vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of OXFORD INDUSTRIES INC (OXM) and TIC Solutions, Inc. (TIC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
TIC Solutions, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($508.3M vs $307.3M, roughly 1.7× OXFORD INDUSTRIES INC). TIC Solutions, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -9.3% vs -20.7%, a 11.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. TIC Solutions, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($37.1M vs $-47.9M).
Oxford Industries, Inc. is a publicly traded clothing company in the United States that specializes in high-end clothing and apparel. The company carries many major labels, including Tommy Bahama, Lilly Pulitzer, Johnny Was and Southern Tide.
OXM vs TIC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $307.3M | $508.3M |
| Net Profit | $-63.7M | $-47.2M |
| Gross Margin | 60.3% | 35.2% |
| Operating Margin | -27.7% | -3.8% |
| Net Margin | -20.7% | -9.3% |
| Revenue YoY | -0.2% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -1517.6% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-4.28 | — |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $307.3M | $508.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $403.1M | $473.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $392.9M | $313.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $234.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $308.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $419.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $398.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $404.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-63.7M | $-47.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.7M | $-13.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.2M | $-233.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-25.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $40.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-60.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | 60.3% | 35.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 61.4% | 32.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 64.2% | 23.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 18.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 63.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 63.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 64.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 60.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -27.7% | -3.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.3% | -1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -4.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -2.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -20.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | -20.7% | -9.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.1% | -2.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.7% | -0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -11.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -1.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -14.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-4.28 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.12 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.70 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.25 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.57 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.42 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.72 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $8.0M | $439.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $528.0M | $2.2B |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $4.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.74× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $8.0M | $439.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.9M | $164.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.2M | $130.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $155.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $751.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $752.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $29.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | $528.0M | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $597.1M | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $592.4M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $612.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $621.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $592.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $560.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.83× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.64× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.67× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.05× | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-9.1M | $49.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-47.9M | $37.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -15.6% | 7.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 12.6% | 2.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-79.9M | $61.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-9.1M | $49.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $83.5M | $19.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.9M | $-6.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $32.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-18.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $88.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $32.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $74.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-47.9M | $37.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $52.3M | $10.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-27.4M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $28.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-56.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $47.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $55.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | -15.6% | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.0% | 2.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -7.0% | -4.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 12.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -18.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 12.6% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.7% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.0% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.00× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.15× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.19× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.86× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
OXM
| Sales Channel Retail | $162.9M | 53% |
| Sales Channel Wholesale | $61.3M | 20% |
| Johnny Was | $45.4M | 15% |
| Sales Channel Food And Beverage | $29.3M | 10% |
| Other Foreign Countries | $9.0M | 3% |
TIC
| Consulting Engineering Segment | $300.1M | 59% |
| Geospatial Segment | $131.3M | 26% |
| Fixed Unit Price Contracts | $54.3M | 11% |
| Other | $22.6M | 4% |
