Oxford Industries
OXMNYSEUSD
- Source valuation snapshot. Not a live recalculation.
- Latest filed annual earnings; price snapshot date unavailable. Not forward P/E.
- Diluted earnings per share from the latest filed annual.
- $29.34 Prior regular-session close from the quote source.
- $28.72–$29.56 Regular-session low and high so far today.
- 318.1K Regular-session shares traded · Nov 11, 4:00 PM ET.
- Dec 9 projected Projected for 2026-12-09 from the company’s own results filings (SEC 8-K Item 2.02). The company has not confirmed the date.
- $24.20–$49.58 52-week trading low and high returned by the quote source.
Understand the Business
Why the Stock Moved
Period-matched expectations history is not yet available. Current metrics are not a substitute for a historical explanation.
The core investment thesis
Own OXM if Oxford’s owned lifestyle brands regain pricing power and operating leverage after a clear FY2026 profit break.
OXM price history
Loading recent earnings…
Investment thesis
What must happen next
Oxford’s owned lifestyle trademarks remain distinctive enough to support full-price selling rather than forcing the company into commodity apparel discounting.HoldingMateriality: High
Item 1 Business describes Oxford as designing, sourcing, marketing and distributing products under owned lifestyle brands including Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer and Johnny Was. If this holds, Oxford can recover premium gross margins; if it breaks, revenue can stabilize while owner earnings remain structurally impaired.
Watch: Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer or Johnny Was lose fashion relevance to brands such as Ralph Lauren, Tory Burch, Anthropologie/Free People or digitally native premium lifestyle labels.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Item 1 Business describes Oxford as designing, sourcing, marketing and distributing products under owned lifestyle brands including Tommy Bahama, Lilly.
Open source ↗The multi-brand portfolio can refresh demand across different lifestyle niches, preventing weakness in one concept from becoming a permanent company-wide relevance problem.WeakeningMateriality: High
Item 1 Business lists a portfolio of lifestyle brands rather than a single-brand model: Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer, Johnny Was, Southern Tide, TBBC, Duck Head and Jack Rogers. If the portfolio diversifies demand, Oxford can return to growth without betting on one brand; if not, the company is more exposed to mature-brand fatigue.
Watch: Johnny Was, Southern Tide, TBBC, Duck Head or Jack Rogers fail to attract incremental customers beyond Oxford’s legacy customer base.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
Item 1 Business lists a portfolio of lifestyle brands rather than a single-brand model: Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer, Johnny Was.
Open source ↗Oxford’s design-sourcing-distribution model can keep converting inventory into cash, giving management room to fund brand investment even when GAAP earnings are pressured.StrengtheningMateriality: Medium
GAAP annual operating_cash_flow was positive at $119.6 million in FY2026 despite a GAAP annual net loss of $27.9 million. If cash conversion holds, the company can endure a brand reset; if it fails, liquidity and investment capacity become the constraint before the income statement recovers.
Watch: Merchandise misses force inventory markdowns and working-capital absorption before sales fall sharply.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
GAAP annual operating_cash_flow was positive at $119.6 million in FY2026 despite a GAAP annual net loss of $27.9 million.
Open source ↗Oxford’s fixed retail, marketing and brand-management costs must become productive again; otherwise the company’s premium gross profit will not translate into owner earnings.WeakeningMateriality: Medium
GAAP annual operating_income was $218.8 million in FY2023, showing the model has historically produced substantial operating profit. This is the bridge from good brands to a good investment: without operating leverage, shareholders own sales and gross profit but not durable earnings.
Watch: Store traffic remains weak enough that occupancy and payroll deleverage continue even if online demand is stable.
Supporting sources
Source notes are factual paraphrases; read the original disclosures below.
GAAP annual operating_income was $218.8 million in FY2023, showing the model has historically produced substantial operating profit.
Open source ↗
Full investment case & evidence
Loading the original research archive…
Original research
Oxford’s owned lifestyle trademarks remain distinctive enough to support full-price selling rather than forcing the company into commodity apparel discounting. If this holds, Oxford can recover premium gross margins; if it breaks, revenue can stabilize while owner earnings remain structurally impaired.
The multi-brand portfolio can refresh demand across different lifestyle niches, preventing weakness in one concept from becoming a permanent company-wide relevance problem. If the portfolio diversifies demand, Oxford can return to growth without betting on one brand; if not, the company is more exposed to mature-brand fatigue.
