Earnings Recap — Q2 FY2026
CY Q3 2026 · Reported August 4, 2026 · Beat 6 of last 7 quarters
The Buildout is a website built on agentic AI tools, currently in beta, and could have factual errors.
PSEG's results underscore the accelerating demand for electricity in PJM, driven by data center load growth, with PJM's capacity auction falling short of reliability targets and peak load hitting a 14-year high. The company's pursuit of bilateral generation contracts and new nuclear development positions it to capture incremental opportunities from the AI infrastructure buildout, while its regulated utility investments support grid reliability and interconnection for new loads.
PSEG reported Q2 2026 net income of $0.67 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings of $0.86 per share, with first-half non-GAAP operating earnings of $2.41 per share. PSE&G's results were driven by ongoing investments in energy efficiency and gas system modernization, while PSEG Power benefited from higher realized market prices, nuclear generation, and gas operations, partially offset by the absence of Zero Emission Certificates. The company successfully restored power to approximately 380,000 customers after severe July 4 storms, and PJM's capacity auction cleared at $325/MW-day, below the reliability requirement. PSEG reaffirmed its full-year guidance and 5-year growth outlook, and announced plans to file a base rate case by year-end 2026.
Management reaffirmed full-year 2026 non-GAAP operating EPS guidance of $4.28–$4.40 and the 6%–8% non-GAAP operating earnings CAGR through 2030. PSE&G plans to file a base rate case by year-end 2026, citing regulatory lag and fewer clause-based investment programs, and expects to file comments on the BPU's EO1 Phase 2 by September 18. PSEG Power is pursuing bilateral opportunities under PJM's Reliability Backstop Procurement, targeting utility-like returns, and continues to engage on new nuclear development in New Jersey under the Power New Jersey Act. Management highlighted potential upside from nuclear contracting, competitive transmission, and incremental distribution investments to connect solar and battery storage. The tone was confident, with regulatory clarity improving at both PJM and the New Jersey BPU.
“When you consider that we have added a significant amount of distribution rate base at a time when there have been fewer infrastructure investment programs, the alternative is more frequent base rate cases.”
on Base rate case timing
“We're looking for utility-like returns. So I think in saying that utility-like investments, we're saying utility-like returns because we're looking for utility-like risk.”
on RBP investment criteria
“I think there's plenty of levelized cost of energy reports out there that give policymakers a clear line of sight into what the costs are going to be.”
on New nuclear cost transparency
How much of the decision to file a base rate case is on the back of the BPU report versus other factors, and what parts of the report might make it into this filing?
Ralph LaRossa said the timing aligns with the state's goals for transparency and performance-based ratemaking, and that a base rate case is needed to set up for multiyear rate plans. He noted most other New Jersey utilities have already filed or settled, so this keeps PSE&G from being an outlier.
On the BPU review, any sense of when it will wrap up, and on the rate case, any sense of size or potential decrease?
Ralph LaRossa said Phase 2 is the next step, with the BPU setting its own timeline. He declined to provide details on the rate case size, only signaling the filing by year-end to align with EO1.
In bilateral discussions, is interest in existing assets, new assets, or both? And how do you think new nuclear fits in?
Daniel Cregg said interest is in both but with a preference for new generation to pair with new load. Ralph LaRossa noted new nuclear is a long-term solution (12-year projects) and that short-term solutions are also needed.