New York — Saturday, Dec. 27, 2025 (12:03 a.m. ET).
Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT) is heading into the weekend with fresh momentum — and a fresh dose of uncertainty — after shares climbed in the latest holiday-thinned session on news that an activist investor has taken a stake in the retailer. The move lands at a delicate moment for Target: comparable sales have been slipping, management is in the middle of a leadership transition, and the broader U.S. market is hovering near record territory as 2025 winds down. [1]
Target stock price today: where TGT stands going into the weekend
As of the most recent market update available early Saturday morning New York time, Target shares were last at $99.55, up about 3.13% versus the prior close, after trading between roughly $96.11 and $101.30 in the latest session.
That jump came during a quiet, post-Christmas stretch where trading volumes are often lighter — even as the S&P 500 remains close to major psychological milestones and investors keep one eye on the “Santa Claus rally” window that tends to span the last trading days of the year and the first two of the new one. [2]
What’s driving Target stock: activist investor takes stake
The immediate catalyst: Reuters reported that Toms Capital Investment Management (TCIM) has made a “significant investment” in Target, citing a Financial Times report. The size of the stake and any formal demands were not disclosed in the report, but the market reaction was clear — Target shares rose on the headline. [3]
Why this matters for TGT investors:
- Activism can change the timeline. Turnarounds that were supposed to play out over quarters can get compressed into months when an activist arrives with governance proposals, cost-cutting demands, or portfolio suggestions.
- It raises the odds of headline volatility. Even without a public letter, investors start gaming out scenarios: board changes, accelerated restructuring, sharper margin targets, or more aggressive capital returns.
- It puts leadership structure under a brighter spotlight. Target has already been navigating criticism around governance as it transitions to incoming CEO Michael Fiddelke in 2026. [4]
Target itself told Reuters it maintains regular dialogue with the investment community and that its top priority is returning to growth. [5]
The governance angle: “Investors are hungry for change”
One of the most interesting details in Reuters’ report is that the activist stake lands alongside an existing push for governance changes. Matt Prescott, president of the nonprofit shareholder activist group The Accountability Board, argued that TCIM’s move signals investors “are hungry for change,” adding that the group believes its proposal for an independent chair has a stronger chance of passing. [6]
That’s not just boardroom drama for drama’s sake. For retailers, leadership structure can influence how quickly merchandising resets happen, how bold pricing moves get approved, and whether the organization is empowered to simplify (or stays stuck in “committee gravity”).
The “real estate lever” is back on the table — but experts warn it’s not a cure-all
Target owns a large share of its real estate — about 75%, including land, according to an analysis referenced by UBS analyst Michael Lasser. That’s the kind of balance-sheet fact activists love, because it invites “unlock value” narratives. [7]
But Reuters also quoted Neil Saunders, managing director at GlobalData, warning that a real-estate selloff could offer only short-term gains — and that the bigger need is retail fundamentals: product, pricing, stores, and selling methods, not “financial games.” [8]
Translation: if activism turns into a debate about monetizing assets rather than improving the guest experience and value perception, shareholders may get a pop — and then get stuck with the same core business problems.
The bigger backdrop: Target’s sales slump and a strategy reset
To understand why an activist headline is hitting so hard, you have to look at the underlying business story Target has been telling Wall Street.
Q3 results: comp sales fell again, but digital and “non-merch” grew
In Target’s third-quarter 2025 results (reported Nov. 19), the company posted:
- Net sales of $25.3 billion, down about 1.5% year over year
- Comparable sales down 2.7% overall (store comps down 3.8%, digital comps up 2.4%)
- Adjusted EPS of $1.78 (GAAP EPS $1.51) [9]
Notably, Target highlighted faster-growing components that don’t look like “traditional retail”: non‑merchandise sales rose sharply, with growth in Roundel (advertising), membership, and marketplace-related revenue. [10]
That matters because, for big-box retailers, ad networks and membership programs can help stabilize margins when merchandise is under pressure.
Guidance: cautious holiday tone and a tighter profit ceiling
Target maintained its expectation of a low-single-digit sales decline for Q4 (the holiday quarter), and it trimmed the top end of its adjusted full-year earnings outlook to $7.00–$8.00 per share (GAAP EPS expected around $7.70–$8.70). [11]
Reuters also reported that Target had slashed prices on about 3,000 everyday items to appeal to cost-conscious consumers — a move that can help traffic, but can also squeeze margins if mix and volume don’t cooperate. [12]
“Decisive actions,” but the clock is ticking
Reuters quoted Michael Baker of D.A. Davidson saying it’s too early for meaningful changes to show up in results, since Fiddelke doesn’t take over fully until the next fiscal year — but that there were “decisive actions” during the quarter. [13]
Those actions included operational experiments in how stores fulfill online orders, plus new tools like a generative-AI gift finder and expanded use of machine learning in inventory forecasting, according to Reuters’ reporting. [14]
Cost cuts and restructuring: 1,800 corporate jobs eliminated
Target’s turnaround plan has also included meaningful restructuring. Reuters reported the company planned to cut roughly 1,800 corporate roles as part of an effort to streamline operations, with the changes tied to leadership under incoming CEO Michael Fiddelke. [15]
The Associated Press similarly reported the cuts represent about 8% of Target’s corporate workforce, with store and supply chain roles not affected. [16]
For investors, this is a double-edged sword:
- In the bull case, fewer layers and lower overhead can improve speed and margin.
- In the bear case, cost cuts without merchandising “magic” can become a slow bleed — fewer people, same problems.
Wall Street’s forecasts: what analysts and consensus estimates imply
No single forecast is gospel (analysts are human; markets are chaos with a dress code), but consensus estimates help frame expectations.
