April 5, 2018

Dear Stockholder:

I am pleased to invite you to our 2018 Annual Stockholders’ Meeting. We will hold the meeting at 12:30 p.m. central time on Thursday, May 24, 2018 at the Four Seasons Hotel Saint Louis, Mississippi Room, 8^th Floor at 999 North 2^nd Street, Saint Louis, Missouri.

On April 5, 2018, we began mailing our stockholders a notice containing instructions on how to access our 2018 Proxy Statement and 2017 Annual Report and vote online. The notice also included instructions on how to receive a paper copy of your annual meeting materials, including the notice of annual meeting, proxy statement and proxy card. If you received your annual meeting materials by mail, the notice of annual meeting, proxy statement and proxy card from our Board of Directors were enclosed. If you received your annual meeting materials via e-mail, the e-mail contained voting instructions and links to the annual report and the proxy statement on the Internet, which are both available at http://investor.belden.com/investor-relations/financial-information/latest-financials/default.aspx.

The agenda for this year’s annual meeting consists of the following items:

Please refer to the proxy statement for detailed information on the proposals and the annual meeting. Your participation is appreciated.

Sincerely,

John Stroup

President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman

of the Board

BELDEN INC.

1 North Brentwood Boulevard, 15th Floor

Saint Louis, Missouri 63105

314-854-8000

NOTICE OF 2018 ANNUAL STOCKHOLDERS’ MEETING

DATE:		Thursday, May 24, 2018
TIME:		12:30 p.m. CDT
PLACE:		Four Seasons Hotel Saint Louis,   Mississippi Room, 8th Floor,   999 North 2nd Street,   Saint Louis, Missouri 63102

    VOTING

Please vote as soon as possible to record your vote promptly, even if you plan to attend the annual meeting. You have three options for submitting your vote before the annual meeting:

 

				Phone (if you request a full delivery of the proxy materials)
				Internet
				Mail (if you request a full delivery of the proxy materials)

PROXY STATEMENT FOR THE

2018 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS OF

BELDEN INC.

To be held on Thursday, May 24, 2018

INTERNET AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS

Under rules of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), we are furnishing proxy materials to our stockholders primarily via the Internet, instead of mailing printed copies of those materials to each stockholder. On April 5, 2018, we began mailing to our stockholders (other than those who previously requested electronic or paper delivery) a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials containing instructions on how to access our proxy materials, including our proxy statement and our annual report. The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials also instructs you on how to access your proxy card to vote through the Internet or by telephone.

This process is designed to expedite stockholders’ receipt of proxy materials, lower the cost of the annual meeting, and help conserve natural resources. However, if you would prefer to receive printed proxy materials, please follow the instructions included in the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials. If you have previously elected to receive our proxy materials electronically, you will continue to receive these materials via e-mail unless you elect otherwise.

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR QUESTIONS

Answers to certain frequently asked questions including the votes required for approval of the agenda items are included in this document beginning on page 50. For other questions, please see the following contact information:

The Belden Board has ten members and four standing committees: Audit, Compensation, Finance, and Nominating and Corporate Governance. The Board had six meetings during 2017; two of which were telephonic. All directors attended 75% or more of the Board meetings and the Board committee meetings on which they served.

At its regular meeting on March 1, 2018, the Board determined that each of the non-employee directors seeking reappointment meets the independence requirements of the NYSE listing standards. As part of this process, the Board determined that each such member had no material relationship with the Company.

Biographies of Directors Seeking Reappointment

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee operates under a Board-approved written charter and each member meets the independence requirements of the NYSE’s listing standards. The Committee assists the Board in overseeing the Company’s accounting and reporting practices by, among other items:

At its March 1, 2018 meeting, the Board determined that each of Ms. Brown and Mr. Minnich qualifies as an Audit Committee Financial Expert as defined in the rules pursuant to SOX. As previously described, each member of the Audit Committee is independent.

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee of Belden determines, approves and reports to the Board on compensation for the Company’s elected officers and oversees senior management succession planning. The Committee reviews the design, funding and competitiveness of the Company’s retirement programs. The Committee also assists the Company in developing compensation and benefit strategies to attract, develop and retain qualified employees. The Committee operates under a written charter approved by the Board.

Finance Committee

The Finance Committee provides oversight in the area of corporate finance and makes recommendations to the Board about the financial aspects of the Company. Examples of topics upon which the Finance Committee may provide guidance include capital structure, capital adequacy, credit ratings, capital expenditure planning, and dividend policy and share repurchase programs. The Committee is governed by a written charter approved by the Board.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee identifies, evaluates, and recommends nominees for the Board for each annual meeting (and to fill vacancies during interim periods); evaluates the composition, organization and governance of the Board and its committees; and develops and recommends corporate governance principles and policies applicable to the Company. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider nominees recommended by stockholders if such nominations are submitted to the Company prior to the deadline for proposals as noted above under the caption “Nomination of Director Candidates” on page 54.

The Committee’s responsibilities with respect to its governance function include considering matters of corporate governance and reviewing (and recommending to the Board revisions to) the Company’s corporate governance principles and its code of conduct, which applies to all Company employees, officers and directors. The Committee is governed by a written charter approved by the Board.

Corporate Governance Documents

Current copies of the Audit, Compensation, Finance and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee charters, as well as the Company’s governance principles and code of conduct, are available on the Company’s website at http://investor.belden.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance/governance-documents/default.aspx. Printed copies of these materials are also available to stockholders upon request, addressed to the Corporate Secretary, Belden Inc., 1 North Brentwood Boulevard, 15^th Floor, Saint Louis, Missouri 63105.

During 2017, it became clear that the Company’s stockholders were dissatisfied with the Company’s prior decision to extend that certain Rights Agreement, dated as of December 11, 1996, as amended, between the Company and American Stock & Trust Company, LLC, successor to Computershare Trust Company, N.A., and prior to that the First National Bank of Boston (the “Rights Agreement”), through December 10, 2019 without obtaining the prior consent of stockholders. After considering the feedback offered by stockholders, the Board of Directors authorized Company management to redeem the Rights Agreement, effective as of March 27, 2018. The Company announced the redemption of the Rights Agreement on March 23, 2018 (the “Redemption”). For additional information, please see the Form 8-K filed by the Company on March 23, 2018.

Related Party Transactions and Compensation Committee Interlocks

It is our policy to review all relationships and transactions in which the Company and our directors and executive officers or their immediate family members are participants to determine whether such persons have a direct or indirect material interest. Annually, we obtain information from all directors and executive officers with respect to related party transactions to determine, based on the facts and circumstances, whether the Company or a related person has a direct or indirect material interest in any such transaction. As required under SEC rules, transactions that are determined to be directly or indirectly material to the Company or a related person are disclosed in our proxy statement. We have determined that there were no material related party transactions during 2017.

