Oxford Square Capital Corp. (OXSQ) Stock Analysis
Oxford Square Capital Corp.
▾ What's in the 51/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend). See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read OXSQ (pre-profit growth)
This company is reinvesting instead of generating profit, so a standard DCF cannot price it. The useful question is whether the growth the market is paying for is achievable — and whether the company can fund itself until then.
-
1
Reverse-DCF — the growth the price demands ↓
It shows exactly how fast the business must grow to justify today's price. Compare that to what comparable companies have actually achieved.
-
2
Cash runway ↓
Can it reach profitability before it has to raise money and dilute shareholders?
-
3
Interactive calculator ↓
Set your own growth + margin assumptions and see what the business would be worth if you are right.
OXSQ's SEC filings give us limited machine-readable financials — common for some foreign or newly-listed filers that report under IFRS or file abbreviated statements. We can't run a full valuation on a partial dataset.
What to use instead: What we have parsed is shown below. As more complete filings arrive (or IFRS support lands), the valuation will populate.
Riskier than 56% of the stocks we cover
A model trained on every US filing since 2012 — including the 823 companies that went bankrupt or stopped trading under a dollar — ranks each covered stock by its chance of failing in the next year. This is a position among peers, not a prediction about this company alone. Below is what happened to stocks that sat in the same position in past years.
▾ Every band, and what happened to the stocks in it
| Rank band | went bankrupt within 12 months | fell 80% or more (or failed) within 12 months | fell 50% or more (or failed) within 6 months |
|---|---|---|---|
| All covered stocks (average) | 0.59% | 4.21% | 8.51% |
| Other (construction, transport, services) (sector average) | 0.48% | 3.35% | 7.44% |
| riskiest 1% | 16.4% of 1,749 | 33.0% of 1,998 | 45.5% of 2,239 |
| next 2% (97-99) | 5.9% of 3,360 | 24.9% of 3,985 | 38.2% of 4,461 |
| next 2% (95-97) | 3.4% of 3,409 | 21.2% of 3,984 | 33.8% of 4,462 |
| next 5% (90-95) | 1.6% of 8,443 | 15.1% of 9,965 | 27.3% of 11,155 |
| next 15% (75-90) | 0.8% of 25,328 | 8.5% of 29,884 | 17.8% of 33,459 |
| next 25% (50-75) ← this stock | 0.2% of 36,310 | 2.7% of 49,810 | 6.2% of 55,771 |
| safest half | <0.1% of 92,256 | 0.5% of 99,617 | 2.1% of 111,538 |
Counts are stock-quarters 2012–2025, scored each year by a model that had not seen that year. The rank is recomputed from each company's latest filing (this one: 2026-05-04); table generated 2026-09-17. Calibrated one-year odds for this stock alone: bankruptcy 0.1%, 80%+ fall 1.0%, 50%+ fall in six months 2.8% — treat these as rougher than the band counts; the model overstates the middle of the range.
What this is not. It is not a trade. We tested shorting these names and buying puts on them at real option prices (2010–2025): every version lost money, because the market already prices the distress and the survivors squeeze. A high rank is a reason to read the filings and to size a position for the chance of a total loss — not a reason to bet against the company. A low rank says the balance sheet and the market are calm; it says nothing about whether the price is sensible.
How does OXSQ stack up against its closest peers?
We take the 8 same-industry companies most similar to OXSQ (similar size) and check what investors are paying for each dollar of their revenue (or profits). If OXSQ is much more expensive on the same yardstick, that's a red flag — unless you have a specific reason it deserves a premium. For a leveraged business, FCF yield (in the table) is usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 8 same-industry peers; implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/Sales | EV/GP | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WHF | WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. | Unknown | $144M | — | — | — | 53.3% |
| TPVG | TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Cor | Unknown | $224M | — | — | — | — |
| SCM | Stellus Capital Investment Corp | Unknown | $260M | — | — | — | — |
| RWAY | Runway Growth Finance Corp. | Unknown | $275M | — | — | — | 51.7% |
| TCPC | BlackRock TCP Capital Corp. | Unknown | $323M | — | — | — | 47.3% |
| SSSS | SURO CAPITAL CORP. | Unknown | $362M | — | — | — | 8.4% |
| SAR | SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP. | Unknown | $366M | — | — | — | — |
| SAT | SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP. | Unknown | $405M | — | — | — | — |
A lender to private mid-market companies — not a bank
A BDC is a publicly-traded fund that lends money to private mid-market companies (typically $10M–$100M loans). They\'re structured like REITs — must distribute 90%+ of taxable income, so they pay big dividends. The right metrics are Price / Net Asset Value (P/NAV), dividend coverage, and the non-accrual rate (% of loans not paying interest). Standard bank metrics don\'t apply because BDCs don\'t take deposits.
