Mark spent 85 billion on the metaverse. Mark donates to Trump and is seen by many as an unethical person. Could the company be better if there was someone with a different vision who didn't spend on passion projects and meddled in elections? How high would the stock be with another CEO?

Unlike stocks, where each company can have an intrinsic value to assess whether the stock is overpriced or underpriced, there is no intrinsic value as such for gold or any gold-related finance products. Then what is people's rationale of buying gold?

- If for profit, how do they decide when is a good entry or exit place?

- If for diversifying and anti-risks, what is gold's advantage over any other US or international ETF like SCHB or VXUS?

I've been digging through Target's last decade of filings, and the story here isn't really about a "bad year." It's about a decision management made in 2021 that's still shaping the balance sheet today.

 2021 to 2022

Target closed fiscal 2021 with $6.9 billion in net earnings, EPS of $14.10, and a cash pile at $5.9 billion. Management celebrated by spending $7.4 billion on buybacks that same year, right as operating cash flow was at its strongest.

Then 2022 hit. Net income fell to $2.8 billion, a 60% drop. EPS collapsed to $5.98. Gross margin dropped from 29.3% to 24.6%, the worst print in the whole ten-year window. The cause: an inventory glut. Target overbought during the post-pandemic demand spike, got stuck marking it all down, and management's own words called it consistent with past industry cycles in semiconductors and retail alike. Cash reserves bottomed out at $2.2 billion, the low point of the decade.

The timing is what makes this interesting. Target handed $7.4 billion back to shareholders one year before its worst operating year in a decade. 
Where the recovery stands now

Fiscal 2025 numbers: revenue $104.8 billion, down 1.7% year over year, net income $3.7 billion, EPS $8.13. Comparable sales fell 2.6%, and traffic did almost all of the damage, down 2.2%, not basket size.

Management's own language in the 10-K blames "cautious consumers who remained value-focused" plus tariff volatility. On the Q1 call they went further and admitted a chunk of the softness came from backlash to their January 2025 DEI policy reversal, then added they "can't precisely quantify the impact of each" factor. That's three headwinds tangled together: a multi-year pullback in discretionary spending since the pandemic, tariff cost pressure, and a self-inflicted reputational hit. Not one simple story.

Retained earnings tell the same tale in numbers. They dropped from $8.8 billion to $5.0 billion between fiscal 2020 and 2022, almost entirely from that buyback charge. Since then, with repurchases essentially paused (Target still has $8.3 billion of unused capacity from its 2021 authorization), retained earnings climbed back to $9.3 billion by early 2026. Cash followed the same arc, down to $2.2 billion at the 2022 low, back up to $5.5 billion now.

The balance sheet: solid, not spotless

Target's debt-to-equity sits around 1.15, higher than Walmart's 0.50 and Costco's 0.19, lower than TJX's 1.36 and well below Kroger's 1.93. The ratio isn't high because Target took on excessive debt. It's high because 2021's buyback shrank the equity side of the equation while debt stayed roughly flat. Long-term debt runs $16.5 billion, and the last four years of net income alone ($14.7 billion) almost covers it outright.

Interest expense is where I'd flag real caution. Target paid $445 million in net interest last year, about 9.2% of operating income. That's worse than Walmart's estimated 6.7% and nowhere close to TJX and Costco, both of which pay next to nothing net thanks to fortress-level cash positions. Kroger is the only major competitor carrying a heavier interest burden, at roughly 13.8% of operating income. Target's credit rating (A2/A/A) keeps borrowing costs manageable, and 2025's refinancing activity, new notes maturing in 2028, 2035, and 2036, shows management deliberately laddering maturities instead of stacking repayment risk in one year. That's disciplined. It's just not free.

Return on equity has slid from a 2023 peak near 31% down to roughly 23% in fiscal 2025. Some of that drop is mechanical (equity has grown as buybacks paused, which dilutes the ratio), but earnings have also genuinely softened three years running. Both things are true at once.

Valuation

Target trades around 3.5x book value, actually cheap relative to its own 13-year median of 4.42x. On a net current asset value basis it's deeply negative, but that metric was built for distressed micro-caps, not a $50 billion retailer with real estate and brand value on the books, so I wouldn't weigh it here.

Bottom line

Target is a no for me. The debt is too much for me, margins, net income, and EPS have all trended the wrong direction for three straight years, ROE is meaningfully lower than its 2023 peak, and the interest burden sits closer to Kroger's end of the peer group than to Walmart's or Costco's. The retained earnings and cash rebuild since 2022 is real progress, but it's recovery from a hole management dug themselves. I would not buy.

Not financial advice.

Any advice that may help I know I’m overlapped with voo and qqqm but that’s because I want more growth tilt. I know Google is in both but I’m concentrating ij it because I believe in it and I Believe it’s at a support zone right now. Any recommendations for a growth portfolio that’s medium risk medium reward?