None of our executive officers served during 2017 as a member of the board of directors or as a member of a compensation committee of any other company that has an executive officer serving as a member of our Board of Directors or Compensation Committee.

Communications with Directors

The Company’s Board has established a process to receive communications from stockholders and other interested parties. Stockholders and other interested parties may contact any member (or all members) of the Board (including John Stroup, Chairman of the Board, or Bryan Cressey, Lead Independent Director and presiding director for non-management director meetings), any Board committee, or any chair of any such committee by U.S. mail, through calling the Company’s hotline or via e-mail.

To communicate with the Board, any individual director or any group or committee of directors, correspondence should be addressed to the Company’s Board or any such individual directors or group or committee of directors by either name or title. All such correspondence should be sent “c/o Corporate Secretary, Belden Inc.” at 1 North Brentwood Boulevard, 15^th Floor, Saint Louis, MO 63105. To communicate with any of our directors electronically or through the Company’s hotline, stockholders should go to our corporate website at http://investor.belden.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance/governance-documents/default.aspx. On this page, you will find a section titled “Contact the Belden Board”, on which are listed the Company’s hotline number (with access codes for dialing from outside the U.S.), the Internet address for our web-based hotline portal and an e-mail address that may be used for writing an electronic message to the Board, any individual directors, or any group or committee of directors. Please follow the instructions on our website to send your message.

All communications received as set forth in the preceding paragraph will be opened by (or in the case of the hotline, initially reviewed by) our corporate ombudsman for the sole purpose of determining whether the contents represent a message to our directors. The Belden ombudsman will not forward certain items which

are unrelated to the duties and responsibilities of the Board, including: junk mail, mass mailings, product inquiries, product complaints, resumes and other forms of job inquiries, opinion surveys and polls, business solicitations, promotions of products or services, patently offensive materials, advertisements, and complaints that contain only unspecified or broad allegations of wrongdoing without appropriate supporting information.

In the case of communications to the Board or any group or committee of directors, the corporate ombudsman’s office will send copies of the contents to each director who is a member of the group or committee to which the envelope or e-mail is addressed.

In addition, it is the Company’s policy that each director attends the annual meeting absent exceptional circumstances. Each director that was then a member of the Board of Directors attended the Company’s 2017 annual meeting.

Board Leadership Structure and Role in Risk Oversight

John Stroup, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, serves as Board Chairman. Mr. Stroup provides strategic planning expertise, general management experience, and in-depth knowledge of the Company, and, as Chairman of the Board, acts as an important liaison between management and the Company’s non-employee directors.

Bryan Cressey, who is independent of management and the Company and previously served as Board Chairman from 1988 to 2016, is the Lead Independent Director and continues to provide strong leadership experience, strategic vision and an understanding of the risks associated with our business. As Lead Independent Director, Mr. Cressey maintains the power to provide formal input into board meeting agendas, call meetings of the independent directors, and preside over meeting of the independent directors should such a meeting occur.

Our Board assesses on an ongoing basis the risks faced by the Company in executing its strategic plan. These risks include strategic, technological, competitive and operational risks. The Audit Committee oversees the process we use in performing our periodic enterprise risk management analysis (while the Board oversees the content of the analysis, management is responsible for the execution of the process and the development of the content).

Non-Employee Director Stock Ownership Policy

The Board’s policy requires that each non-employee director hold Company stock equal in value to five times his or her annual cash retainer (currently 5 times $77,250). Upon appointment, a member has five years to meet this requirement, but must meet interim goals during the five-year period of: 20% after one year; 40% after two years; 60% after three years; and 80% after four years. The value of unvested RSUs are included in making this determination at the higher of their grant date value or current market value. Each non-employee director meets either the full-period or interim-period holding requirement: Ms. Brown and Messrs. Aldrich, Balk, Berglund, Cressey, Klein, Minnich and Monter each meet 100% of the stock holding requirement. Ms. Brink, who was appointed in December 2017, is not yet subject to the minimum holdings requirement.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

The following table reflects the director annual compensation structure as of December 31, 2017 and as of May 1, 2018 per changes approved by the Board at its March 2018 meeting:

The following table provides information on non-employee director compensation for 2017.

ITEM I – ELECTION OF TEN DIRECTORS

The Company currently has ten directors – Mses. Brink and Brown and Messrs. Aldrich, Balk, Berglund, Cressey, Klein, Minnich, Monter and Stroup. The term of each director will expire at this annual meeting and the Board proposes that each of Mses. Brink and Brown and Messrs. Aldrich, Balk, Berglund, Cressey, Klein, Minnich, Monter and Stroup be reelected for a new term of one year and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. Each nominee has consented to serve if elected. If any of them becomes unavailable to serve as a director, the Board may designate a substitute nominee. In that case, the persons named as proxies will vote for the substitute nominee designated by the Board.

ITEM II – RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ERNST & YOUNG AS THE COMPANY’S INDEPENDENT

REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR 2018

It is anticipated that Ernst & Young LLP (“EY”) will be selected as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2018, and the Board of Directors has directed that management submit the anticipated appointment for ratification by the stockholders at the annual meeting. EY has served as our registered public accounting firm since the 2004 merger of Belden Inc. and Cable Design Technologies Corporation, and prior to that served as Belden 1993 Inc.’s registered public accounting firm since it became a public company in 1993. A representative of the firm will be present at the annual meeting, will have an opportunity to make a statement, if he or she desires, and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

We are not required to obtain stockholder ratification of the appointment of EY as our independent registered public accounting firm. However, we are submitting the appointment to stockholders for ratification as a matter of good corporate practice. If the stockholders fail to ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain EY. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee in its discretion may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time if they determine that such a change would be in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders.

Fees to Independent Registered Public Accountants for 2017 and 2016

The following table presents fees for professional services rendered by EY for the audit of the Company’s annual financial statements and internal control over financial reporting for 2017 and 2016 as well as other permissible audit-related and tax services.

“Audit fees” primarily represent amounts paid or expected to be paid for audits of the Company’s financial statements and internal control over financial reporting under SOX 404, reviews of SEC Form S-3, Form S-8, Forms 10-Q, Form 10-K and the proxy statement, statutory audit requirements at certain non-U.S. locations, and comfort letter procedures related to debt issuances.

“Audit-related fees” are primarily related to due diligence services on completed and potential acquisitions.

