Lululemon shares plummet as tariff costs, rivals threaten profit outlook
Lululemon cut its profit forecast for the year, hurt by higher costs to mitigate US tariffs and as tepid demand for its latest products failed to draw away buyers from upstart athleisure rivals such as Vuori.
Lululemon Athletica's shares slumped 22% in trading after the bell on Thursday.
'We experienced lower store traffic in the Americas, partially reflective of economic uncertainty, inflationary pressures, lower consumer confidence, and changes in discretionary spending,' Lululemon said in a statement.
3 Although Lululemon has been betting on its new product offerings to boost demand, it is still struggling to drum up sales as competitors, including Alo Yoga and Vuori, gain more traction.
Getty Images
President Trump's chaotic global tariffs have fanned fears that the economy is headed for stagflation, pushing even wealthier shoppers to prioritize essential purchases.
Companies are diversifying sourcing and increasing prices to mitigate any hit from tariffs, which are expected to shrink margins.
'We are planning to take strategic price increases … on a small portion of our assortment, and they will be modest in nature,' Lululemon's finance chief Meghan Frank said.
The company will also negotiate with vendors and cut costs, Lululemon said in a filing.
In 2024, 40% of Lululemon's products were manufactured in Vietnam, and 28% of its fabrics were sourced from mainland China.
3 In March, Lululemon forecast downbeat annual targets that included a 20-basis-point hit from tariffs.
Getty Images
3 'Lululemon also hasn't had a lot of huge hit products recently that are having some effect,' said Morningstar analyst David Swartz.
REUTERS
The company now expects annual profit between $14.58 and $14.78 per share, compared with previous expectations of $14.95 to $15.15 each.
Lululemon also forecast second-quarter profit below an average estimate from LSEG. Its revenue forecast of between $2.54 billion and $2.56 billion was largely in line.
'Lululemon also hasn't had a lot of huge hit products recently that are having some effect,' said Morningstar analyst David Swartz.
It introduced new apparel franchises for men and women — including the Glow Up activewear collection and its new lifestyle trousers Daydrift — but those have done little to boost sales.
'Lululemon has a history of beating numbers, so even when Lululemon doesn't raise estimates, that's considered to be kind of a disappointment,' Swartz added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Strait of Hormuz saber-rattling ramps up following US attack. Whether the key waterway will close is less clear.
Iran's parliament pushed the nation to close the Strait of Hormuz, according to state media, but left the final decision to choke off the key waterway to Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Vice President JD Vance shot back Sunday that such an action "would be suicidal" for Iran as "their entire economy runs through the Strait of Hormuz." Yet the Islamic Republic appears to be a step closer to the unprecedented action that could spike prices around the world, with about 20% of global oil and gas flowing through the narrow passageway connecting the Persian Gulf to the rest of the globe. It was just one front — but perhaps one with the greatest economic consequences — after President Trump ordered an attack on three of Iran's nuclear sites and drew the US into the ongoing war. Some experts are skeptical Iran will ever follow through, as the country has threatened the strait multiple times over the years — but historically opted for less disruptive measures. In comments Saturday night, Trump described the move as a means to bring Iran to the negotiating table. But it immediately set off fears of additional violence and retaliation in the days ahead. For their part, Iranian leaders say any talks are on hold but haven't outlined exactly how they are going to respond. "The US is not diplomatic and only understands the language of force and threats," said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, according to Mehr News, the country's semi-official news agency. Araqchi also reportedly avoided directly commenting on the strait, saying "a variety of options are available to Iran." The action also comes after Iranian General Mohsen Rezaei, an Iranian leader who has a seat on the decision making Supreme National Security Council, reportedly said on state television hours before the attack that the country would move to close the strait if Trump entered the war. Economists will be closely watching the strait because of global economic repercussions that would almost surely follow any disruptions there. Analysts at JPMorgan Chase (JPM) have called a blockage there a "worst-case scenario" and suggested the result could be global oil prices reaching $120 a barrel and pushing inflation in the US to 5%. But as Bloomberg energy columnist Javier Blas re-emphasized over the weekend, it benefits Iran to "use low-ranking officials to talk about closing Hormuz," because it sows instability. But it would actually damage Iran to follow through. Indeed, closing the strait would be felt in Iran's own oil sector and cut off a key revenue source for the country's leaders. Iran uses the waterway for its own energy exports, which totaled over 1.3 million barrels of oil a day 2023 according to CEIC. As Noam Raydan, who studies energy and maritime risks at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, put it to Yahoo Finance last week before the attacks: "If its oil production and terminals are badly