Smart Equity Research, Powered by AI

Victoria’s Secret & Co (VSCO)

AI Analysis (Generated on: 22nd February 2025)

Warning: This document has been generated by an advanced customised AI prompted with financial data derived from company filings and other reputable sources. The process is specifically designed to minimise hallucinations, however the output is not 100% reliable. It is essential to check any information in this document before relying on it for financial decisions. You can find the underlying data used here.

Screener Ratings

Overall: 4
Value: 6
Growth: 4
Dividend Income: 1
Defensive: 3
Competitive Advantage: 2

Summary

Victoria’s Secret, known for lingerie and beauty products, is attempting a turnaround amid declining sales and high debt. While new partnerships and a focus on activewear offer hope, the company faces fierce competition and operational challenges. Not suitable for risk-averse investors, but potentially rewarding if the brand reinvention succeeds.

Bull Case

Victoria’s Secret could reinvent itself through the high-profile Skims partnership, capturing the booming $48B global activewear market. Cost-cutting measures and debt reduction may restore profitability, while a revamped brand image attracts younger consumers. At 0.37 P/S ratio, any sales growth would create significant upside.

Bear Case

The company is a fading mall brand burdened by $1.12B debt in a rising rate environment. Margins face perpetual pressure from Shein and Amazon. The Skims collab is too little too late – activewear is already saturated. With negative FCF and 9.98 D/E ratio, bankruptcy risk looms if sales don’t rebound immediately.

Recent News

  • Upcoming Q4 2024 earnings call on March 6, 2025 (GlobeNewswire).
  • Partnership with Skims (Kim Kardashian’s brand) to launch NikeSKIMS activewear line in 2025 (CNBC).
  • Analyst opinions diverge: 3 Strong Buy, 1 Buy, 6 Hold, 2 Strong Sell ratings. Target price $42.4 vs. current ~$30 (implied from P/E and EPS).

Financial Analysis

  • Revenue decline: $6.76B (2022) -> $6.28B (2023) -> $6.08B (2024).
  • EBITDA collapse: $1.17B (2022) -> $751M (2023) -> $264M (2024).
  • Gross margins contracted from 41% (2022) to 37% (2024).
  • Debt-to-equity ratio improved from 15.9 (2022) to 9.98 (2024) but remains elevated.
  • Current ratio fell below 1 (0.95) in 2024, indicating liquidity strain.
  • P/S ratio of 0.371 suggests undervaluation relative to sales.
  • P/E of 14.96 vs. forward P/E 11.34 implies expected earnings growth.
  • ROE fell from 251% (2022) to 26% (2024) – collapsing profitability.
  • Interest coverage ratio dropped from 32.22 (2022) to 2.41 (2024) – debt servicing risk.
  • Inventory turnover declined from 6.23 (2022) to 6.05 (2024) – weaker sales efficiency.

The company faces structural challenges in women’s apparel retail: declining sales, contracting margins, and high leverage (beta=2.2 shows market perceives significant risk). While cost controls improved D/E ratio, interest coverage remains precarious. The Skims partnership and focus on activewear could signal strategic repositioning.

S.W.O.T. Analysis

Strengths:

  • Iconic brand with global recognition
  • New strategic partnerships (Skims/Nike)
  • Improving inventory management (turnover up from 5.58 to 6.05)

Weaknesses:

  • High debt load ($1.12B LT debt)
  • Negative free cash flow in recent quarters
  • Declining same-store sales

Opportunities:

  • Growth in premium activewear segment
  • International expansion
  • E-commerce optimization

Threats:

  • Consumer shift to value retailers (Walmart gaining share)
  • Rising interest rates impacting debt servicing
  • Fast fashion competition

Industry Overview

Threat of New Competitors: Moderate. Brand loyalty creates barriers but fast fashion entrants (Shein, Zara) pressure margins.

Competition Among Existing Firms: High. Competitors include Lululemon, Aerie, Walmart (attracting wealthier shoppers per CNBC).

Suppliers’ Bargaining Power: Moderate. Global apparel supply chain offers alternatives, but company’s weak financial position reduces negotiating power.

Buyers’ Bargaining Power: High. Low switching costs in lingerie/activewear with numerous alternatives.

Threat of Substitute Products: High. Fast fashion and direct-to-consumer brands offer cheaper alternatives.

Competitive Advantage

Cost Advantage: None evident – COGS ratio increased to 98% of revenue in 2024.

Intangible Assets: Brand recognition persists but diminished by controversy and competition.

Network Effect: Limited – no platform effects in retail.

Switching Costs: Low – apparel purchases are discretionary and brand-agnostic for many consumers.

Supporting Data

You can find supporting data that is derived from company filings and other reputable sources here. It was provided to the AI to generate this report and you can use it to verify the analysis. This supporting data is not AI generated but may still contain errors.

Download Analysis PDF

© Copyright 2024. All rights reserved.