MOS

A month has gone by since the last earnings report for CF Industries (CF). Shares have added about 18.1% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500. Will the recent positive trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is CF due for a pullback? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at the latest earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important drivers. CF Industries reported second-quarter 2026 earnings of $4.73 per share, up 99.6% from $2.37 in the year-ago quarter. The figure missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $5.65 by 16.3%. Net sales increased 17.6% year over year to $2.22 billion but missed the consensus estimate of $2.43 billion by 8.7%. Higher average selling prices across all segments supported growth, while total sales volume declined 15.3% to 4.25 million tons. Ammonia segment net sales rose 19.3% year over year to $586 million. Adjusted gross margin increased to $288 million from $188 million. An increase in the average selling price more than offset a decline in sales volume. Higher prices supported profitability, while lower supply availability and maintenance costs remained headwinds. Granular Urea segment net sales climbed 38.8% to $759 million. Adjusted gross margin advanced to $551 million from $351 million. Sales volume and the average selling price rose. Greater product availability and a production mix favoring granular urea supported volumes, while stronger pricing lifted margins despite higher natural gas costs. UAN segment net sales edged up 0.5% to $613 million. Adjusted gross margin rose to $403 million from $342 million. A rise in the average selling price offset a reduction in sales volume. Lower global demand and a production mix favoring granular urea pressured volumes, while higher freight, distribution and natural gas costs partly offset the pricing benefit. AN segment’s net sales decreased 39.3% to $71 million. The segment recorded an adjusted gross loss of $1 million compared with an adjusted gross margin of $35 million a year earlier. Sales volume plunged because of lost production at the Yazoo City Complex, outweighing an increase in the average selling price. Higher purchased ammonia costs and outage-related expenses also pressured results. As of June 30, 2026, CF Industries had cash and cash equivalents of $2.48 billion. Long-term debt was $3.22 billion. Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $878 million in the second quarter. CF Industries repurchased 2 million shares for $230 million during the quarter. The company bought back 2.2 million shares for $245 million in the first half, leaving roughly $1.48 billion under its current authorization. CF Industries expects full-year 2026 gross ammonia production of approximately 9.5 million tons, including the effect of the ongoing Yazoo City outage. Management expects ammonia, AN solution, nitric acid, UAN solution and urea liquor production at the complex to resume during the first half of 2027. The company projects 2026 capital expenditures of about $1.3 billion on a consolidated basis. Management expects nitrogen supply to remain constrained and demand to remain constructive through the end of 2026 and into 2027. Lower nitrogen prices entering the second half of 2026 are expected to support demand in India, Southeast Asia, Brazil and other import markets. North American nitrogen demand for the 2027 growing season is also expected to remain firm. In the past month, investors have witnessed a downward trend in estimates revision. The consensus estimate has shifted -20% due to these changes. At this time, CF has a strong Growth Score of A, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with an F. However, the stock was allocated a grade of A on the value side, putting it in the top 20% for this investment strategy. Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of A. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in. Estimates have been broadly trending downward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions indicates a downward shift. Interestingly, CF has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). We expect an in-line return from the stock in the next few months. CF belongs to the Zacks Fertilizers industry. Another stock from the same industry, Mosaic (MOS), has gained 8.7% over the past month. More than a month has passed since the company reported results for the quarter ended June 2026. Mosaic reported revenues of $2.82 billion in the last reported quarter, representing a year-over-year change of -6%. EPS of $0.13 for the same period compares with $0.51 a year ago. Mosaic is expected to post earnings of $0.09 per share for the current quarter, representing a year-over-year change of -91.4%. Over the last 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate has changed -64.2%. The overall direction and magnitude of estimate revisions translate into a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell) for Mosaic. Also, the stock has a VGM Score of D. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF) : Free Stock Analysis Report The Mosaic Company (MOS) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