“Tax fees” for 2017 and 2016 are for domestic and international compliance totaling $40,410 and $117,301, respectively, and tax planning totaling $768,096 and $331,830, respectively.

In approving such services, the Audit Committee did not rely on the pre-approval waiver provisions of the applicable rules of the SEC.

Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

Audit Fees: For 2017, the Committee reviewed and pre-approved the audit services and estimated fees for the year. Throughout the year, the Committee received project updates and approved or ratified amounts that significantly exceeded the original estimates, if any.

Audit-Related and Non-Audit Services and Fees: Annually, and otherwise as necessary, the Committee reviews and pre-approves all audit-related and non-audit services and the estimated fees for such services. For recurring services, such as tax compliance and statutory filings, the Committee reviews and pre-approves the services and estimated total fees for such matters by category and location of service.

For non-recurring services, such as special tax projects, due diligence, or other tax services, the Committee reviews and pre-approves the services and estimated fees by individual project. Up to an approved threshold amount, the Committee has delegated approval authority to the Committee Chair.

For both recurring and non-recurring services, the projected fees are updated quarterly and the Committee considers and, if appropriate, approves any amounts exceeding the original estimates.

Should an engagement need pre-approval before the next Committee meeting, the Committee has delegated to the Committee Chair authority to grant such approval up to an approved spending threshold. Thereafter, the entire Committee will review such approval at its next quarterly meeting.

Report of the Audit Committee

The Audit Committee assists the Board in overseeing various matters, including: (i) the integrity of the Company’s financial statements; (ii) all material aspects of the Company’s financial reporting, internal accounting control and audit functions; (iii) the qualifications and independence of the independent auditors; and (iv) the performance of the Company’s internal audit function and independent auditors.

The Audit Committee’s oversight includes reviewing with management the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor, mitigate and control such exposures. Management has the responsibility for the implementation of these activities and is responsible for the Company’s internal controls, financial reporting process, compliance with laws and regulations and the preparation and presentation of the Company’s financial statements.

Ernst & Young LLP (“EY”), the Company’s registered public accounting firm for 2017, is responsible for performing an independent audit of the consolidated financial statements and an audit of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (U.S.) (“PCAOB”) and issuing reports with respect to these matters, including expressing an opinion on the conformity of the Company’s audited financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles.

In connection with the Company’s December 31, 2017 financial statements, the Committee: (i) has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management (including management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and EY’s audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting for 2017); (ii) has discussed with EY the matters required to be discussed under PCAOB Auditing Standard No. 1301, Communications with Audit Committees; and (iii) has received and discussed with EY the written disclosures and letter from EY required by the PCAOB Ethics and Independence Rule 3526, Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence, and has discussed with EY its independence from the Company.

As part of such discussions, the Committee has considered whether the provision of services provided by EY, not related to the audit of the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting referred to above or to the reviews of the interim consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, is compatible with maintaining EY’s independence. (Above is a report on audit fees, audit-related fees, tax fees, and other fees the Company paid EY for services performed in 2017 and 2016.) The Committee has concluded that EY’s provision of non-audit services to the Company and its subsidiaries is compatible with its independence.

Based on these reviews and discussions, the Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2017.

Audit Committee

George E. Minnich (Chair)

Judy L. Brown

John M. Monter

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Note: Throughout this section, the Company utilizes adjusted results and other non-GAAP measures to describe Company performance. For a reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure to its most closely comparable GAAP measure, please see the Form 8-K filed with the SEC by the Company on February 1, 2018.

A NOTE FROM THE BELDEN COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

Valued Belden Stockholders:

The Committee would like to thank Belden’s stockholders for another year of loyal support in 2017. For the sixth consecutive year, our Say-on-Pay proposal was supported by over 97% of the voted shares. This illustrates to us that: (1) the stockholders understand and support the Company’s strategy, (2) the stockholders agree that the compensation structure is well aligned with strategy and (3) the stockholders believe in the management team and there is an open line of communication between management and stockholders. Continuous engagement with the investment community is a top priority for Belden management and our consistent Say-on-Pay support signals to us that management is executing well on this priority.

2017 saw Belden continue to grow, though not in line with our expectations. We experienced record revenues, record EBITDA, and record adjusted net income in 2017, and successfully executed a number of strategic actions that will leave the Company well positioned for future success. In May 2017, Belden successfully completed the acquisition of Thinklogical, greatly enhancing the Company’s enterprise solutions offerings by adding a technology leader with one-of-a-kind, mission critical solutions. In July 2017, the Company completed an issuance of €450 million of Senior Subordinated Notes due 2027 carrying an interest rate of 3.375%, and in September 2017, the Company completed an offering of €300 million Senior Subordinated Notes due 2025 carrying an interest rate of 2.875%. The interest rates associated with these notes are the lowest long term borrowing rates in the Company’s history and, in each case, the proceeds were utilized to redeem notes with 5.5% interest rates. This allowed the Company to lower its fixed interest expense and solidify a capital structure with debt maturities pushed out significantly. The enhanced balance sheet will provide the Company with the resources and flexibility to drive growth in the future, including through the pursuit of additional acquisition opportunities to advance its overall strategy.

Notwithstanding the previously mentioned records and the successful execution of important strategic actions, our overall performance in 2017 did not meet our expectations, based on management’s commitments to the Board. As the Compensation Committee, it is our duty to ensure that the Belden compensation program is appropriately designed to reward excellent performance, and to hold management accountable when performance falls below expectations. We believe the program is functioning properly in this regard. Annual cash incentive payouts are down substantially from last year and no executive has realized any value from the last three equity grant cycles. Please keep this in mind as you read the Summary Compensation Table, as the figures shown there differ greatly from the realized and realizable values. Much of that value is still available to executives, but it must be earned.

Discipline on our executive compensation is what our stockholders expect and deserve. We believe that after reviewing the materials that follow, you will continue to agree that we are performing our duty of aligning pay with performance and aligning the interests of our executives with those of our stockholders. Therefore, we request your support for Belden’s 2018 Say-on-Pay proposal. If at any time you would like to discuss the compensation program, we are available to address your questions. Thank you for your consideration.

The Belden Inc. Compensation Committee

I.      Introduction

In this section, we discuss our compensation program as it pertains to our chief executive officer, our chief financial officer, and our three other most highly compensated executive officers who were serving at the end of 2017. We refer to these five persons throughout as the “named executive officers” or our “NEOs”.

