyrrell when the only target was to win. 

1) You own one because you want to go racing. 

2) You own one because going racing helps another business make money. 

3) You (part) own one because you believe the racing team itself will make you money.

Frank Williams largely represented the first. Benetton and Red Bull are examples of the second. The arrival of Arctos, Otro and other institutional investors represents the third.

But we are not anywhere close to a grid with a 100% ownership by institutional investors, representing reason 3. And that’s what makes the detail so interesting. 

Today's grid is increasingly populated by hybrids. Manufacturers alongside private capital, billionaire controllers alongside institutional investors, sovereign wealth alongside entrepreneurs, even senior employees owning equity. 

Once you dig into these structures some of the strategic decisions of the teams and cultural differences make sense. Gene Haas is the only 100% owner/operator left on the grid. Haas are also the only team operating below the cost cap. This is perhaps not a surprise correlation.

With Haas being the simplest to explain, I’ll start at the opposite end of the complexity scale.

Aston Martin: Lawrence Stroll controls it, but plenty of others own part of it

Stroll doesn't simply 'own' Aston Martin F1, and Aston Martin Lagonda, the listed road car company whose name is above the door, doesn't own the F1 team either.

The F1 business ultimately sits within AMR GP Holdings Limited and this is probably the best example on the grid of how sophisticated F1 ownership has become.

PlanetF1 recently did some detailed digging into filings relating to Adrian Newey's shareholding and calculated that Stroll-related interests account for around a third of the economic ownership of the team. 

It also highlighted something considerably more important: Stroll doesn't need to own anything close to a majority to control it.

UK Companies House currently records Racing Point UK Holdings Limited, the Stroll-led consortium holding vehicle, as owning more than 25% but no more than 50% of AMR GP Holdings' shares. But it has 75% or more of the voting rights and the right to appoint or remove directors.

Then it gets more interesting.

The latest articles of association define Racing Point UK Holdings as the 'Controlling Shareholder' for as long as it owns at least 15% of the company's shares.

That status brings significant governance rights, including around appointment of the chairman, directors and the quorum required for board meetings.

So Stroll has achieved something increasingly important in modern F1, he has brought substantial amounts of other people's capital into the business, and crystallised some of the extraordinary increase in its value, without surrendering control.

Who are the others?

Arctos Partners, one of the biggest specialist sports investment firms in the world, is a substantial shareholder. HPS Investment Partners is another. Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has an interest. Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets, joined through Delaware vehicle Green Racer LLC. Adrian Newey has an equity interest through a special class of shares. There are also management interests.

PlanetF1's analysis puts Newey's interest at approximately 4.7% and Racing Point UK itself at around 27%, with total Stroll-associated interests around 33%.

Ferrari: Publicly owned, family influenced

Ferrari ought to be straightforward as well.

It isn't a separately syndicated F1 operation like Aston Martin. Scuderia Ferrari sits inside Ferrari itself.

And Ferrari is a publicly listed company, so in one sense it has thousands of owners.

But that doesn't mean all Ferrari shares are created equally when it comes to control.

As of February 2026, Exor, the Agnelli family's investment company, owned 21.33% of Ferrari's ordinary shares.

Thanks to Ferrari's loyalty voting structure, those shares represented 32.32% of the voting power.

Piero Ferrari's trust held another 10.67% economically, representing 16.17% of the votes.

Put those together and interests representing around 32% of the economic ownership command approximately 48.5% of the voting power..

So saying Ferrari is ‘publicly owned’ is correct.

Saying Ferrari is a company over which the Agnelli/Exor and Ferrari family interests retain enormous influence is also correct.

And this is a good example of the difference between economic ownership and control.

There is another important difference with Ferrari. If someone says the Ferrari F1 team is worth $5billion, there isn't a standalone company containing Scuderia Ferrari that can simply be bought for that number.

Ferrari's F1 team is part of the wider Ferrari business.

That makes comparing an implied Ferrari F1 valuation with, say, a transaction in Aston Martin or Alpine slightly more apples and pears than most valuation tables acknowledge.

Red Bull and Racing Bulls: Two F1 teams, one strategic purpose

At its simplest, Red Bull Racing and Racing Bulls are ultimately part of the Red Bull empire.

This is perhaps the best current example of our second reason for owning an F1 team: going racing helps another business make money.

Red Bull wasn't created to go motor racing. Red Bull Racing was created to help sell Red Bull.

That has worked rather well.

But the ownership trail is worth understanding.

At the UK level, Red Bull Technology sits above much of the Milton Keynes operation. Companies House currently identifies Mark Mateschitz as owning more than 25% but no more than 50% of Red Bull Technology. The same pattern runs through Red Bull Powertrains and other UK entities.

