Your Old Clothes Are Worth Billions

Closets are full of unworn clothes ready for purging, thrifting is in vogue , and everybody’s looking for a good deal these days. It all sounds like a golden business opportunity—if anyone can figure it out.

Americans on average throw away some 70 pounds of clothes a year, and thrifting is becoming more popular by the day—particularly among younger consumers. The U.S. secondhand apparel market was worth about $43 billion last year, according to an annual market report from the online apparel reseller ThredUp . It estimates that the market could grow about 11% a year on average through 2028. The market is fragmented, with about 74% of thrift stores being independently run, according to a report from Piper Sandler.

Companies specialising in thrift, though, are struggling to stitch together a compelling investment case. Shares of the online seller ThredUp and the bricks-and-mortar thrift-store chain Savers Value Village are each down around 29% year to date. The luxury online resale platform RealReal has fared better, but in large part thanks to a debt exchange it announced in late February to address liquidity concerns. ThredUp and RealReal are both down significantly from their peaks a few years back.

This could simply be air coming out of highly inflated expectations. ThredUp and the RealReal made their debuts with much fanfare in 2021 and 2019, respectively. Savers listed last year with a lofty valuation. But sales growth for all three companies has slowed, and they are all growing slower than the overall market.

Nonprofits such as Goodwill control a sizeable portion of the secondhand market, with a steady supply of donations, and eBay dominates the resale market online. ThredUp and RealReal’s bet is that consignors and buyers would be willing to pay a premium for a more convenient selling and buying experience. Sellers need only mail in or drop off their goods, and the platforms do the work of photographing, pricing and tagging each item by size, brand, colour and condition so that items are easily searchable. For RealReal, there is an extra human step of making sure the products aren’t fakes. A single-item distribution system is difficult to recreate and is therefore a powerful moat, says Dylan Carden, an equity analyst at William Blair, referring to ThredUp.

But the expensive process also means profitability is distant: Neither ThredUp nor RealReal is expected to turn a profit on the basis of generally accepted accounting principles for the next four years, according to analyst estimates polled by Visible Alpha.

Balancing the quantity of supply with quality has been difficult. ThredUp last year introduced fees that are subtracted from the payout customers receive if their items are sold on the platform. The change is meant to encourage consumers to send in high volumes of high-quality clothes. RealReal last year tweaked its commission structure to motivate consignors to send in expensive items priced above $100.

While these moves could attract higher quality, they might also divert consignors to platforms such as Poshmark and eBay, where selling involves more work but potentially higher payout. Notably, both of those marketplaces have authentication features for high-end items, and eBay has been trying to simplify sellers’ listing process through generative AI .

Meanwhile, the bricks-and-mortar Savers comes with the promise of a more efficient shopping experience than nonprofits. Piper Sandler estimates that its sales per store is nearly twice that of Goodwill and more than six times that of the Salvation Army. But the retailer faces similar quality challenges.

Only about half the items that Savers gets actually end up on the sales floor, and of those about half actually are sold, according to a company filing. Savers receives all of its items—whether directly or indirectly—by paying nonprofits by the pound for donated products. Savers has previously said that it might be able to snag higher-quality donations by placing its drop-off trailers—known as GreenDrop—near locations frequented by wealthier shoppers.

While Savers has been profitable for the past three years, same-store sales have unexpectedly slowed in recent quarters, and its investment case is highly dependent on new-store growth. This remains a risk. Previous management had trouble opening up stores because they weren’t able to procure enough supplies of secondhand clothing, notes Peter Keith, equity analyst at Piper Sandler, who is still confident about the company’s ability to expand.

Much like that shirt you only wore once, secondhand-apparel sellers so far hold more promise than substance.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.