Oxford’s design-sourcing-distribution model can keep converting inventory into cash, giving management room to fund brand investment even when GAAP earnings are pressured. If cash conversion holds, the company can endure a brand reset; if it fails, liquidity and investment capacity become the constraint before the income statement recovers.
Oxford’s fixed retail, marketing and brand-management costs must become productive again; otherwise the company’s premium gross profit will not translate into owner earnings. This is the bridge from good brands to a good investment: without operating leverage, shareholders own sales and gross profit but not durable earnings.
All standing thesis claims
Original report summary
Oxford’s owned lifestyle brands regain pricing power and operating leverage after a clear FY2026 profit break.
Bull case and bear case
Bull case and bear case for Oxford Industries
Where the evidence on Oxford Industries disagrees: Mixed on the latest evidence (Oct 22, 2026). Of its 4 thesis points, 1 strengthening, 1 holding and 2 weakening.
Bull case: what the evidence supports
Oxford’s owned lifestyle trademarks remain distinctive enough to support full-price selling rather than forcing the company into commodity apparel discounting.
Oxford’s design-sourcing-distribution model can keep converting inventory into cash, giving management room to fund brand investment even when GAAP earnings are pressured.
Bear case: what the evidence questions
The multi-brand portfolio can refresh demand across different lifestyle niches, preventing weakness in one concept from becoming a permanent company-wide relevance problem.
Oxford’s fixed retail, marketing and brand-management costs must become productive again; otherwise the company’s premium gross profit will not translate into owner earnings.
Thesis-Break Engine
What has broken in Oxford Industries’s thesis
Each break OptimistFi flagged on Oxford Industries, dated — with what has historically followed the same kind of break across the market, not a forecast for Oxford Industries.
- Operating-margin compression
Across all companies, this kind of break has happened 10,660 times before. Those stocks trailed comparable companies by a median of 1% over the next six months, and 36% of them trailed it by 10 points or more.
Early warning
The break condition read on the trailing twelve months through Oxford Industries’s latest quarterly report, ahead of the annual figure it is written on.
- Operating-margin compression, trailing 12 months
Across all companies, this kind of early warning has happened 2,641 times before. Those stocks trailed comparable companies by a median of 1% over the next six months, and 36% of them trailed it by 10 points or more.
MARKET + FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT
The numbers behind the thesis
What Changed
- MixedReported results of operations (earnings release).
Oxford Industries filed an SEC 8-K on 2026-09-03: Reported results of operations (earnings release). It is a dated development that tests the current thesis.
- MixedReported results of operations (earnings release).
Oxford Industries filed an SEC 8-K on 2026-06-10: Reported results of operations (earnings release). It is a dated development that tests the current thesis.
Risks / falsifiers
What could break the thesis
- Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer or Johnny Was lose fashion relevance to brands such as Ralph Lauren, Tory Burch, Anthropologie/Free People or digitally native premium lifestyle labels.
- Johnny Was, Southern Tide, TBBC, Duck Head or Jack Rogers fail to attract incremental customers beyond Oxford’s legacy customer base.
- Merchandise misses force inventory markdowns and working-capital absorption before sales fall sharply.
- Store traffic remains weak enough that occupancy and payroll deleverage continue even if online demand is stable.
OXM news
Loading headlines…
Financial statements
OXM income statement
Annual filed results · USD · Oldest to newest. Margins are calculated from the reported figures.
OXM: quick answers
- When does Oxford Industries (OXM) report earnings next?
- Oxford Industries's next results are projected for December 9, 2026, from the dates of its own results filings with the SEC. The company has not confirmed the date. It last reported on September 3, 2026. Earnings calendar
- What is OXM's short interest?
- As of October 30, 2026, 3.8M OXM shares were sold short, 25.3% of its shares outstanding, down 4.9% from the count before. At the stock's average daily volume that is 7.3 days to cover. FINRA publishes the count twice a month. OXM short interest history
- Have members of Congress traded OXM?
- Reports made public in the last 90 days disclose 3 trades in OXM by 2 filers: 0 purchases and 3 sales. They are filed under the STOCK Act by members of Congress, the President and senior officials. Every disclosed OXM trade