For 2017, our named executive officers were:

II.      Executive Summary

As noted by our Compensation Committee above, 2017 was marked by record performance in a number of areas, but nevertheless fell short of expectations. The issuance of the long term Euro-denominated debt in July and September allowed us to continue to reduce our net leverage and position ourselves for value-enhancing capital allocation opportunities. While the business as a whole experienced record performance, all four of our product platforms fell short of their revenue targets. The results of our productivity improvement programs can be seen in our strong EBITDA margins of 18.2%, which is within our long-term desired range of 18-20%. Some other financial highlights of the consolidated business included the following (see the Company’s Form 8-K filed on February 1, 2018 for a reconciliation of GAAP financial measures to non-GAAP measures):

The Company’s 2017 overall financial results and the individual performance of our NEOs are discussed under Annual Cash Incentive Plan Awards beginning on page 22.

Our compensation program design takes into account several stockholder friendly features, including:

III.      2017 Say-on-Pay Review

For the sixth consecutive year, our executive compensation program was endorsed by a vast majority of our stockholders. With 91.11% of our shares voting on the issue, we received 97.26% in favor of the proposal, with only 2.45% opposing and 0.28% abstaining. We believe this is a reflection of the transparency of our program, which is clearly aligned with the interests of our stockholders. Based on this strong endorsement, and the view of our compensation committee is that the program is performing properly, we did not make any changes to the existing structure of the program.

IV.      Compensation Objectives and Elements

A.      Objectives

Belden’s executive compensation program is designed to support the interests of stockholders by rewarding executives for achievement of the Company’s specific business objectives, which for the NEOs in 2017 included net income from continuing operations, EBITDA, revenue, operating working capital turns and inventory turns. The overarching principles of the program are:

B.      Elements

Below is an illustration of Belden’s compensation program. Individual compensation packages and the mix of base salary, annual cash incentive opportunity and long-term equity incentive compensation for each NEO vary depending upon the executive’s level of responsibilities, potential, performance and tenure with the Company. Each of the elements shown below is designed for a specific purpose, with the overall goal of achieving a high and sustainable level of Company and individual performance. The percentage of total compensation that is performance-based and therefore at risk generally increases as an officer’s level of responsibilities increases. Approximately 80% of Mr. Stroup’s 2017 compensation as reported in the summary compensation table was performance-based compensation, compared to 80% in 2016 and 85% for 2015. The chart below is not to scale for any particular named executive officer.

Additionally, the Company provides competitive retirement and benefit programs to our NEOs on the same basis as other employees and limited perquisites as described under Compensation Policies and Other Considerations.

C.      Pay for Performance Philosophy

Our ability to execute on our strategic plan relies on implementation of our talent management program. We continually seek to hire and retain high performing and high potential managers to both drive performance today and build a dependable bench of successors for the future. The principles of the program are as follows:

We believe that this philosophy has provided an appropriate balance to drive continuous improvement and retain high performing employees. More importantly, we believe the incentives we provide for achievement without rewarding under-performance aligns the interests of our managers closely with those of our investors, which is the main objective.

D.      Compensation Design

Role of Compensation Consultant

Following an analysis based on rules promulgated by the NYSE, the Compensation Committee has retained Deloitte Consulting LLP (“Deloitte Consulting”) as its independent compensation consultant. Deloitte Consulting reports directly to the Committee. The Committee generally relies on Deloitte Consulting to provide it with comparison group benchmarking data and information as to market practices and trends, and to provide advice on key Committee decisions.

In 2017, Deloitte Consulting provided advice to the Compensation Committee and management in connection with the composition of peer companies we use for benchmarking purposes, the design of our annual cash incentive and long-term incentive programs, and our executive employment agreements. For its compensation consulting in 2017, we paid Deloitte Consulting $128,922.

In 2017, our financial management separately engaged affiliates of Deloitte Consulting to perform other services involving internal controls auditing, tax consulting and acquisition due diligence. For these non-compensation related services, we paid Deloitte Consulting’s affiliates $6,540,374. The Compensation Committee did not approve these charges prior to their incurrence, but considered them in connection with Deloitte Consulting’s retention for 2018. Given the nature and scope of these other services, the Compensation Committee does not believe this work had any impact on the independence of our independent consultant. In addition to considering the type and volume of other services performed by Deloitte Consulting and the fees associated therewith in assessing Deloitte Consulting’s independence, the Compensation Committee considered a number of other factors. These factors include Deloitte Consulting’s policies and procedures designed to prevent conflicts of interest; the nature of any business or personal relationship between Deloitte Consulting’s primary consultant and any member of the Compensation Committee or any other executive officer of the Company; and any Belden stock owned by the Deloitte Consulting employees servicing the Company’s account. Deloitte Consulting has represented to the Company that none of its employees that service the Company’s account own Belden stock.

Benchmarking and Survey Data

In determining total compensation levels for our NEOs, the Compensation Committee reviews market trends in executive compensation and a competitive analysis prepared by Deloitte Consulting, which compares our executive compensation to both the companies in the comparator group described below and to broader market survey data. The Committee also considers other available market survey data on executive compensation philosophy, strategy and design. The Company’s compensation philosophy is to target base salaries at the 50th percentile of the competitive market. Individual executives may have base salaries above or below the target based on their individual performances, internal equity and experience. As discussed above, at-risk incentive compensation components have the potential to reward our executives at levels above industry medians, but only when the Company is outperforming the industry.

The Committee chose our comparator group from companies in the primary industry segments in which the Company operates and competes for talent.

The comparator group companies for 2017 were as follows:

ISS and Glass-Lewis independently develop and publish peer groups that they use to analyze our compensation. It is noteworthy that of the 14 companies in our comparator group, 11 were chosen by ISS, Glass-Lewis, or both, as appropriate peer companies in their 2017 reports. The Committee considers the comparator group competitive pay analysis and survey data as relevant, but non-determinative data points in making its pay decisions. The approach to pay decisions is not formulaic and the Committee, based on advice from Deloitte Consulting, exercises judgment in making them.

Each year, the Committee reviews the performance evaluations and pay recommendations for the named executive officers and the other senior executives. The Compensation Committee, with input from the Board, meets in executive session without the CEO present to review the CEO’s performance and set his compensation. In its most recent review in February 2018, the Committee concluded that the total direct compensation of executive officers, with respect to compensation levels, as well as structure, are consistent with our compensation design and objectives.

V.      2017 Compensation Analysis

A.      Base Salary Adjustments

Salaries of executive officers are reviewed annually and at the time of a promotion or other change in responsibilities. Increases in salary are based on a review of the individual’s performance against objective performance measures, the competitive market, the individual’s experience and internal equity. For executives who earn a composite individual performance score of 0.91 or more, base salaries may be adjusted using a merit salary increase matrix, discussed below. An executive who scores less than 0.91 and fails to improve his or her performance may be subject to disciplinary action, including dismissal.

