Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 2, 2026

Oxford Performance Materials, Inc.

Oxford Performance Materials, Inc. looks under-valued against its niche peers and is active on financing cadence.

SourceModeled below same-niche peers while still financing on rhythm — a potential mispricing worth a closer look.

Businessfiled

Oxford Performance Materials, Inc. operates in Other, based in SOUTH WINDSOR.

Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.

No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

Oxford Performance Materials, Inc. has raised $38M in disclosed capital across 5 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series B (a $15M–$40M round).

Largest single filing: $26M on 2016-05-24.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2025-06-16.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Oxford Performance Materials, Inc. at approximately $1.7M (range $888K–$2.6M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Under-valued. Modeled value is 0.02× the median modeled value of Series B Other companies in 2025–2027 (207 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 23 months.

Last raise 13 mo ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Raising on or ahead of the sector's normal rhythm.

The last round was 30.4× smaller than the prior — a bridge or down round.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 91% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 10% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Acorn Sim Investor Holdings, LLC, Aircapture, Inc., Bathhouse Holdings Inc., Chlorum Solutions USA LLC, Olympus Pines LLC.

Peoplefiled

18 named people on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.