.brand TLD: why major brands create their own domain extension

⚡Key Takeaways

• A .brand TLD = your own domain extension (.captaindns), reserved exclusively for your company
• 494 active .brands worldwide, 32,409 domains registered (May 2025)
• 4 benefits measured by AFNIC: Consistency (83%), Authenticity (80%), Proximity (71%), Security (77%)
• Global leaders: .dvag (DE, 10,562), .leclerc (FR, 1,165), .google (US, 622), .toyota (JP, 185), .ferrari (IT), .zara (ES)
• Important note: a .brand is a cost center, not a revenue generator; defensive-only strategy = risk of abandonment

Are your emails landing in spam? Are your customers hesitant to click on your links? Does your legal team spend tens of thousands of dollars every year defending your brand against cybersquatting?

These problems have a radical solution: owning your own domain extension.

In the previous article about the ICANN Next Round 2026, we presented the opportunity. Here, we dive into the specific case of .brand TLDs: what they actually deliver, who uses them successfully, and whether your company should apply.

What is a .brand TLD?

A .brand TLD (or "brand TLD", "dotbrand") is a top-level domain extension exclusively owned by a company. Instead of using captaindns.com, you become the owner of .captaindns and create any domains you want: shop.captaindns, email.captaindns, promo.captaindns.

The legal framework: Specification 13

ICANN defines .brands through Specification 13 of the Registry Agreement. This framework allows companies to operate a "closed" TLD where:

• Only the company (or its affiliates) can register domains
• No public sales are allowed
• The namespace is entirely controlled

This closure is what creates value: any domain under .captaindns is by definition legitimate.

The market in 2025

Indicator	Value
.brands delegated (2012-2025)	500
.brands active (after abandonments)	370
.brands actually operating	244 (50% success rate)
Domains registered under .brands	29,561
Countries of origin represented	40

Sources: ICANN, Dotzon 2025

Distribution by country of origin (number of .brands):

Rank	Country	.brands	Leaders
1	USA	~120	.google, .amazon, .apple, .aws
2	Japan	~60	.toyota, .canon, .panasonic
3	Germany	~50	.dvag, .schwarz, .audi, .bmw
4	France	22	.leclerc, .bnpparibas, .mma
5	UK	~20	.barclays, .hsbc, .sky
6	Spain	7	.zara, .seat, .bbva, .telefonica

Distribution by registered domains (effective usage):

Rank	Country	Domains	Comment
1	Germany	~12,000	Leader thanks to .dvag (10,562)
2	France	~3,500	Leclerc, MMA, BNP Paribas
3	USA	~2,500	Google, Amazon, Microsoft
4	UK	~1,500	Barclays, HSBC, Sky
5	Spain	~500	Telefonica, Seat, Zara
6	Japan	~400	Toyota, Canon

Revealing paradox: the USA has the most .brands, but Germany makes the best use of theirs. Having a .brand does not equal using it effectively.

The 4 pillars of .brand customer experience

An AFNIC 2024 study surveying 2,000 French internet users measured the impact of brand TLDs on user perception. The results fall into 4 categories.

Consistency: 83% of users

83% of internet users instantly identify the company through the brand TLD.

The .brand creates visual and structural coherence across the entire digital ecosystem. A retail network like Leclerc (with city.leclerc for each store) or an agency network like MMA benefits from uniform identification, regardless of the touchpoint.

Concrete benefit: no more endless URLs (store-paris-15.leclerc-drive.com), replaced by simplicity (paris15.leclerc).

Authenticity: 73-80% of users

Two measured dimensions:

• 80% feel more confident when visiting a .brand website
• 73% trust emails from a .brand domain more

This last point is crucial: 76% of internet users consider that the .brand helps identify legitimate email senders. In a context where banking phishing is exploding, this is a major asset.

Concrete benefit: an email from advisor@mybank.bnpparibas is immediately identifiable as legitimate. An email from bnpparibas-service@gmail.com is not.

Proximity: 71% of users

71% of users perceive a more direct relationship with the brand, without the intermediary of .com or country-code TLDs.

The URL mybank.bnpparibas suggests a direct connection, while bnpparibas.com interposes a generic element. It's subtle, but measurable.

Concrete benefit: strengthening the emotional brand-customer bond, particularly for sectors where trust is critical (banking, insurance, healthcare).

Security: 77% of users

77% of internet users believe that brand TLDs enhance online transaction security.

Beyond perception, .brands offer real technical advantages: closed namespace (no fraudulent domains possible), enhanced DMARC/SPF policies at the TLD level, and complete control over DNS infrastructure.

Concrete benefit: drastic reduction in phishing targeting your brand. If only your domains exist under .captaindns, fraudsters cannot create fake-site.captaindns.