The executive is scored on our merit salary increase matrix that is annually reviewed by the Committee and, if appropriate, revised to reflect the competitive market, based on the salary survey data noted above. The executive’s salary is classified based on three categories: below market, market and above market. Company-wide, the ranking system, which assigns personal performance factor ranging from 0.5 to 1.5, is designed to take the form of a normal distribution.

2017 Merit Increase Guidelines for Named Executive Officers

The timing and amount of any salary adjustment will be based on the executive’s annual overall performance ranking and whether the executive falls “below,” “at” or “above” market as compared to the median of the applicable market data noted above.

For example, an executive with an overall ranking of “1.25” who is “above market” will receive a lower salary increase than an executive with a ranking of “1.25” who is “below market”.

The named executive officers’ salaries as of December 31, 2017 are provided in the following table:

B.      Annual Cash Incentive Plan Awards

Executive officers participate in our annual cash incentive plan. Overall, we had 2,366 employees participate in the plan’s 2017 performance offering. Under the plan, participants earn cash awards based on the achievement of Company, business unit and individual performance goals. For 2017, the amount paid under the plan to all participants was approximately $14.493 million or approximately 3.7% of adjusted net income before ACIP expense. This compares to approximately 7.8%, 6.7%, 7.7%, and 7.3% in 2016, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, as shown below:

A participant’s award (other than the CEO) is computed using the following formula:

ACIP Award = Base Salary  X  Target Percentage  X  Financial Factor  X  Personal Performance Factor

In 2012, based on the fact that Mr. Stroup’s personal performance factor (“PPF”) had consistently been equal to or greater than 1.0, the Compensation Committee removed the component from the calculation of Mr. Stroup’s ACIP award. The Committee desired to avoid any perception that the PPF was simply serving as a second multiplier to Mr. Stroup’s award. Given his direct reporting relationship to the Board, the Committee is comfortable that Mr. Stroup is fully accountable without the need of the additional lever to adjust his ACIP award downward or upward.

Target Percentages

For 2017, each NEO’s ACIP Target Percentages were as follows: Mr. Stroup – 130%, Mr. Derksen – 75%, and Mr. Trivedi – 70%. The target percentages for Messrs. Pennycook and Vestjens were increased from 70% to 75% in February 2017. Their payouts were determined based on a pro-rated formula using 70% for two months and 75% for ten months.

Financial Factors

As stated above, performance targets for calculating the Financial Factors were based on net income from continuing operations, EBITDA, revenues, operating working capital turns and inventory turns. In addition, as discussed further below, the performance stock units (“PSUs”) had performance targets based on relative total stockholder return and free cash flow. In order to ensure that we are rewarding performance that drives stockholder value, these factors flow from and support the strategic financial goals we communicate to our investors.

Performance Factor Determination and Adjustments

The performance factors we use that make up the Financial Factor support our short- and long-range business objectives and strategy. We have selected multiple factors because we believe no one metric is sufficient to capture the performance we are seeking to achieve and any one metric in isolation may not promote appropriate management performance. Management and the Board believe that income from continuing operations and EBITDA are the financial metrics most clearly aligned with the enhancement of stockholder value. Therefore, they are weighted heavily in our consolidated and platform targets. Additionally, revenue growth has been highlighted by our stockholders as a key component of value creation. Consistent with our Lean manufacturing philosophy, continuous improvement in inventory and working capital turnover remains a high corporate priority.

In setting performance goals, we consider our annual and long-range business plans and factors such as our past variance to targeted performance, economic and industry conditions, and our industry performance. We set challenging, realistic goals that will motivate performance within the top quartile of our comparator group based on consensus data on the peer companies publicly available at the time the targets are set. We recognize that the metrics may need to change over time to reflect new priorities and, accordingly, review these performance metrics at the beginning of each performance period.

In 2017, threshold, target and maximum levels for the performance factors that make up the Financial Factors were set to challenge management to grow the company to outpace an accelerating growth environment. For instance, the 2017 target for consolidated net income from continuing operations reflected an approximate 6% increase over actual 2016 performance. Likewise, the consolidated EBITDA target represented a 5% improvement over actual 2016 performance. Targets for the business platforms reflected similar improvement initiatives. With the exception of EBITDA performance at Industrial Solutions and Broadband Solutions, the results were disappointing. Extraordinary execution on tax planning initiatives delivered a near target performance on consolidated net income.

Officers with company-wide responsibilities (Messrs. Stroup and Derksen) were measured using consolidated performance. Messrs. Pennycook, Trivedi and Vestjens were compensated based on the performance of the Enterprise and Broadband Solutions, Network Solutions, and Industrial Solutions and Broadcast IT platforms, respectively. The applicable factors and weighting percentages are set during the first quarter of each performance period as shown in the charts below and illustrated in further detail on Appendix I.

Messrs. Stroup and Derksen

Mr. Pennycook

Mr. Trivedi

Mr. Vestjens

Consistent with the terms of the annual cash incentive plan, the performance factors were adjusted to reflect certain unusual events that occurred during the year. These adjustments can result in either increases or decreases in performance factors and in 2017 primarily concerned amortization of intangible assets, severance, restructuring and acquisition integration costs, depreciation expense, as well as the income tax impact of these adjustments. The Compensation Committee and the Audit Committee meet jointly to analyze and approve the adjustments recommended by management. The Committees agree that it was appropriate to adjust the financial results for these matters to properly capture our operating results and to eliminate the potential for managers delaying strategic decisions beneficial to the Company in the long term (e.g., restructuring) because of the impact of those decisions on short-term financial metrics or to benefit from favorable one-time adjustments or unbudgeted events (such as acquisitions).

For each individual performance factor, threshold, target and maximum amounts are set by the Compensation Committee. Actual performance at the threshold level is reflected with a Financial Factor score of 0.5, actual performance at the target level is reflected with a Financial Factor score of 1.0 and actual performance at or above the maximum level is reflected with a Financial Factor score of 2.0. Performance between the threshold and target and between the target and maximum are interpolated on a linear basis. Actual performance below the threshold would result in a component score of 0 and the failure to achieve at least threshold performance on the consolidated net income/platform EBITDA component would result in an overall Financial Factor of 0. Because Financial Factors are capped at 2.0 and because, as described below, he does not have a Personal Performance Factor, Mr. Stroup’s ACIP payout cannot mathematically be higher than 200% of his target payout.