Ultimately, however, you arrive at privately-held Austrian parent Red Bull GmbH and the interests of the Mateschitz and Yoovidhya families.

That structure has itself changed since Dietrich Mateschitz's death and there has been a further change involving a 2% holding previously held personally by Chalerm Yoovidhya being transferred to Swiss trustee Fides Trustees.

Mercedes: Three equal owners, plus one

Mercedes is refreshingly easy at team level.

Mercedes-Benz, INEOS (ultimately Sir Jim Ratcliffe) and Toto Wolff each own one third.

When INEOS joined the ownership in 2020, Mercedes explicitly announced that the team would be owned in three equal parts. Companies House still identifies Mercedes-Benz Holdings UK, INEOS Industries Holdings and Toto Wolff as the three active persons/entities with significant control.

Except there is now a footnote.

In November 2025 CrowdStrike founder George Kurtz acquired a 15% minority interest in Wolff's ownership entity.

Because that entity owns one third of Mercedes, Kurtz's indirect economic interest is equivalent to around 5% of the F1 team.

Crucially, Mercedes said the governance had not changed. Wolff remains in control of his ownership entity and continues as CEO and team principal, although Kurtz joined the team's strategic steering committee alongside Wolff, Ola Källenius (Mercedes) and Ratcliffe.

This is a small transaction but an interesting one.

Wolff has effectively been able to sell part of his economic exposure to an F1 team valued in the billions without giving up his position or changing the three-way governance structure.

McLaren: Sovereign capital has ended up owning the racing team

McLaren's ownership has recently become simpler.

During the pandemic, McLaren Racing brought in MSP Sports Capital and other investors at a time when the wider McLaren organisation badly needed capital.

That proved to be a spectacular investment.

In September 2025 McLaren announced that the remaining minority shareholders MSP, O'Connor Capital Solutions, Ares and Caspian had been bought out.

That left Bahrain's Mumtalakat and Abu Dhabi-based CYVN Holdings owning 100% of McLaren Racing between them.

Mumtalakat remains the majority shareholder and CYVN holds a non-controlling stake. McLaren has not publicly disclosed the exact split.

The transaction reportedly valued McLaren Racing at more than $4billion.

This is an important distinction from McLaren Automotive, which has gone through its own ownership restructuring. McLaren Racing is the business we are interested in here, and it contains more than F1. IndyCar and McLaren's incoming World Endurance Championship programme also sit within the racing operation.

Again, what exactly are we valuing when we say ‘McLaren F1 is worth $4billion’?

It isn't necessarily only the two orange cars turning up at 24 grands prix.

Cadillac: The newest team produces one of the least obvious answers

If you asked somebody who owns the Cadillac F1 team, the instinctive answer would probably be General Motors.

Understandably.

Formula 1 itself described the successful entry application as being made by General Motors and TWG Motorsports, and TWG CEO Dan Towriss has subsequently confirmed publicly that GM is an equity owner in the team

But the UK corporate record gives us another name.

The British company is now TWG Cadillac Formula 1 Team Limited.

Companies House identifies Mark Walter as its sole active person with significant control, on the basis that he “has significant influence or control”.

TWG is Walter's wider investment group and its sports interests stretch well beyond Formula 1. With Walter very recently and unexpectedly selling parts of his sports investment portfolio including the LA Lakers and Chelsea FC, facing increasing US government scrutiny and with MSP (see McLaren above) principals spotted in the Cadillac motorhome during the Madrid F1 weekend, the longevity of TWG involvement in F1 is currently in doubt. 

TWG itself recently denied reports that those assets might be for sale.

So where exactly does GM sit economically?

Public descriptions variously refer to TWG owning the team in partnership with GM or to a TWG owned operation backed by GM. What isn't publicly available is a clean percentage split. Paddock insiders suggest that GM has options up to 30%, Dan Towriss has 3% with Walter owning the remaining equity.

Audi: A works team with a sovereign wealth shareholder

Audi is another good example of the modern hybrid.

Audi initially moved to take complete ownership of Sauber Holding as it prepared for its 2026 works entry.

Then, before the Audi name had even appeared on an F1 grid, Qatar Investment Authority signed definitive agreements to acquire a significant minority stake in Sauber Holding.

Neither Audi nor QIA publicly disclosed the final percentage in their announcement. Formula 1 described it as a “substantial minority” investment and a significant capital injection into the project.

Subsequently Audi has admitted to various parties including Joe Saward to be looking towards a Mercedes-esque split, looking at offers for 33% of the team in part a reaction to cost cutting and major restructuring within the wider VW group. 

Alpine: Renault owns 76%, financial investors own 24%

After some of the structures above, Alpine almost feels straightforward, despite being the most newsworthy in recent months. 