- Non-accrual rate — % of loans not paying interest. Above 3% is yellow flag, above 5% is red. In the 10-K\'s "Schedule of Investments".
- Dividend coverage — Net Investment Income (NII) per share vs. distributions per share. Below 100% means they\'re paying out of capital.
- Leverage ratio — debt-to-equity. SEC caps BDCs at 2:1; most run 1.0-1.5×. Higher = more dividend but more risk.
- Originations vs repayments — Is the loan book growing or shrinking?
Quality & solvency checks
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
BDCs are lenders — their balance sheets are loan portfolios funded with leverage, exactly the structure Altman Z misreads as distress. Judge them on Net Asset Value, the leverage ratio (capped at 2:1) and non-accrual rate instead.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
Piotroski F's checks (operating cash flow, gross-margin trend, current ratio, asset turnover) assume an industrial cost structure, so they misread asset-heavy or financial businesses like this one — a healthy REIT, utility, pipeline, BDC/fund or holding company can score low for reasons that aren't weakness. See the sector lens above for the metrics that actually matter.
Plain English: the company holds about $52M in cash and is burning roughly $14M/year in operations. At that pace, the cash lasts 3.8 yrs before it must raise capital (diluting shareholders), take on debt, or cut spending.
Assumes constant burn and ignores financing/asset sales. For pre-profit biotech and growth companies, this matters more than a DCF — a great drug pipeline is worthless if they run out of money before approval.
A standard discounted cash flowDCF — Discounted Cash Flow — sums up all future cash a business will produce, adjusted for the fact that future dollars are worth less than dollars today.
Why it matters: It is the most fundamentally honest valuation method when applicable — but only works for companies with predictable, positive cash flow.
Reference: Best for: mature, profitable businesses. Fails for: pre-profit growth, banks, REITs.
Full explanation → (DCF) valuation is not meaningful for Oxford Square Capital Corp. because its latest operating cash flow is negative, indicating a cash-burning state. Investors are likely focused on the company's ability to generate future income from its investments, rather than current cash flows, which are erratic. To value it, one would need clear visibility into the performance of its debt and equity investments and its ability to distribute income. The number one quantifiable risk is the negative operating cash flow, which suggests the company is not generating sufficient cash from its core operations.
As of 3 months ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What's free cash flow / what do these mean?
Revenue per share — how much the business earns from customers, divided by the number of shares outstanding. Top of the income statement.
Earnings per share — profit left after operating costs, interest, and taxes, per share. Two versions appear on this page and are not interchangeable: GAAP diluted EPS uses the company's weighted-average diluted share count during the reporting period (this is the "earnings" in "price-to-earnings"); net income per current share divides annual net income by today's share count. They differ whenever the share count has changed.
Owner-earnings free cash flow per share — the cash the business produces for shareholders. Savng's owner-earnings FCF subtracts capital expenditures and stock-based compensation from operating cash flow (SBC is a real dilution cost even though it's non-cash). This is deliberately more conservative than "standard" FCF, which subtracts only capital expenditures — so our figure is lower than the headline FCF you'll see elsewhere. FCF funds dividends, buybacks, debt repayment, and acquisitions; a company can report positive earnings yet negative FCF.
Debt per share — total interest-bearing borrowings divided by shares. High debt-per-share next to thin FCF-per-share is a fragility signal.
What you actually need to decide
Every stock price is a disagreement. Here's the single thing that must go right for the bulls, the single thing that breaks the thesis, and the concrete signposts to watch so you can update your view as real results arrive.