The performance factor definitions, thresholds, targets and actual results, as well as the applicable weighting and calculations for each NEO are contained in Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The applicable 2017 Financial Factor for the NEOs is as follows:

Personal Performance Factor

Each named executive officer other than Mr. Stroup establishes annual personal performance objectives. As discussed above, the Committee feels that the consolidated Financial Factor is the best reflection of Mr. Stroup’s personal performance and, thus, he does not have a separate Personal Performance Factor (“PPF”). The other NEO’s objectives are agreed upon between the NEO and Mr. Stroup. At the end of the year, the parties measure progress relative to the objectives, as well as an assessment of how effectively the individual has lived the Company’s values during the year. Mr. Stroup scores each NEO’s PPF on a scale of 0.50 to 1.50.

The personal performance goals reflected in the Personal Performance Factor measure the attainment of short- and long-term goals that often are in furtherance of achieving objectives set out in our three-year strategic plan. Personal performance goals can be qualitative in nature and the determination of the NEO’s degree of attainment of them generally requires the judgment of Mr. Stroup. The values scoring is, by definition, subjective based on the manager’s observations throughout the year, as well as feedback collected from others inside and outside of the organization.

As a general rule, the higher in the organizational structure that one sits, the more global in scope are his or her personal objectives. Mr. Derksen, as the CFO, had objectives in the areas of talent management, information technology and investor relations performance, but also focused other objectives on areas specific to the

finance function, e.g., accounting, tax and capital structure. As the EVPs of three of Belden’s product platforms, the objectives of Messrs. Pennycook, Trivedi, and Vestjens were supportive of the Company’s global goals, but focused within their respective business units. Their objectives related to the areas of growth, both organic and M&A, talent management and operational excellence through the continued institution of Lean enterprise principles in their respective business units.

The 2017 Personal Performance Factors for the NEOs as recommended by Mr. Stroup and approved by the Committee ranged from 1.00 to 1.10.

Annual Cash Incentive Plan Payouts

Based on the preceding discussion, each NEO’s annual cash incentive plan award is as shown in the table below. The awards were paid out following adoption of the Financial Factors and Personal Performance Factors by the Committee in February 2018.

C.      Performance-Based Equity Awards

Our long-term equity incentive plan is designed to align the financial interests of our executives and our stockholders by providing executives with a continuing stake in the long-term success of the company. With grants of SARs that have value only if Belden’s stock price increases and PSUs that only convert into Belden shares if certain performance metrics are achieved, the plan emphasizes Pay-for-Performance. For 2017, executive officers received 50% of their LTI award (discussed below) under the plan in the form of SARs and 50% in the form of PSUs.

Individual performance, the competitive market, executive experience and internal equity were factors used to determine the total dollar value of SARs and PSUs granted to each executive officer in 2017, which we refer to as the “Long-Term Incentive Value”, or “LTI Value”.

LTI Value

We use the following matrix to determine the LTI as a percentage of base salary for each officer:

An officer did not receive an equity award in 2017 if his or her 2016 Personal Performance Factor was less than 0.85. Mr. Stroup does not have a target LTI percentage or a Personal Performance Factor. At its February 2017 meeting, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Stroup LTI with a grant date fair value of approximately $4.4 million. Messrs. Derksen, Pennycook and Vestjens each have a Target LTI of 160% while Mr. Trivedi has a Target LTI percentage of 120% of their respective base salaries.

To illustrate the LTI value matrix, assume a base salary of $400,000 and a Target LTI percentage of 50%. The Target LTI is $200,000. Assuming the officer’s PPF is 1.0, he or she would receive equity valued between

$140,000 and $240,000. If the same officer’s PPF is 1.20, he or she would receive equity valued between $200,000 and $380,000. The exact amount granted within the range for each individual is at the discretion of the individual’s immediate supervisor (the “LTI Award”).

For 2017, the NEOs received 50% of their LTI Award in the form of SARs and 50% in the form of PSUs. We use the Black-Scholes-Merton (“Black-Scholes”) option pricing formula to calculate SAR values. Instead of using the grant date stock price as the input in the Black-Scholes formula, we use a one-year average price of the stock (the “Average Belden Stock Price”). That same price is utilized to determine the number of PSUs granted.

In summary, the LTI Award is allocated into the number of units resulting from the following formulas:

SARs = 50% of the LTI Award divided by the Black-Scholes value of a Belden SAR, rounded to the nearest unit.

PSUs = 50% of the LTI Award divided by the Average Belden Stock Price, rounded to the nearest unit.

Half of the PSUs granted in 2017 will be measured based on total stockholder return (TSR) relative to the S&P 1500 Industrials Index. The other half of the PSUs will be measured based on cumulative consolidated free cash flow, as adjusted for certain restructuring expenses in connection with acquisition integration. The PSU agreements state that following the three-year performance period, a conversion factor ranging from 0 to 2.0 will be applied to each award. The result of that formula, rounded to the nearest whole unit, is the gross number of Belden shares the officer will receive. The actual number of shares to be distributed will be net of any required withholding taxes. The PSUs granted in 2017 will be measured on the performance period from February 22, 2017 (the grant date) to December 31, 2019, in the case of the TSR-based PSUs, and January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019, in the case of the free cash flow-based PSUs. The conversion and any required payout will occur in the first quarter of 2020.

Conversion will be effected based on the following threshold, target and maximum levels:

For the PSUs based on relative TSR, threshold performance results in a conversion factor of 0.25, target performance results in a conversion factor of 1.00 and maximum performance results in a conversion factor of 2.00. Performance between threshold and target and between target and maximum are interpolated on a linear basis.

For the PSUs based on consolidated free cash flow, threshold performance results in a conversion factor of 0.50, target performance results in a conversion factor of 1.00 and maximum performance results in a conversion factor of 2.00. Performance between threshold and target and between target and maximum are interpolated on a linear basis.

The SARs provide a material incentive for executives to increase the Company’s share price during their ten-year term, and they serve as a retention tool because they take three years to fully vest. The PSUs drive performance against targets during the three-year performance period, as PSUs will not convert to Belden shares if performance thresholds are not achieved.

At its February 2017 meeting, the Compensation Committee approved equity award grants in the form of 254,674 SARs, 135,981 PSUs and 43,881 RSUs to over 300 employees. The table below shows the total 2017 grants of SARs and RSUs to the named executive officers.