It has been about a month since the last earnings report for Mosaic (MOS). Shares have added about 10.1% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500. Will the recent positive trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Mosaic due for a pullback? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at the latest earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important catalysts. Mosaic posted second-quarter 2026 net loss of $273 million or 86 cents per share, down sharply from a profit of $411 million or $1.29 per share in the year-ago quarter. Barring one-time items, adjusted earnings were 13 cents per share, down 74.5% from adjusted earnings of 51 cents a year ago. The figure beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 9 cents. Net sales declined 6% year over year to $2,824.1 million from $3,005.7 million in the prior-year quarter. Revenues missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $3,046.4 million. Lower sales volumes and elevated raw material costs, particularly sulfur, more than offset the benefit of higher phosphate and potash prices. Mosaic’s Phosphate segment generated net sales of $1.25 billion, up from $1.17 billion a year ago. Sales volumes declined to 1.4 million tons from 1.5 million tons due to production curtailments. Net sales missed our estimate of $1.27 billion. Gross margin deteriorated to negative $4 per ton from $67 per ton a year ago as higher sulfur and ammonia costs offset stronger DAP pricing. The average DAP selling price increased to $773 per ton from $668 per ton. The Potash segment delivered net sales of $650 million, down from $711 million a year ago. Sales volumes fell to 2 million tons from 2.3 million tons because of turnaround activities and the Carlsbad divestiture. However, net sales beat our estimate of $603.8 million. Gross margin improved to $103 per ton from $89 per ton, supported by higher realized prices. The average MOP selling price rose to $275 per ton from $261 per ton. Mosaic Fertilizantes reported net sales of $1.03 billion, down from $1.18 billion in the year-ago quarter. Sales volumes declined to 1.5 million tons from 2.2 million tons, reflecting curtailed domestic production and softer demand. Revenue missed our estimate of $1.21 billion. Gross margin fell to $4 per ton from $73 per ton, while the average finished product selling price increased to $585 per ton from $474 per ton. Higher sulfur costs and lower production volumes weighed on profitability. Mosaic ended the quarter with cash and cash equivalents of $294 million compared with $276.6 million at the end of 2025. Long-term debt (net of current maturities) increased to $4,767.7 million from $4,250.9 million at year-end 2025. Cash flow from operating activities totaled $167.4 million in the second quarter, down from $609.5 million a year ago. Capital expenditures were $320.3 million, resulting in negative free cash flow of $152.9 million. Mosaic paid a regular dividend of 22 cents per share during the quarter. Mosaic reduced its 2026 capital expenditure guidance to $1.2 billion from the prior expectation of $1.25 billion while maintaining its potash production outlook of about 9 million tons. For the third quarter, phosphate sales volumes are expected to be 1.1-1.4 million tons with DAP prices of $820-$840 per ton, while potash sales volumes are projected at 2-2.2 million tons with MOP prices of $270-$290 per ton. The company now expects SG&A expenses of $510-$530 million, net interest expense of $220-$240 million and cash taxes of $250-$300 million for 2026. In the past month, investors have witnessed a downward trend in estimates revision. The consensus estimate has shifted -64.19% due to these changes. At this time, Mosaic has a poor Growth Score of F, a score with the same score on the momentum front. However, the stock has a score of C on the value side, putting it in the middle 20% for value investors. Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of D. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in. Estimates have been broadly trending downward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions indicates a downward shift. It's no surprise Mosaic has a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell). We expect a below average return from the stock in the next few months. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The Mosaic Company (MOS) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