Renault Group owns 76% of Alpine Racing Limited.

An investor group led by Otro Capital owns 24%.

The latter stake was acquired for €200million in 2023, valuing Alpine Racing at around $900million at the time. Renault explicitly identified Otro, RedBird Capital Partners and Maximum Effort Investments as the investor group.

The investment subsequently attracted plenty of headlines because athletes and celebrities including Patrick Mahomes, Rory McIlroy and others participated.

But the important ownership point is that Renault retained very clear legal and voting control. Its 76% holding also puts it above the 75% threshold required for major corporate decisions such as special resolutions under UK company law.

The saga of the 24% has been dragging on and is likely to conclude in the coming months. 

Williams: An F1 team owned as an investment

Williams is historically important to this story because for decades it was almost the definition of our first ownership model.

Frank Williams owned a racing team (with Patrick Head) because he wanted to race. The only blip in the simple model was a long forgotten part listing on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and a cameo role from Toto Wolff (with 15% equity). This was a glimpse of the hybrid ownership model we now see over a decade later. 

The modern Williams represents something very different.

Dorilton Capital acquired Williams in August 2020 following the strategic review undertaken by the then-listed Williams business. Williams described Dorilton at the time as a US-headquartered private investment firm with a long-term approach to investment.

Matthew Savage, Dorilton's chairman, became chairman of Williams following the acquisition alongside fellow Dorilton figure Darren Fultz and paddock insider James Matthews on the board.

This is therefore perhaps the cleanest example on the grid of our third reason for owning an F1 team.

Dorilton doesn't need Williams to sell cars, energy drinks or petrochemicals.

The racing business itself is the asset. My own conversations with Savage also make clear that this isn't simply a passive financial investment. He genuinely wants Williams to win again.

There are more layers to the corporate structure than the simple word ‘Dorilton’ suggests. The UK operating company currently records that there is no registrable person or relevant legal entity for UK PSC purposes.

This illustrates why the quality of public ownership information differs from team to team. Private investment structures, overseas entities, trusts and statutory reporting thresholds don't all produce the same neat trail.

Haas

Finally, Gene Haas.

After multiple share classes, sovereign wealth funds, private equity, holding companies, enhanced voting rights and 83-page articles of association, this comes as something of a relief.

Gene Haas founded the team.

Gene Haas controls the team.

Companies House identifies Haas as the only active person with significant control of Haas Formula UK, with 75% or more of both the shares and voting rights, Haas itself goes further, describing Gene Haas as Formula 1's only sole team owner.

That leaves Haas as the closest thing on the 2026 grid to the traditional proprietor-owned F1 team. 

How long might that last? Toyota's technical and commercial involvement with the team continues to grow and Haas has inevitably attracted investor interest as F1 valuations have increased. But as of today the ownership model remains remarkably clean and simple.

So what does an F1 owner look like in 2026?

That turned out to be a considerably longer answer than I expected.

Via different routes and structures modern F1 has accumulated different types of capital.

You want to race.

Racing helps another business make money.

Or you believe the racing business itself will make you money.

For much of Formula 1's history it was relatively easy to work out which box an owner belonged in.

Frank Williams wanted to win races.

Benetton wanted to sell clothes.

Renault wanted to sell cars.

Today the boxes increasingly sit on top of each other. 

Winning can now be both the sporting objective and the mechanism through which a shareholder achieves a wider commercial or investment return.

One thing that revealed itself as I dug into the detail is that an F1 team has now become valuable enough that an owner no longer necessarily must choose between keeping it and selling it.

Renault could sell 24% of Alpine, raise €200million and retain control.

Audi could bring QIA into Sauber without surrendering its works team.

Toto Wolff could sell 15% of his Mercedes ownership vehicle while retaining his role and control.

Lawrence Stroll has brought successive investors into Aston Martin while preserving overwhelming voting power.

For an owner, a multibillion dollar valuation can therefore become more than a theoretical number on a Forbes list. You can monetise part of it.

For the incoming investor the calculation is the opposite. There are only 11 F1 teams and very few owners who want to sell one.

If the only way into an appreciating global sports franchise is buying 10%, 20% or 24% while somebody else remains in charge, increasingly sophisticated investors appear perfectly happy to do that.

That is a very different Formula 1 ownership market from the one that existed even a decade ago.

How that happened and when an F1 team stopped being something you had to continually fund and became something investors fought to own is an extraordinary case study to explore.

For now, though, I started this exercise asking who is actually benefiting from the huge increase in Formula 1 team values?

The answer isn't private equity. It isn't the manufacturers. And it isn't a collection of billionaires.

It is all of them.

Formula 1 hasn't replaced one type of owner with another.

It has become valuable enough to attract them all.