damaged, we can then seriously consider the possibility of Tehran shutting the strait." So far, that doesn't appear to be the case, with Israel striking one oil refinery in Tehran but so far apparently leaving the country's oil infrastructure largely in place. Most Iranian oil flows to China but the closing the Strait of Hormuz would jeopardize a wider array of oil and natural gas sources with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and others using that waterway. The overall landscape has led Trump administration to express tempered confidence Sunday that the Strait of Hormuz option is one that won't be taken. "That would be suicidal," Vance said Sunday on NBC of Iran taking that step. "If they want to destroy their own economy and cause disruptions in the world, I think that would be their decision," he acknowledged "but why would they do that? I don't think it makes any sense." Secretary of State Marco Rubio added on Fox News that Iran closing the strait would be "another terrible we retain options to deal with that." Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: Trump is suddenly waging two wars—one with trade partners and one with Iran
Life can get complicated awfully fast. President Trump hoped his first year in office would bring victories on tax cuts, trade realignment, and deregulation. Five months in, however, he has not just one war on his hands, but two. First is the trade war with dozens of nations, which many economists say is bound to end up an unwinnable quagmire. And now, Trump has stepped into a risky Middle East war by green-lighting US attacks on three Iranian nuclear weapons sites, a step other presidents have considered and averted. The June 21 American attack on Iran may turn out to have been a risk worth taking. It came after a week of attacks on Iranian nuclear and military targets by Israel, which says Iran was days or weeks from having the capability to build a nuclear weapon. Iran's Islamic theocracy has long threatened Israel's destruction, and a nuke would give them the means to do it. Starting June 13, Israel mounted a brilliant campaign that neutered Iran's air-defense network, killed several military leaders, and damaged Iran's nuclear complex. But it needed American help to finish the job. Only American 'bunker buster' bombs had the heft to penetrate deeply buried facilities at the heart of Iran's nuclear program. Trump okayed the raid, and American warplanes dropped at least a dozen of the giant bombs on June 21. Trump says Iran's nuclear program is gone. Maybe. It could take days or weeks to determine if the bombs destroyed everything on the target list. The Pentagon may never know for sure. Iran could have moved some nuclear material or other parts of the program to reconstitute later. Trump obviously hopes the June 21 strikes are a one-and-done operation. That would allow him to refocus on a trade war that has key deadlines approaching and a huge tax bill that's bogging down in Congress. But Iran may not cooperate. 'Wars are easy to start, but difficult to end,' Byron Callan of Capital Alpha Partners wrote in a June 22 analysis. 'We are highly skeptical that Iran 'surrenders.'' Iran is in a weak position, yet it may influence the outcome of Trump's economic agenda, not to mention other Trump priorities such as immigration enforcement and anything else that depends on Trump holding a reasonable level of popular support at home. Wars can boost a president's popularity and political capital if they go well (and quickly), but they can also drag down a presidency if they bog down or go off the rails. President Lyndon Johnson, most famously, dropped his 1968 reelection bid as opposition to the Vietnam War biggest market concern, for now, is whether Iran will try to close the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway at the eastern end of the Persian Gulf that's a transit point for 20% of the world's oil. Iran could mine the strait, attack oil tankers, or conduct sabotage that could easily send oil prices, which were around $75 per barrel before the US attacks, over $100 and possibly higher. But closing the strait could be self-defeating for Iran. First, it would block its own oil from flowing into markets, depriving the government of badly needed cash. It would also trigger a prompt US response and possibly end with the destruction of much of Iran's navy, making Iran even weaker. 'The next move is up to the Iranians,' economist Ed Yardeni of Yardeni Research wrote in a June 22 analysis. "Our bet is that they will sue for peace. While the Mullahs and their generals may be fanatics, they aren't crazy. If that's the case, then the price of oil should fall and stock markets around the world should resume their ascents.' Iran has other moves, however. Instead of targeting the Strait of Hormuz, it could attack US ships and bases in the region with drones and missiles. There are several ways to go about that. One might be a symbolic fireworks show that lets Iran say it retaliated, without doing much harm. That may let both sides say they've done what they needed to do and are wrapping things up. But Iran has killed Americans before and it could do so again, which might leave Trump feeling he has no choice but to escalate further. In an escalation scenario, Iran would still have the option to go after the strait, which would keep oil prices elevated. Iran could also sit back for a while and plot something more cunning. Affiliated terrorist groups could plot overt or covert attacks on American assets in the Middle East or elsewhere. Iran backed the 1981 