2017 Equity Awards to NEOs

2015-2017 PSU Grant

Beginning in 2015, the Company moved from a one-year performance measurement period to a three-year performance measurement period for its PSUs. The first three-year performance measurement period ended on December 31, 2017. At its February 2018 meeting, the Compensation Committee certified a conversion ratio of 0 for both types of PSUs, resulting in each NEO receiving no shares of Belden stock in connection with this grant. The threshold, target, maximum and actual performance are shown below:

Free cash flow is defined as net cash provided by operating activities (adjusted for certain acquisition and divestiture transaction costs) less capital expenditures (net of the proceeds from the disposal of tangible assets).

VI.      Compensation Policies and Other Considerations

Stock Ownership Guidelines

To align their interests with those of the Company’s stockholders, the Company’s executive officers must hold stock whose value is at least three times their annual base salary (six times in the case of Mr. Stroup). Officers have five years from the date they are appointed as an executive officer to acquire the appropriate shareholdings. In addition, executive officers must make interim progress toward the ownership requirement during the five year period – 20% after one year, 40% after two years, 60% after three years and 80% after four years. For purposes of determining ownership, unvested RSUs and the value of vested but unexercised, in-the-money options and SARs are included. For calculation purposes, the Company will use the higher of the current trading price or the acquisition price. As of March 27, 2018 (our record date for the annual meeting), each of the named executive officers except for Messrs. Trivedi and Vestjens either met his interim or five-year stock ownership guideline. In accordance with Company policy, an officer is prohibited from selling Belden stock received from the Company as an equity award until the officer meets the applicable guideline.

Tax and Accounting Considerations

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, imposes a $1 million limit on the amount that a public company may deduct for compensation paid to the Company’s CEO or any of the Company’s other NEOs who are employed as of the end of the fiscal year. This limitation does not apply to compensation that meets the requirements under Section 162(m) for “qualifying performance based” compensation (i.e., compensation paid only if performance meets pre-established objective goals based on performance criteria approved by stockholders). The Company’s incentive compensation plans are designed to qualify under Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) to ensure tax deductibility. However, the Committee retains the flexibility to design and administer compensation programs that are in the best interests of Belden and its stockholders.

Annual non-equity based incentive compensation and PSUs for our Named Executive Officers are unguaranteed, subject to maximum payout amounts based on the achievement of the Section 162(m) performance objectives established by the Committee annually. These objectives are selected by the Committee from among the performance metrics in the annual incentive plan for non-equity based compensation and the long term incentive plan for the PSUs. The Committee may exercise “negative discretion” to reduce the award based on an assessment of Company and individual performance. For 2017, the Committee awarded less than the maximum amount. Also, our compensation plans comply with the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, which requires that nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements must meet specific requirements.

The Company is analyzing the impacts of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to determine whether it will impact the Company’s compensation programs in any material way.

In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, for financial statement purposes, we expense all equity-based awards over the period earned based upon their estimated fair value at grant date.

Executive Compensation Recovery

In accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Mr. Stroup, as CEO, and Mr. Derksen, as CFO, must forfeit certain bonuses and profits if the Company is required to restate its financial statements as a result of misconduct. In addition, if the Board of Directors determines that any other executive officer has engaged in fraudulent or intentional misconduct that results in the Company restating its financial statements because of a material inaccuracy, the Company, as permitted by law, will seek to recover any cash incentive compensation or other equity-based compensation (including proceeds from the exercise of a stock option or SAR) received by the officer from the Company during the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing with the SEC of the financial statement required to be restated. The Company will revisit its clawback policies once the proposed rules issued by the SEC implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) are finalized or if there is a material shift in practice.

Insider Trading; Hedging and Pledging of Company Stock

Company policy requires executive officers and directors to consult the Company’s legal department prior to engaging in transactions involving Belden stock. In order to protect the Company from exposure under insider trading laws, executive officers and directors are encouraged to enter into pre-programmed trading plans under Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b5-1. The Company will not approve hedging or monetization transactions including, but not limited to, through the use of financial instruments such as exchange funds, prepaid variable forwards, equity swaps, puts, calls, collars, forwards and other derivative instruments, or through the establishment of a short position in the Company’s securities. Executive officers and directors are prohibited from utilizing margin accounts to engage in transactions in Belden stock and from pledging Belden stock for any purpose. The Company will revisit its trading policies once the proposed rules issued by the SEC implementing the Dodd-Frank Act are finalized.

Equity Compensation Grant Practices

The Committee approves all grants of equity compensation, including stock appreciation rights, performance stock units and restricted stock units, to executive officers of the Company, as defined in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. All elements of executive officer compensation are reviewed by the Committee annually at its February/March meeting. Generally, the Company’s awards of stock appreciation rights, performance stock units and/or restricted stock units are made at that meeting, but may be made at other meetings of the Committee. The Committee meeting date, or the next business day if the meeting falls on a non-business day, is the grant date for stock appreciation rights and restricted stock unit awards. The Company may also make awards in connection with acquisitions or promotions, or for retention purposes. Under the Company’s equity plan, the Committee may delegate to the Company’s CEO the authority to grant stock options to any employees of the Company other than executive officers of the Company as that term is defined in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. The Committee has exercised this authority and delegated to the CEO the ability to make limited equity grants in connection with promotion, retention and acquisitions, which he uses strategically but infrequently. Awards made by the CEO are reported to the Committee on a periodic basis.

Employment Agreements: Severance, Termination and Retirement

The Company has an employment agreement with each of the named executive officers. We believe that our agreements are essential in attracting and retaining the desired executive talent in a competitive market. In addition, the agreements benefit the Company by providing for the upfront agreement of each executive on certain important provisions, including post-termination covenants and an agreement to provide a full release of claims against the Company. These agreements address key provisions of the employment relationship, including payment of severance benefits upon a termination of employment before and after a change of control of the Company. Beginning in 2010, new executive employment agreements no longer contain a gross-up to compensate the executives for an Internal Revenue Code Section 280G excise tax. Instead the executives are given the option of either (a) collecting their full severance and paying the excise tax themselves with no assistance from the Company or (b) reducing the severance payments to an amount that prevents the excise tax from being imposed. Information regarding benefits under these agreements is provided following this Compensation Discussion and Analysis under the heading Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control.

Aircraft

The Company owns and from time to time leases corporate aircraft to provide flexibility to executive officers and other associates to allow more efficient use of executive time for Company matters. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviews management’s use of corporate aircraft throughout the year to confirm that it is consistent with this philosophy and in full compliance with the regulations promulgated by the Federal Aviation Administration, the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Benefits and Perquisites

The named executive officers receive retirement and health care benefits on a consistent basis with other Belden employees. As described in Pension Benefits and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation, excess defined

benefit and defined contribution plans are offered to eligible U.S. employees. In order to attract and retain talented officers, we have provided certain other compensation to our NEOs. In connection with an expatriate assignment in Hong Kong that ended in 2014, Mr. Vestjens was, by agreement, entitled to tax equalization, including a gross-up to make him whole financially. Other than this limited exception, it is our policy to not provide tax gross-ups for any perquisites provided to executive officers.