- Improvement in net investment income per share
- Positive operating cash flow in subsequent quarters
- Growth in net asset value per share
The trend, in plain numbers (FY2024 → FY2025, latest reported)
Straight from the financial statements — no model, no opinion. For a small or unprofitable company, the direction of these numbers usually tells you more than any single valuation.
- Free cash flow is negative at -$13.7M — the cash burn widened vs last year.
- Swung to a loss of -$18.7M (from a profit the prior year).
Nothing was clearly improving year-over-year.
Management & Leadership
Oxford Square Capital Corp. is led by Jonathan H. Cohen, who serves as its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer. He has been instrumental in guiding the company's investment strategy since its inception. Bruce L. Rubin is the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.
What They Make
Oxford Square Capital Corp. is a business development company (BDC) that invests in debt and equity securities, primarily in the senior secured loans, subordinated debt, and equity of U.S. middle-market companies. Its customers are the companies it provides financing to.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
What we use instead: earnings (P/E, EV/EBIT), book value (P/B) — computed from the figures this company does report, shown in the sections below. Those numbers are unaffected by the missing cash-flow data.
The market is likely pricing OXSQ based on its potential to generate future investment income and capital gains from its portfolio, rather than its current erratic cash flows, which include negative operating cash flow. The market may be assigning value to the company's ability to identify and manage a diversified portfolio of debt and equity investments, which is not fully captured by a backward-looking cash flow model. The company's 'Franchise/durability score 0/5' suggests a lack of clear competitive advantage, making future performance highly dependent on investment selection and market conditions.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
The company funds its investments through a mix of debt and equity, and it distributes a significant portion of its taxable income to shareholders as dividends.
Growth / Revenue DCF
Negative free cash flow: revenue/margin growth model used - standard FCF DCF is unreliable for companies still scaling.
Show advanced inputs
| Revenue Growth | 15.0% |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project its revenue segments independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Moat Signals
Net income has been negative in the latest period, though profitable in 3 out of 5 years.
Geography & Markets
Oxford Square Capital Corp. primarily invests in U.S. middle-market companies. Specific geographic mix percentages are not available from current data sources, but its focus is domestically within the United States.
Geographic Risks
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)80.7OverboughtBought up hard recently — stretched; pullbacks are common from here.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (4 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (4)
- FCF negative: revenue/margin growth model projects future cash flows from revenue trajectory.
- INVARIANT: weighted IV is non-positive. Model may not be appropriate.
- Model implies no positive equity value under these assumptions. Valuation is speculative/low-confidence.
- Illiquidity discount 15% applied (small/micro-cap — harder to exit, demand a margin).
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From Oxford Square Capital Corp.'s SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | — | -18.7M | $0.30 |
| 2024 | — | 5.9M | $0.42 |
| 2023 | — | 17.2M | $0.51 |
| 2022 | — | -85.6M | $0.42 |
| 2021 | — | 39.6M | $0.32 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
Capital expenditure isn't tagged in this filer's machine-readable data (the CapEx column shows "—"). The free-cash-flow column is therefore operating cash flow less stock-based compensation only — an upper bound on true owner earnings, not the real figure. Companies that report capex under a custom label (some large IFRS filers do) look better here than they are.
| Year | Operating CF | CapEx | − SBC & adj. | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | -13.7M | — | — | -13.7M |
| 2024 | 25.7M | — | — | 25.7M |
| 2023 | 65.5M | — | — | 65.5M |
| 2022 | 20.4M | — | — | 20.4M |
| 2021 | -107.4M | — | — | -107.4M |
How we define FCF: operating cash flow − capital expenditure − stock-based compensation (owner-earnings basis — SBC is a real cost to shareholders even though it's non-cash). This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses, though the DCF's starting value is a projected from revenue × terminal margin, not this single year.
Balance Sheet
| Total Assets | 306.7M |
| Total Liabilities | 161.3M |
| Equity | 145.4M |
Similar companies worth a look
Same sector and industry, similar fundamentals shape. Verify everything yourself — this list is computed mechanically and does not reflect our judgment about whether any of these are a good investment.