Detailed success stories

E.Leclerc (.leclerc) - 1,165 domains

The Leclerc group is the French champion of .brand with 1,165 registered domain names.

Strategy: one domain per store. Each retail location has its address as city.leclerc (e.g., brest.leclerc, toulouse.leclerc).

Benefits achieved:

• Perfect consistency across 700+ stores network
• Instant identification for consumers
• Simplified anti-phishing efforts: any site claiming to be Leclerc but not using .leclerc is immediately suspicious

Lesson: the .brand makes full sense with an extensive physical distribution network.

BNP Paribas (.bnpparibas) - 250+ emails

BNP Paribas has deployed over 250 email addresses using @mybank.bnpparibas for its client advisors.

Strategy: create a strong authenticity signal in banking communications, a sector particularly targeted by phishing.

Benefits achieved:

• "Trust seal" allowing clients to instantly verify email legitimacy
• Clear differentiation from fraud attempts
• Strengthened advisor-client relationship

Lesson: regulated sectors (banking, insurance, healthcare) have an obvious ROI on phishing reduction.

MMA (.mma) - 1,600 agencies

MMA has equipped its 1,600 agencies with .mma addresses.

Strategy: uniform presence of the network across all of France.

Benefits achieved:

• Nationwide brand consistency
• Homogeneous customer experience regardless of touchpoint
• Simplified technical management (single TLD to administer)

Lesson: the .brand is particularly suited to franchise or agency networks.

Microsoft (.microsoft) - The cloud.microsoft migration

Microsoft represents the international reference case. The company applied for 8 TLDs in 2012 (.microsoft, .xbox, .azure...) and launched the "One Consolidated Domain Initiative" (OCDI) between 2020 and 2023.

Strategy: progressively migrate Microsoft 365 products to cloud.microsoft, resolving 20 years of inconsistent naming across hundreds of domains.

Challenges encountered:

• Critical internal education: many Microsoft employees were unaware of their own TLDs
• Redirect system needed for user errors (typing .com)
• Consultation with other .brand holders (Sky, HSBC, BNP Paribas) for implementation lessons

Lesson: organizational commitment is more important than budget. Without a convinced C-level sponsor, the project dies.

International benchmark: who dominates the market?

Germany: the "advisor network" model

Germany dominates the global .brand ranking thanks to a B2B2C-oriented approach:

Extension	Sector	Domains	Strategy
.dvag	Financial advisory	10,562	1 domain per advisor (max.mustermann.dvag)
.schwarz	Retail (Lidl/Kaufland)	739	Internal group domains + suppliers
.audi	Automotive	80+	German dealer network

Cultural factors: strong Mittelstand culture (partner network), high GDPR sensitivity, advanced B2B adoption.

Lesson: companies with advisor/agent networks (insurance, banking, real estate) have untapped potential.

United Kingdom: the "regulated trust" model

The UK favors .brands in regulated sectors where trust is critical:

Extension	Sector	Primary use
.barclays	Banking	Client communications, anti-phishing
.hsbc	Banking	Regional portals, digital services
.sky	Media/Telecom	Streaming services unification
.boots	Pharmacy/Retail	Health ecosystem

Cultural factors: strict FCA regulation, mature banking phishing market, strong corporate culture.

Lesson: banks and insurers have an obvious ROI on phishing reduction.

United States: the "tech infrastructure" model

American tech giants use their .brands as strategic infrastructure:

Extension	Company	Domains	Approach
.google	Alphabet	622	Services consolidation (registry.google)
.amazon	Amazon	268	Sovereign internal DNS
.aws	Amazon Web Services	-	Independent cloud infrastructure
.apple	Apple	-	Minimal, defensive use

American paradox: despite the highest number of applications in 2012, many US .brands are underutilized or abandoned.

Notable failures:

• .gm (General Motors): abandoned after restructuring
• .tiffany: terminated after LVMH acquisition
• .ford: minimal use despite dealer network

Lesson: size doesn't guarantee success. Organizational commitment is more important than budget.

Japan: the "digital keiretsu" model

Japan presents a unique approach linked to conglomerate structure:

Extension	Group	Domains	Particularity
.toyota	Toyota Group	185	Manufacturer + suppliers + dealers ecosystem
.canon	Canon Inc.	-	Global group internal use
.panasonic	Panasonic	-	B2B communications
.hitachi	Hitachi	-	Group infrastructure

Cultural factors: keiretsu structure (vertically integrated group), natural long-term horizon, sensitivity to brand honor.

Lesson: industrial groups with multiple subsidiaries can unify their digital presence.