Download the Complete Report Here Key Takeaways: Completion of project-wide FEED awards moves Autazes further from permitting-led de-risking toward lender-facing engineering and construction readiness. During 2Q26, GRO awarded the mine shafts and underground development FEED to WSP UK, with Redpath Deilmann supporting the shaft scope, complementing the surface facilities and infrastructure FEED already being executed by Wood and Promon Engenharia. Engineering design coverage now spans both the surface and underground components of the ~$2.5 billion Autazes Project, strengthening the technical foundation for DFI and ECA construction-debt discussions. The two mine shafts sit on the project’s critical path, making their design and execution central to subsequent underground development, processing, tailings, and logistics. Redpath’s experience across more than 500 shafts globally, including major potash projects such as Jansen, Rocanville, K3, Woodsmith, and Nezhinsky, adds further credibility to the lender diligence package. The Gera Center power MOU provides initial evidence that GRO’s BOOT strategy could reduce upfront project capital requirements and, in turn, the equity burden associated with Autazes. In May, GRO signed a non-binding MOU with Gera Center for a 28-year Build, Own, Operate and Transfer arrangement covering a modular diesel generation system that would provide construction power before transitioning into emergency backup power during the mine’s 23-year operating life. The proposed 20 MW plant would initially deploy 10 MW and ramp to 20 MW during the first construction year, with first power available within 120 days after definitive contract execution and 98% minimum availability during the backup phase. More importantly from a financing perspective, if finalized, the structure is expected to shift approximately $33 million of upfront power-generation capex into operating costs over the contract term while generating approximately $10 million of net savings versus the Pre-Feasibility Study budget. New Profert legislation introduces another potential lever to lower Autazes’ construction funding requirement and expand access to domestic financing. Brazil’s Senate approved Profert on August 11, 2026, creating a new incentive framework for domestic fertilizer production that now awaits presidential signature into law. Management estimates that Profert, when combined with existing SUFRAMA incentives, could exempt up to ~$190 million of federal taxes on Autazes’ ~$2.5 billion initial capex, reducing required construction capital by approximately 7%. The legislation also authorizes BNDES to invest in the construction of new domestic fertilizer production capacity and introduces a domestic-content requirement for fertilizer sold in Brazil, beginning at 2% in 2027 and rising to 10% by 2037, with potential to increase to 30% depending on supply availability. Importantly, the benefits are not yet assured, as GRO’s eligibility will depend on a competitive selection process and implementing regulations from MAPA that have not yet been published. Separately, Profert provides for a production tax credit of up to 20% of eligible investment, subject to a R$2 billion annual program cap from 2027 through 2031, which management notes is distinct from the ~$190 million capex tax analysis. Infrastructure carve-outs could become a meaningful component of the broader construction funding stack if additional proposals convert into definitive agreements. GRO continues to frame Autazes around approximately $2.5 billion of total capex, with ~$1.8 billion expected from DFIs and ECAs and up to ~$350 million of potential third-party infrastructure funding across the powerline, port, steam plant, construction/backup power, and trucking system. The project also has potential access to approximately $150 million from Franco-Nevada’s binding royalty option, subject to the applicable funding condition. On a purely illustrative basis, if all three funding sources were fully realized, they would represent roughly $2.3 billion of the $2.5 billion requirement, leaving approximately $200 million to be addressed through strategic project equity or other capital. The $350 million remains prospective and the Gera agreement remains non-binding, but the $33 million identified in the proposed Gera construction-power BOOT begins to demonstrate how the BOOT strategy could reduce the amount of equity capital ultimately required at the project level. Recent judicial developments have further reduced perceived legal risk around Autazes, with both the PGR’s position and separate favorable TRF-1 rulings supporting the project’s legal and permitting position. In July, the DPU filed an application with the Federal Supreme Court seeking to suspend installation activities, but the matter did not constitute a new lawsuit or introduce new allegations and instead challenged prior TRF-1 decisions favorable to GRO and the Mura Indigenous Council. The underlying consultation process spanned more than six years, covered over 35 Mura villages and concluded with approximately 90% support among participating communities. On July 9, the PGR, Brazil’s highest prosecutorial authority before the STF, recommended that the application not be heard on the merits, citing lack of standing and an inappropriate procedural mechanism. Separately, on August 11, TRF-1 found other special and extraordinary appeals inadmissible for referral to the Superior Court of Justice and Federal Supreme Court, thereby preserving prior rulings supporting the Mura consultation process, IPAAM’s licensing authority and the validity of Autazes’ environmental licenses. Together with the project’s 21 Installation