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the 1996 bombing of an Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia, and numerous attacks against US troops in Iraq from 2003 to 2011, among other crimes. They'd relish a few more notches on the bloody belt. As the first US president to approve a direct attack on Iran, Trump risks an open-ended entanglement involving dead Americans, damaged American prestige, and a disapproving electorate. There are already signs that Iran salvaged some of the enriched uranium needed for nuclear bombs. If so, that would raise the question of whether the United States should attack again and whether it could even destroy all of Iran's uranium if it wanted to. It may be more likely following the US attacks that Iran decides to fully end all cooperation with international inspectors and nonproliferation regimes and sprint toward a nuclear weapon, even a crude one. 'It is possible an Iranian regime could pick up the pieces and get to a bomb in a couple of years,' Ilan Goldenberg, a former Defense Dept. Middle East analyst, wrote in Foreign Affairs. 'The best and most durable option for the United States all along was to pursue a diplomatic deal that verifiably restrained Iran's nuclear program. That option is much less likely.' Trump has entered the Middle East caldron just as his trade war is approaching a climactic moment. Trump set a July 9 deadline for dozens of countries to negotiate trade deals favorable to the United States or face punitive 'reciprocal' tariffs. But the whole world has seen that Trump backs down on tariff threats when markets slide, and the Iran standoff will make markets much twitchier than they'd otherwise be. That could force Trump to postpone the July 9 deadline. Markets would cheer, since tariffs damage corporate profitability, and any delay is a reprieve. But another delay would also prolong the uncertainty that's suppressing the US stock market and possibly weakening the economy. Trump also can't afford a sudden spike in oil and energy prices, which would create significant inflationary pressure if it lasted. Economists already think Trump's tariffs could add a percentage point to inflation, or more, and that's with relatively low energy prices. An energy spike would make tariff inflation more painful. It's not all downside for Trump. Iran's theocratic government might lose its nerve and decide its quest for the bomb isn't worth the trouble. If Trump did manage to rid the world of an Iranian nuclear menace, without much cost, it could stabilize the Middle East, a little, and solve one very dangerous problem. Any kudos for that, however, will only come after weeks, months, or even years of tension. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices. Connectez-vous pour accéder à votre portefeuille
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
There Are Reasons To Feel Uneasy About Meridian Energy's (NZSE:MEL) Returns On Capital
What trends should we look for it we want to identify stocks that can multiply in value over the long term? Ideally, a business will show two trends; firstly a growing return on capital employed (ROCE) and secondly, an increasing amount of capital employed. Put simply, these types of businesses are compounding machines, meaning they are continually reinvesting their earnings at ever-higher rates of return. However, after briefly looking over the numbers, we don't think Meridian Energy (NZSE:MEL) has the makings of a multi-bagger going forward, but let's have a look at why that may be. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. For those that aren't sure what ROCE is, it measures the amount of pre-tax profits a company can generate from the capital employed in its business. The formula for this calculation on Meridian Energy is: Return on Capital Employed = Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT) ÷ (Total Assets - Current Liabilities) 0.022 = NZ$272m ÷ (NZ$13b - NZ$872m) (Based on the trailing twelve months to December 2024). So, Meridian Energy has an ROCE of 2.2%. Ultimately, that's a low return and it under-performs the Renewable Energy industry average of 11%. See our latest analysis for Meridian Energy In the above chart we have measured Meridian Energy's prior ROCE against its prior performance, but the future is arguably more important. If you're interested, you can view the analysts predictions in our free analyst report for Meridian Energy . On the surface, the trend of ROCE at Meridian Energy doesn't inspire confidence. To be more specific, ROCE has fallen from 7.2% over the last five years. Although, given both revenue and the amount of assets employed in the business have increased, it could suggest the company is investing in growth, and the extra capital has led to a short-term reduction in ROCE. If these investments prove successful, this can bode very well for long term stock performance. While returns have fallen for Meridian Energy in recent times, we're encouraged to see that sales are growing and that the business is reinvesting in its operations. And the stock has followed suit returning a meaningful 43% to shareholders over the last five years. So while the underlying trends could already be accounted for by investors, we still think this stock is worth looking into further. On a separate note, we've found 1 warning sign for Meridian Energy you'll probably want to know about. While Meridian Energy isn't earning the highest return, check out this free list of companies that are earning high returns on equity with solid balance sheets. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
