How did Target's quarterly earnings and same-store sales change following the boycott?

Checked on December 7, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Target’s sales have been declining through 2025 and company reports show quarterly net sales fell 1.5% to $25.3 billion in Q3 2025 and fell ~2.8–3% in earlier quarters; comparable/same-store sales were down in several quarters (Target reported digital comparable growth but overall comps declined) [1] [2] [3]. Multiple news outlets and analysts attribute some of that decline to organized boycotts after Target’s DEI rollback, though they also point to competition and broader business issues as contributing factors [4] [5] [6].

1. Sales slipped — official numbers and timing

Target’s own Q3 2025 release shows net sales of $25.3 billion, a 1.5% decline from a year earlier, and the company has reported prior quarterly drops (Q1 net sales $23.8 billion, down from $24.5 billion) and a multi-quarter pattern of weak or flat top-line performance [1] [2] [3]. Public filings and press releases used by reporters confirm Target trimmed full‑year guidance in 2025 consistent with those quarterly shortfalls [2] [1].

2. Same-store/comparable-sales: mixed signals inside the releases

Target’s releases note pockets of strength — for example digital comparable sales grew in quarters such as Q1 and Q3 even while total net sales declined — but overall comparable-store metrics showed weakness in 2025. Investing.com’s Q2 reporting and Target materials show comparable sales were down (comparable sales fell 1.9% in Q2) even as adjusted EPS beat street estimates that quarter [7] [8]. The company’s own disclosures therefore show digital comps rising while total comparable/same‑store performance was negative or soft in several quarters [2] [1] [7].

3. The boycott’s measurable footprints cited by analysts and firms

Independent data firms and media traced sharp drops in foot traffic coinciding with boycott campaigns: Placer.ai flagged a 9.5% fall in February 2025 foot traffic, and outlets cited four straight weeks of traffic declines around the start of the boycott period [9] [10]. Journalists and analysts quoted by NPR, CNN and Investopedia say boycotts were a factor in weakened store traffic and sales, and Target itself acknowledged reputation damage tied to the controversy in filings cited by local reporting [4] [5] [11].

4. Attribution: boycott vs. business fundamentals — competing narratives

Reporting shows two competing frames. Some outlets and activists argue the boycott “worked” and directly depressed Target sales and traffic (CNN, Forbes, People’s World excerpts) [5] [10] [12]. Other journalists and analysts — and even some sources cited in the coverage — caution that Target’s drop reflects broader business challenges (competition from Walmart/Amazon, merchandise and margin pressure) and not solely consumer activism (NPR, Fortune, Investopedia) [4] [13] [6]. Both narratives appear in the record; available sources show journalists presenting the boycott as a material factor but not the only one [4] [5] [6].

5. Financial consequences beyond sales: stock, guidance, margins

News reports and the company’s releases show knock‑on effects: Target cut the high end of its guidance and trimmed earnings expectations for fiscal 2025; Q3 net income fell roughly 19% year over year to $689 million in one report, and the company faced sizable stock declines in 2025 as investors reacted to sales slippage [14] [1] [15]. Analysts noted rising markdowns and merchandising pressure that compressed gross margins even as Target pointed to gains in advertising and fulfillment efficiencies [1].

6. Limitations and gaps in the public record

Available sources document quarter‑by‑quarter sales and traffic trends and quote both company commentary and independent analysts, but they do not provide a single, conclusive causation study proving the boycott alone produced each dollar of lost sales. Detailed econometric attribution (e.g., isolating boycott impact versus macroeconomic weakness or competitor gains) is not present in the cited reporting; Placer.ai and surveys give proximate evidence on foot traffic and consumer intent but not definitive causal decomposition [9] [10].

7. Bottom line — what the record supports

The public record shows Target’s same‑store/overall sales deteriorated through 2025 (quarterly net sales declines in multiple quarters, comparable sales down in Q2/Q3 periods), and contemporaneous reporting from outlets including NPR, CNN, Fortune and Investopedia attributes at least part of that deterioration to organized boycotts after Target’s DEI rollback while also emphasizing structural retail challenges [1] [2] [4] [5] [6]. If you need a deeper causal answer, the documents cited here do not include a formal academic or company‑commissioned impact study isolating the boycott’s share of lost revenue (available sources do not mention such a study).

Want to dive deeper?
How much revenue did Target lose in the quarter after the boycott compared with the prior year?
Which product categories and regions drove Target's same-store sales decline after the boycott?
What actions did Target take in its earnings call to address the sales impact of the boycott?
How did analysts revise Target's guidance and stock price following the post-boycott quarter?
Were promotional activity, discounts, or inventory adjustments used to recover same-store sales after the boycott?