Next earnings: early March is the key checkpoint
Several earnings calendars currently point to early March 2026 for Target’s next report (typically its holiday-quarter results), with $2.16 cited as a consensus EPS forecast for the relevant fiscal period by some tracking services. [17]
(Companies can change confirmed dates, so treat calendars as informed estimates until Target formally confirms.)
Price targets and ratings: “Hold” vibes, but wide dispersion
Recent roundups show a “Hold”-leaning consensus with average price targets clustered around the low $100s — but with a wide range between bearish and bullish views. MarketBeat, for example, cited a consensus “Hold” rating and an average target around $102.62 in a recent note. [18]
Meanwhile, a Nasdaq.com write-up on an Argus Research note referenced a one-year target average around $104.94, with a range extending from roughly the low $80s to the high $140s (reflecting how divided analysts are on the speed and credibility of a turnaround). [19]
You can also see the “spread” in individual calls: Benzinga’s ratings feed notes Evercore ISI set a price target of $95 in December. [20]
What that dispersion usually signals is not “analysts are clueless” — it signals execution risk. Everyone can agree what Target should do (value, in-stocks, experience, digital convenience). The disagreement is whether it can do it fast enough to matter.
Valuation check: dividend yield, P/E, and the 52-week context
Target’s selloff earlier in 2025 has pushed its valuation into a zone that looks “cheap” compared to its own history — but cheap stocks can be bargains or value traps.
Recent market data listings put Target around:
- 52-week range: roughly $83.44 to $145.08
- Market cap: roughly $45B (varies with price) [21]
At around $99–$100, some market data sources place TGT at about ~12x earnings and a dividend yield in the mid‑4% range. [22]
On dividends: Target declared a quarterly dividend of $1.14 per share in 2025 and noted that payout was the company’s 233rd consecutive dividend since becoming publicly held in 1967. [23]
High yield + low-ish multiple is exactly the combo that attracts contrarians — and activists — especially when a company also has levers like cost cuts and store reinvestment. But the market is also telling you, bluntly: it wants proof the core business is stabilizing.
The broader market setup: why macro still matters for Target
Even though Target is a company-specific story right now, retail stocks don’t trade in a vacuum.
On Friday, Dec. 26, U.S. stocks finished slightly lower in quiet post-holiday trading, with the S&P 500 still near record territory. Reuters described the session as light-volume with limited catalysts, and noted Target as one of the day’s notable movers because of the activism headline. [24]
Looking ahead, Reuters’ “Week Ahead” piece highlighted that investors are watching the Federal Reserve’s messaging closely (including the release of Fed minutes next week), with markets already factoring in the impact of recent rate cuts and debating what comes next. [25]
For Target specifically, the macro variables that tend to matter most are:
- Consumer confidence and discretionary spending (Target has meaningful exposure to “nice-to-have” categories)
- Inflation and price competition (value perception is everything in big-box retail)
- Interest rates (affects consumer credit, housing-linked spending, and equity multiples)
The exchange is closed now — what investors should know before the next session
Because it’s Saturday in New York, U.S. stock exchanges are closed. The next regular session is Monday, with standard U.S. market hours typically 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET. [26]
Between now and Monday’s open, here are the practical “watch items” for TGT holders and watchers:
1) Any activist filing or public letter
If TCIM shifts from “reported stake” to a formal disclosure (or lays out demands), that can reshape expectations fast. Reuters noted the stake size and demands weren’t disclosed in the initial reporting. [27]
2) Governance signals from Target
Watch for any weekend or early-week commentary about board structure, strategic priorities, or how Target plans to respond to investor pressure (even subtle wording changes can matter).
3) Macro headlines in a thin-liquidity window
End-of-year trading can exaggerate moves, especially when volume is lower. Reuters noted the post-holiday lull and the seasonal “Santa Claus rally” period dynamic. [28]
4) Next week’s economic calendar
Reports tied to housing, consumer activity, and rates can move retail stocks broadly. MarketWatch’s calendar for the week beginning Dec. 29 lists items like pending home sales and home price data, among others. [29]
5) Re-centering on fundamentals
Activism can create a sugar rush. But Target’s next sustained leg up still likely depends on the fundamentals management has emphasized: better merchandising, better experience, and better in-stock/value execution — the same priorities Target reiterated in its own statements around recent results. [30]
Bottom line for Target stock: activism creates a catalyst, but execution decides the outcome
Target’s latest pop is the market reacting to possibility: activism, sharper accountability, faster change. But the company’s recent story — declining comps, cautious outlook, heavy value investments — means TGT remains a “show me” stock.
If the activist pressure nudges Target toward clearer governance, faster operational simplification, and a tighter plan to regain value credibility, shareholders could see a re-rating. If it turns into a distracted tug-of-war over financial engineering, the risk is a short-term bounce followed by more sideways frustration — a scenario retail analysts like GlobalData’s Neil Saunders explicitly warned against. [31]
References
1. www.reuters.com, 2. www.reuters.com, 3. www.reuters.com, 4. www.reuters.com, 5. www.reuters.com, 6. www.reuters.com, 7. www.reuters.com, 8. www.reuters.com, 9. corporate.target.com, 10. corporate.target.com, 11. corporate.target.com, 12. www.reuters.com, 13. www.reuters.com, 14. www.reuters.com, 15. www.reuters.com, 16. apnews.com, 17. www.zacks.com, 18. www.marketbeat.com, 19. www.nasdaq.com, 20. www.benzinga.com, 21. www.morningstar.com, 22. www.marketwatch.com, 23. corporate.target.com, 24. www.reuters.com, 25. www.reuters.com, 26. www.nasdaq.com, 27. www.reuters.com, 28. www.reuters.com, 29. www.marketwatch.com, 30. corporate.target.com, 31. www.reuters.com
