-
Signature
-
/s/ Christopher Schaub, as attorney-in-fact for Jennifer Vecchio
-
Issuer symbol
-
BURL
-
Transactions as of
-
02 Feb 2026
-
Net transactions value
-
-$124,693
-
Form type
-
4
-
Filing time
-
04 Feb 2026, 16:15:03 UTC
Reporting Owners (1)
| Name |
Relationship |
Address |
Signature |
Signature date |
CIK |
| Vecchio Jennifer |
Group President and CMO |
2006 ROUTE 130 NORTH, BURLINGTON |
/s/ Christopher Schaub, as attorney-in-fact for Jennifer Vecchio |
04 Feb 2026 |
0001641994 |
Transactions Table
| Type |
Sym |
Class |
Transaction |
Value $ |
Shares |
Change % |
* Price $ |
Shares After |
Date |
Ownership |
Footnotes |
| transaction |
BURL |
Common Stock |
Sale |
$11,471 |
-39 |
-0.06% |
$294.12 |
62,874 |
02 Feb 2026 |
Direct |
F1 |
| transaction |
BURL |
Common Stock |
Sale |
$32,249 |
-109 |
-0.17% |
$295.86 |
62,765 |
02 Feb 2026 |
Direct |
F1, F2 |
| transaction |
BURL |
Common Stock |
Sale |
$10,983 |
-37 |
-0.06% |
$296.83 |
62,728 |
02 Feb 2026 |
Direct |
F1 |
| transaction |
BURL |
Common Stock |
Sale |
$52,893 |
-177 |
-0.28% |
$298.83 |
62,551 |
02 Feb 2026 |
Direct |
F1, F3 |
| transaction |
BURL |
Common Stock |
Sale |
$17,098 |
-57 |
-0.09% |
$299.96 |
62,494 |
02 Feb 2026 |
Direct |
F1, F4 |
| holding |
BURL |
Common Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
186 |
02 Feb 2026 |
By reporting person as UTMA custodian for son |
|
| holding |
BURL |
Common Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
186 |
02 Feb 2026 |
By reporting person as UTMA custodian for daughter |
|
* An asterisk sign (*) next to the price indicates that the price is likely invalid.
Buy Plan / Sale Plan: These are also open market purchases/sales of shares, but in this case the transaction is part of a trading plan. Rule 10b5-1 allows insiders to setup a trading plan to buy/sell stocks over a certain period of time. Since the purchases/sales are predetermined, this protects the insiders from violating insider trading law.
Transaction was made pursuant to a contract, instruction or written plan for the purchase or sale of equity securities of the issuer that is intended to satisfy the affirmative defense conditions of Rule 10b5-1(c).
Explanation of Responses: