Home / Companies / Netflix, Inc. / 4 Jun 2026
Netflix, Inc.: meeting of 4 Jun 2026
Votes reported on Form N-PX, item by item
2,158 Form N-PX filers reported votes at the Netflix, Inc. meeting of 4 Jun 2026. Their records fall into 8 items below, in ballot order: management items first, then proposals from security holders. Each bar shows how the reporting filers split; it is not the result of the meeting.
foragainstabstain, withhold or otheramber tick: the portion cast against management
Items
DIRECTOR ELECTIONSIssuer
Director elections
12 nominees; 93.5% of reported votes for; 163 filers withheld from or voted against at least one nominee.
19,021 vote records from 557 filers. 11 of the 553 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 4 filers reported this item without a management mark.
SECTION 14A SAY-ON-PAY VOTESIssuer
Advisory vote on executive pay (say-on-pay)
3,872 vote records from 2,135 filers. 183 of the 2,073 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 62 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
AUDIT-RELATEDIssuer
Audit-related items (auditor ratification)
1,594 vote records from 555 filers. 15 of the 551 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 4 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
CORPORATE GOVERNANCESecurity holder
Stockholder proposal entitled, "Proposal 4 - Shareholder Right to Act by Written Consent,"
1,533 vote records from 530 filers. 290 of the 525 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 5 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS AND DEFENSESSecurity holder
Shareholder proposal: SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS AND DEFENSES
1,521 vote records from 529 filers. 31 of the 524 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 5 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
OTHER SOCIAL ISSUESSecurity holder
Stockholder proposal entitled, "Report on Politicized Brand Misalignment,"
1,531 vote records from 530 filers. 22 of the 525 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 5 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
OTHER SOCIAL ISSUESSecurity holder
Stockholder proposal entitled, "ESG ROI Report,"
1,526 vote records from 531 filers. 20 of the 527 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 4 filers reported this item without a management mark.
0 filers reported share counts too large to be the holding described. No share split is published for this item. How that is decided
Several categoriesSecurity holder
Shareholder proposals (not separable from the filings)
Filers described these proposals in wordings that could not be matched to one another, so they are shown together.
129 vote records from 24 filers. 6 of the 24 filers that marked the item either way voted against management.
How the largest families voted
| Family | 1. Directors | 2. Say-on-pay | 3. Auditor | 4. Proposal | 5. Proposal | 6. Proposal | 7. Proposal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vanguard | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| BlackRock and iShares | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Fidelity | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Dimensional | Against * | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| State Street and SPDR | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| American Century | For | For | For | Against | For * | Against | Against |
| Franklin Templeton | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Invesco | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Equitable | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Charles Schwab | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Nuveen and TIAA | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| ProShares and ProFunds | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| John Hancock and Manulife | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Morgan Stanley, Eaton Vance and Calvert | For | Against * | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| J.P. Morgan | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Goldman Sachs | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| WisdomTree | For | Against * | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| PGIM and Prudential | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Jackson National funds | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Northern Trust and FlexShares | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| SEI | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| T. Rowe Price | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Thrivent | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Lincoln Financial | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against * | Against |
| Voya | For | For | For | Against | For * | Against | Against |
| First Trust | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Russell Investments | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Nationwide | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Victory Capital | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Brighthouse Funds | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Guggenheim and Rydex | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Columbia Threadneedle | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| BNY Mellon | For | Against * | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Principal | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Capital Group and American Funds | For | Against * | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Pacific Life funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Global X | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| MFS | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Transamerica | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Federated Hermes | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| AllianceBernstein | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Hartford Funds | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| DWS | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| PIMCO | For | For | For | For * | Against | For * | For * |
| Allspring | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| MassMutual | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Harbor Funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Virtus | For | Against * | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| VanEck | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Macquarie and Delaware Funds | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Janus Henderson | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Neuberger Berman | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| American Beacon | For | For | For | No report | No report | No report | Against |
| Natixis and Loomis Sayles | For | For | For | For * | Against | Against | Against |
| Lord Abbett | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Harris Associates and Oakmark | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Baird | No report | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
| Artisan Partners | No report | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
* against management. A family's position is the way most of its reported shares were voted across its filers; "split" means no single position led. "No report" means none of the family's filers listed the item.
Questions
How did large funds vote at the Netflix, Inc. meeting?
2,158 Form N-PX filers reported votes at the meeting of 4 Jun 2026. On say-on-pay, 183 of 2,073 voted against management (8.8%). 4 proposals from security holders could be told apart in the filings. The family table lists each of the largest families item by item.
Is this the meeting result?
No. These are the votes of funds and managers that file Form N-PX, counted by filer and by the shares they reported. The certified result, which includes every shareholder, is reported by Netflix, Inc. on Form 8-K.
Why are director elections shown as counts only?
Director records name the nominee. This site does not publish pages or rows about individuals, so for director elections it keeps the number of nominees and the split of votes and discards the wording.
Every meeting on file for Netflix, Inc.
Provenance: SEC EDGAR, Form N-PX and N-PX/A filings listing Netflix, Inc. with a meeting date within three days of 4 Jun 2026. Proposal titles are the most common wording among filers and are replaced by the SEC category where a wording could name a person. Not verified by the SEC. Filings read through 23 Sep 2026.