Italy: luxury and automotive

Italy has invested heavily in .brands for its luxury and automotive brands:

Extension	Sector	Status	Notes
.ferrari	Luxury automotive	Active	Delegated 2016, exclusive brand use
.gucci	Luxury fashion	Active	Anti-counterfeiting, digital identity
.lamborghini	Luxury automotive	Active	Corporate communication
.fiat	Automotive	Active	Dealer network
.alfaromeo	Automotive	Active	Stellantis Group
.maserati	Luxury automotive	Abandoned	Terminated 2023 after restructuring
.abarth	Automotive	Abandoned	Revoked June 2023

Cultural factors: dominant luxury and automotive industry, sensitivity to counterfeiting, premium brand image.

Lesson: luxury brands have an obvious interest in controlling their namespace against digital counterfeiting. The abandonments (.maserati, .abarth) illustrate the risk of corporate restructurings.

Spain: sectoral diversity

Spain presents the most diverse .brand portfolio in Southern Europe:

Extension	Sector	Delegation	Operator
.telefonica	Telecom	April 2015	Telefonica S.A.
.movistar	Telecom	June 2015	Telefonica S.A.
.bbva	Banking	May 2015	BBVA S.A.
.lacaixa	Banking	July 2014	CaixaBank
.zara	Fashion	October 2015	Inditex S.A.
.mango	Fashion	February 2014	Punto FA S.L.
.seat	Automotive	April 2015	SEAT S.A.

Notable points:

• Telefonica: the only telecom operator to have obtained 3 brand TLDs (.telefonica, .movistar, .terra)
• Spanish fashion: Inditex (.zara) and Mango illustrate the fashion sector's interest
• Banking sector: BBVA and CaixaBank for secure client communications

Lesson: Spain shows that a .brand can be relevant across various sectors, not just finance or tech.

Portugal: isolated but significant case

Portugal has only one active .brand, but it's an interesting case study:

Extension	Sector	Operator	Particularity
.sapo	Web portal	PT Comunicacoes	Leading Portuguese portal (1.6M visitors/day)

Context: SAPO is the leading web portal in Portugal, equivalent to Yahoo/Orange for the Portuguese-speaking market. PT Comunicacoes uses it to consolidate its digital presence.

Lesson: even smaller markets can justify a .brand if the brand is dominant in its segment.

Summary by model

Model	Country	Approach	Utilization rate
Distributor network	Germany	1 domain/agent	70-80%
Regulated trust	UK	Anti-phishing	50-70%
Tech infrastructure	USA	Sovereign DNS	20-80% (variable)
Digital keiretsu	Japan	Group integration	40-60%
Luxury & Premium	Italy	Anti-counterfeiting	40-50%
Sectoral diversity	Spain	Multi-industry	40-50%
Physical network	France	Retail locations	40-50%

Advanced security benefits

Beyond user perception, .brands offer unique technical capabilities.

PSD DMARC: TLD-level protection

PSD DMARC (Public Suffix Domain DMARC) allows applying a DMARC policy to the entire TLD, not just domain by domain.

Example from the .bank extension (regulated TLD for financial institutions):

_dmarc.bank TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject; psd=y"

This configuration means that any email from any domain under .bank is subject to a strict reject policy if authentication fails.

Benefits:

• Systemic protection: impossible for an attacker to create a .bank domain and send fraudulent emails
• Management simplicity: one policy for the entire namespace
• Guaranteed compliance: all domains automatically inherit the policy

BIMI: your logo in email inboxes

BIMI (Brand Indicators for Message Identification) allows displaying your brand logo directly in email clients (Gmail, Apple Mail) when an email passes DMARC verification.

For a .brand:

• The logo appears consistently for all emails from the TLD
• Strong visual authenticity signal for recipients
• Requires a VMC (Verified Mark Certificate) validating trademark ownership

Sovereign DNS: the .aws case

Amazon Web Services uses its .aws extension as a true corporate sovereign DNS:

• All internal AWS services are progressively migrating to .aws addresses
• DNS infrastructure entirely controlled by Amazon, with no dependency on third-party registries
• Complete isolation: no .aws domain can be registered by a third party
• Native integration with AWS security services (IAM, CloudTrail)

This approach illustrates the .brand as strategic infrastructure, not simply a marketing tool.

Defensive vs active strategy

The defensive approach: the trap

Many applicants in the 2012 round adopted a defensive approach: "get the TLD to prevent others from having it."

Result: several .brands abandoned after a few years.

Abandoned .brand	Company	Country	Reason
.gm	General Motors	USA	Restructuring, no active use
.tiffany	Tiffany & Co.	USA	LVMH acquisition, change of priorities
.maserati	Stellantis	Italy	Group restructuring, terminated 2023
.abarth	Stellantis	Italy	Revoked June 2023, no identified ROI
.bugatti	Volkswagen Group	Germany	No identified use case

The lesson is clear: a .brand without an active use plan becomes a cost center difficult to justify.

The active approach: creating value

Successful .brands follow an active approach with concrete use cases:

Model	Description	Example
customer.brand	Direct client engagement	portal.bnpparibas
channel.brand	Distributor/partner network	city.leclerc
marcom.brand	Marketing campaigns	promo.bmw
service.brand	Digital service platforms	cloud.microsoft

Key question before applying: do you have at least 3 concrete use cases beyond "protecting our brand"?

Barriers to adoption

A 2025 ICANN study surveying 2,000 marketing executives identifies the main barriers:

Barrier	Percentage
Cost concerns	31%
Knowledge gaps	27%
Insufficient resources	24%
".com is king" mentality	18%

These barriers are real but surmountable for companies with a solid business case. The total cost (USD 350-450K in the first year, USD 70-100K/year thereafter) is significant but comparable to other digital infrastructure investments.

For a detailed cost analysis, see our complete gTLD 2026 budget guide.

Recommended action plan

Step 1: Evaluate the opportunity

Answer these 5 questions:

1. Do you have a distribution network (stores, agencies, advisors) that could leverage the .brand?
2. Are you in a regulated sector where trust is critical (banking, insurance, healthcare)?
3. Do you suffer from significant phishing attacks impersonating your brand?
4. Is your brand portfolio expensive to defend (.com, typosquatting)?
5. Do you have a C-level sponsor ready to champion the project for 5-10 years?

If you answer "yes" to 3+ questions, a deeper evaluation is warranted.

Step 2: Validate the budget

Minimum budget for a defensive/minimal .brand:

• Year 1: USD 350,000 - 450,000
• Following years: USD 70,000 - 100,000/year
• Minimum commitment: 10 years (Registry Agreement duration)

Step 3: Identify use cases

Document at least 3 concrete use cases with:

• Business objective
• Domains/emails to create
• Expected ROI (even qualitative)
• Internal owner

Step 4: Use the decision matrix

To objectify your decision, use our 15-criteria decision matrix.

FAQ

Can a .brand generate revenue?

No. By definition (Specification 13), a .brand is a closed TLD where only the company can register domains. You cannot sell domains to the public. The .brand is a cost center creating indirect value (trust, security, consistency), not a profit center.

Does the .brand replace the .com?

No, at least not in the short term. The recommended strategy is coexistence: keep your existing .coms (which have the SEO history and awareness) while progressively deploying the .brand for new uses. Microsoft maintains microsoft.com while developing cloud.microsoft.

Can you use the .brand for professional emails?

Yes, and it's one of the most relevant use cases. BNP Paribas uses @mybank.bnpparibas for its advisors. Emails from a .brand benefit from a strong authenticity signal, particularly useful in sectors targeted by phishing.

What is the SEO impact?

Neutral. Google has confirmed since 2015 that new gTLDs are treated like other extensions (.com, .org). No direct advantage, no disadvantage. The impact is indirect: user trust, click-through rate, brand perception. Your SEO depends on your content and backlinks, not your extension.

What happens if you abandon the .brand after a few years?

It's possible but costly. The termination process takes 6-12 months and includes: ICANN notification, registration freeze, active service migration, grace period for redirects. The cumulative sunk cost after 5 years of minimal operation reaches approximately USD 750,000. Hence the importance of long-term commitment from the start.

Glossary

• .brand: Brand TLD exclusively owned by a company, operated under ICANN's Specification 13
• Specification 13: ICANN legal framework defining the rules for closed brand TLDs
• PSD DMARC: DMARC applied at the Public Suffix Domain level (entire TLD), offering systemic protection
• BIMI: Brand Indicators for Message Identification - standard allowing brand logo display in email clients
• Registry Agreement: Contract between ICANN and a TLD operator, for a renewable 10-year term

Official sources

• ICANN 2025 Study - gTLD adoption by 2,000 marketing executives
• ICANN New gTLD Program - Official Next Round 2026 documentation

Related .brand and ICANN guides

• .brand TLD Global Benchmark: 5 Strategic Models Worldwide - Discover the 5 proven strategic models from Germany, UK, USA, Japan and Europe
• ICANN Next Round 2026: Introduction - Everything you need to know about the upcoming ICANN application window
• gTLD 2026 Budget: Complete Cost Guide - Detailed breakdown of costs and investments for your .brand project
• .brand gTLD Risks: 6 Scenarios and Contingency Plans - Anticipate risks before applying: auction, abandonment, migration, M&A