Report of the Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the foregoing Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxy statement. Based on such review and discussion, the Committee recommended to the Board of Belden that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the proxy statement.

Compensation Committee

David Aldrich (Chair)

Lance Balk

Steve Berglund

Compensation and Risk

We consider the variable, pay-for-performance components of our compensation programs to assess the level of risk-taking these elements may create. The variable components of our compensation programs offered to management (including our executives) are our annual cash incentive plan and performance-based equity awards program. We believe the way we select and set performance goals and targets with multiple levels of performance; using gradually-sloped payout curves that do not provide large payouts for small incremental improvements; and confirming the achievement of performance before issuing the awards, all reduce the potential for management’s excessive risk-taking or poor judgment. Consistent with sound risk management, we limit the annual cash incentive award by capping the financial factor component at two times the target, as well as capping the awards themselves at the lesser of three times target or $5 million. The long-term incentive is limited through the use of a fixed percentage of the participant’s base salary. In addition, we require that executive officers adhere to stock ownership guidelines to promote a long-term focus and have adopted a compensation recovery policy in the event of fraudulent or intentional misconduct that leads to a restatement of our financial results.

We also consider our variable compensation programs offered to other associates. These are primarily incentive programs offered to sales and marketing associates. We believe the way we administer these programs reduces the potential of their causing a material adverse impact on the Company through excessive risk-taking. We have customer contract practices with respect to operating margins, customer creditworthiness, and channel management that are designed to reduce poor judgment in connection with entering into sales contracts having unreasonable terms. Sales targets are not designed to provide large payouts that are either based on small incremental improvement or overly aggressive goals that could induce excessive risk-taking by the salesperson. These programs are monitored throughout the performance period to ensure they are being properly administered. The results are subject to multiple levels of approval, including through the involvement of internal and external audit resources.

Pay Ratio Disclosure

In accordance with its rulemaking responsibilities related to the Dodd-Frank Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission has adopted a rule that requires annual disclosure of the ratio of the median Company employee’s total annual compensation to the total annual compensation of the Company’s principal executive officer. The Company’s principal executive officer is John Stroup, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board.

The median employee was determined by reviewing the cash compensation paid to all Belden employees worldwide¸ including Belden employees based in countries where the cost of living and average salaries in the

market are substantially lower than the United States, from November 1, 2016 to October 31, 2017. Once the median employee was identified the calculation of annual total compensation for that median employee was determined in the same manner as the “Total Compensation” shown for Mr. Stroup in the Summary Compensation Table contained herein. Compensation elements that were included in the annual total compensation for the median employee include: cash compensation received in 2017, matching payments related to Company retirement plans, and any other compensation received in 2017.

The median total annual compensation of Belden associates, excluding Mr. Stroup, in 2017 was $52,487. As disclosed herein, Mr. Stroup’s total 2017 compensation was $7,012,404. Accordingly, Mr. Stroup’s 2017 compensation was approximately 133.6 times that of the median of the total annual compensation of all employees other than Mr. Stroup.

In reviewing the Compensation Tables that follow, it is important to note that equity based compensation is reported based on the fair value at the grant date as determined under GAAP. As a result, it is not fully illustrative of compensation actually received or realizeable. For example, Mr. Stroup’s 2015 compensation was reported as $6,921,110. However, the performance thresholds associated with the PSUs used to calculate Mr. Stroup’s 2015 compensation were not met, and accordingly those PSUs were forfeited. Further, the exercise price associated with the SARs granted in 2015 is in excess of the price per share of Belden’s common stock as of December 31, 2017. Accordingly, of the $6,921,110 reported as Mr. Stroup’s compensation for 2015, approximately $4,770,000 was without value as of December 31, 2017. All of our NEOs and other senior managers are similarly affected.

The disparity between reported compensation and realized or realizable compensation is depicted graphically in the chart below, which depicts Mr. Stroup’s reported compensation, compensation realizable as of December 31, 2017, and compensation that may be realizable as of December 31, 2020, provided certain assumption prove true. “Reported” compensation as shown in the chart below reflects the total annual compensation paid to Mr. Stroup as reported in the Company’s 2016, 2017, and 2018 proxy statements. The “Realizable 12/31/2017” field shows the value of Mr. Stroup’s annual compensation for each of 2015, 2016 and 2017 after taking into account the conversion of PSUs and the value of Mr. Stroup’s SARs on December 31, 2017. The “Realizable 12/31/2020” field calculates the value of Mr. Stroup’s 2015, 2016 and 2017 compensation assuming 10% annual stock price appreciation over the closing price on December 29, 2017, $77.17 per share, through December 31, 2020, making the December 31, 2020 stock price used for this illustration $102.71. As mentioned above, PSUs granted in 2015 will not convert to shares of Belden common stock. Many of the factors that caused the 2015 PSUs to not convert into common stock will also create headwinds for realization of the 2016 and 2017 PSUs. As a result and for the purposes of this depiction only, it has been assumed that 2016 PSUs will convert to shares of Belden stock at a 0.80 factor, and 2017 PSUs will convert to shares of Belden stock at a 0.90 factor.

As illustrated by this chart, Mr. Stroup’s compensation relies on strong Company performance over the long term. The Company experienced disappointing results in each of 2015 and 2017, and the realizable value of Mr. Stroup’s compensation as of the end of 2017 reflects those results. Conversely, 2016 was strong year, and Mr. Stroup’s realizable compensation for 2016 reflects that strength. In either event, it is clear that compensation of Company management is, in reality, tied to Company performance. Furthermore, as shown by the “Realizable 12/31/2020” field in the chart above, Company management is clearly incentivized to deliver strong performance over the long term.

Compensation Tables

Starting below are the following compensation tables:

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

Each amount listed in column (e) represents the grant date fair value of performance share units (“PSUs”) based on the assumption that the Company would meet its performance goals at the target level, resulting in one share of Belden stock, being issued to the officer for each PSU. Performance over the relevant three-year measurement period at 120%

of target levels or greater (in the case of PSUs based on free cash flow) or at or greater than the 75th percentile (in the case of PSUs based on relative TSR) could result in the issuance of two shares of Belden stock for each PSU. During each performance period, the Company periodically analyzes performance and makes appropriate adjustments to the amount of stock-based compensation expense it records. Based on this structure, the maximum grant date fair value of each award (in dollars) was as follows:

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END