Licenses covering the mine, processing plant and port, the cumulative judicial record further supports the project’s legal and permitting position, while residual procedural risk remains given that additional appeals may still be available. Development-stage operating expenses fell materially y/y, while reported 2Q26 net income was driven by a non-cash warrant revaluation rather than an operating earnings inflection. GRO remains pre-revenue, but operating loss declined 77% y/y to $3.35 million from $14.54 million. The largest driver was share-based compensation, which fell 93% to $0.79 million from $11.63 million as prior-period share-based compensation expense normalized sharply; professional fees also declined to $0.17 million from $0.47 million, while consulting and management fees were broadly stable at $1.44 million. Reported net income of $7.60 million versus a $14.83 million loss in 2Q25 primarily reflected a $10.67 million gain from the change in fair value of warrant liabilities. We therefore view operating loss as the better measure of underlying corporate expense intensity. The May financing materially strengthened GRO’s ability to fund FEED and development activity while larger project-level financing is pursued. Cash increased to $75.7 million at June 30 from $27.8 million at December 31, 2025, while working capital rose to $74.6 million from $26.6 million. The increase primarily reflects the May 4 public offering, which generated $63.23 million of gross proceeds through 7.0 million common shares at $2.50 per share and 18.3 million pre-funded warrants at $2.499, with approximately $4.27 million of issuance costs. Common shares outstanding increased 15% from 53.69 million at year-end to 61.95 million at June 30, reflecting the public offering as well as RSU and DSU exercises and other share issuances during the period, while the 18.3 million new pre-funded warrants create additional economic dilution given their $0.001 exercise price. The financing nevertheless gives GRO substantially greater negotiating flexibility as it works through FEED, BOOT agreements, and project-level debt/equity discussions. Current liquidity materially extends GRO’s runway for corporate and engineering activities, but it should not be confused with construction funding capacity. GRO used $5.12 million of cash in operating activities during 1H26 and invested $6.13 million into exploration and evaluation assets, implying combined operating and project cash deployment of roughly $11.25 million before financing flows. Annualizing that 1H pace would imply approximately $22.5 million of cash deployment, against $75.7 million of quarter-end cash; however, that run-rate is unlikely to remain static as the $4.3 million underground FEED Early Works program progresses alongside surface FEED and other pre-construction activities. Accordingly, the balance sheet materially reduces near-term corporate financing risk, but the financial statements continue to note that GRO’s ability to continue development remains dependent on securing additional financing, and the principal investment question remains GRO’s ability to assemble the approximately $2.5 billion project funding package required to reach full production. Autazes’ long-term financial profile remains intact. Based on ERCOSPLAN technical report assumptions, management illustrates potential run-rate EBITDA of ~$1.0 billion at commercial scale, supported by an estimated realized price of ~$493/ton FOB Port and operating costs of ~$79/ton at full run-rate. This implies mine-gate gross margins above 80% and an EBITDA margin approaching ~75% after transportation and G&A, reflecting the project’s structural delivered-cost advantage in Brazil’s import-dependent potash market. We continue to view GRO as pre-revenue through 2026 and 2027, with near-term value creation driven by milestone completion rather than quarterly earnings progression. Commercial production could begin approximately four years after construction commencement, while current project materials continue to show 2.4 million tons of annual nameplate production and approximately $1.0 billion of estimated run-rate EBITDA once steady-state operations are reached. Over the next several quarters, the more relevant indicators are therefore advancement of the 12-month, $4.3 million underground Early Works program; progression of the Wood/Promon surface FEED; conversion of the Gera Center and other BOOT proposals into definitive agreements; and progress toward the approximately $1.8 billion of targeted DFI/ECA debt and strategic project-level equity required to begin full-scale construction. Disclaimer: Exec Edge does not publish proprietary estimates, ratings, price targets, or investment recommendations. The valuation discussion below is illustrative only and is based on company filings, management commentary, and third-party data and estimates. It does not constitute a recommendation, price target, rating, or prediction of future pricing. GRO’s current valuation continues to reflect substantial financing and execution risk despite meaningful project de-risking and a materially stronger liquidity position. At $2.15 per share, GRO carries a basic market capitalization of approximately $133.2 million and enterprise value of $57.5 million, reflecting $75.7 million of cash and no debt as of June 30, 2026. Cash therefore represents roughly 57% of basic market capitalization, while the stock remains approximately 26% below the $2.92 price used in our May update despite subsequent progress across underground FEED, infrastructure funding optimization, liquidity, and the project’s legal position. GRO also has 84.8 million basic shares plus pre-funded warrants and approximately 106.8 million fully diluted shares, highlighting that dilution remains an important consideration as the company assembles the larger construction funding package. We expect valuation to evolve with project milestones, with the largest rerating potential tied to financing de-risking and progression into full-scale construction. GRO is targeting approximately $1.8 billion of DFI/ECA debt against the ~$2.5 billion Autazes funding requirement, supplemented by potential third-party infrastructure funding of up to ~$350 million, the Franco-Nevada royalty option, and strategic project-level equity. As these funding sources move from indicative discussions toward binding commitments, we would expect the market to assign greater value to Autazes’ prospective operating economics and reduce the discount currently applied for financing, dilution and execution risk. Key catalysts include completion and lender acceptance of the Wood/Promon and WSP/Redpath FEED programs, binding DFI/ECA commitments, additional BOOT infrastructure agreements, strategic equity participation and ultimately the start of full-scale construction. With 91% of nameplate capacity already covered by long-term offtake agreements, full-project FEED coverage established, and the legal/permitting backdrop improving, valuation remains highly sensitive to further milestone delivery, while the scale of the remaining construction requirement keeps funding execution and dilution as the principal risks to the rerating path. Read Exec Edge’s Initiation on Brazil Potash Corp. Here Subscribe to our Weekly Newsletter to Receive All Research Contact: Executives-Edge.com [email protected] The post Brazil Potash Reports Full-Project FEED Coverage, Liquidity & Policy Support for Autazes – Quarterly Update Report appeared first on ExecEdge.

TAMPA, Fla., Aug. 17, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- The Mosaic Company (NYSE: MOS) ("Mosaic") today announced the expiration and final results of its previously announced cash tender offers (collectively, the "Offers") to purchase the outstanding 4.050% Senior Notes due 2027 (the "2027 Notes"), 7.30% Debentures due 2028 (the "2028 Debentures"), 5.375% Senior Notes due 2028 (the "2028 Notes") and 4.350% Senior Notes due 2029 (the "2029 Notes") and together with the 2027 Notes, 2028 Debentures and 2028 Notes, the "Notes," and each a "Series of Notes"), in each case upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Offer to Purchase dated August 10, 2026 (the "Offer to Purchase") and any related documents (collectively with the Offer to Purchase, the "Tender Offer Documents"). Capitalized terms used but not defined in this press release have the meanings given to them in the Offer to Purchase. The Offers expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on August 14, 2026 (such time and date, the "Expiration Date"). Withdrawal rights for the Offers expired at the Expiration Date, and accordingly, Notes validly tendered in the Offers may no longer be withdrawn except where additional withdrawal rights are required by law. At the Expiration Date, according to information provided by Global Bondholder Services Corporation, the tender and information agent for the Offers (the "Tender and Information Agent"), the aggregate principal amount of each Series of Notes validly tendered and not validly withdrawn pursuant to the Offers and the aggregate principal amount of each series of Notes accepted for purchase, are set forth in the table below. All conditions to the Offers were satisfied or waived on or prior to the Expiration Date. On the "Settlement Date" of August 18, 2026, Holders whose Notes have been accepted for purchase will also receive an Accrued Coupon Payment. The Notes validly tendered but not accepted for purchase will be returned promptly to the tendering Holders in accordance with the Offer to Purchase. Based upon information received from the Tender and Information Agent, Mosaic will accept all tendered 2027 Notes, 2028 Debentures and 2028 Notes in full. Mosaic has exercised its right to increase the amount of 2029 Notes accepted for purchase by 2% of the outstanding aggregate principal amount of such Series of Notes and as a result, will accept for purchase the tendered 2029 Notes at a proration factor of approximately 37.78%. Citigroup Global Markets Inc., BMO Capital Markets Corp. and U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. served as dealer managers (the "Dealer Managers") for the Offers. Global Bondholder Services Corporation served as the Tender and Information Agent for the Offers. For additional information, please contact: Citigroup Global Markets Inc. at +1 (800) 558-3745 (toll-free) or +1 (212) 723-6106 (collect), BMO Capital Markets Corp. at +1 (833) 418-0762 (toll-free) or +1 (212) 702-1840 (collect), or U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. at +1 (800) 479-3441 (toll-free), +1 (917) 558-2756 (collect) or by email at [email protected]. Requests for documents and questions regarding the tendering of Notes may be directed to Global Bondholder Services Corporation by telephone at (212) 430-3774 (for banks and brokers only) and (855) 654-2015 (for all others toll-free) or to the Dealer Managers at their respective telephone numbers. Copies of the Offer to Purchase are available at: https://www.gbsc-usa.com/mosaic/. You may also contact your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee for assistance concerning the Offers. This press release is neither an offer to purchase nor a solicitation of an offer to sell the Notes or any other securities. The Offers were made only by and pursuant to the terms of the Offer to Purchase and only to such persons and in such jurisdictions as is permitted under applicable law. The information in this press release is qualified by reference to the Offer to Purchase. Forward-Looking Statements This release includes forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on the views and assumptions of management as of the date of this release. They are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties. These risks include, but are not limited to: market conditions, regulatory and environmental requirements, operational risks, commodity price volatility, labor matters, completion and timing of potential transactions, accounting determinations and other risks and uncertainties described in Mosaic's reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Actual results may differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Mosaic assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements. About The Mosaic Company The Mosaic Company (NYSE: MOS) helps the world grow the food it needs. Headquartered in Tampa, Florida, Mosaic is a leading producer and marketer of potash and phosphate fertilizer which are essential inputs for the world's farmers. Through the Mosaic Biosciences platform, the company is advancing the next generation of biological solutions designed to improve nutrient use efficiency, strengthen crop performance, and support more sustainable agricultural systems. As a Fortune 500 company with 13,000 employees serving customers in more than 40 countries, Mosaic is helping build resilient and productive food systems for the future. View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mosaic-announces-final-results-of-offers-to-purchase-for-cash-certain-of-its-outstanding-debt-securities-302852724.html

Image source: The Motley Fool. Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2026 at 11 a.m. ET Investor Relations - Paul Massoud President and Chief Executive Officer - Bruce Bodine Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer - Luciano Siani Pires Executive Vice President, Commercial - Jenny Wang Operator: Good morning, and welcome to The Mosaic Company's Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] And now I'll turn it over to Mr. Paul Massoud. Please go ahead. Paul Massoud: Thank you, and welcome to our second quarter 2026 earnings call. Opening comments will be provided by Bruce Bodine, President and Chief Executive Officer; Luciano Siani Pires, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer will review financial results. We will then welcome Jenny Wang, Executive Vice President, Commercial, to join Bruce and Luciano as we open the floor for questions. We will be making forward-looking statements during this conference call. Statements include, but are not limited to, statements about future financial and operating results. They are based on management's beliefs and expectations as of today's date and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from projected results. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements are included in our press release published this morning and in our reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Please note, in today's presentation and in our press release and performance data, we will refer to and provide various financial measures, including adjusted EBITDA, adjusted earnings per share, free cash flow, cost per tonne and adjusted effective tax rate, either on a total company or segment basis. Unless we specifically state otherwise, statements regarding these measures refer to our adjusted non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations of these measures to our most directly comparable GAAP financial measures can be found in our earnings release. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Bruce. Bruce Bodine: Good morning. Thank you for joining our call. Our message for you today is simple. Mosaic is working through a difficult market by successfully managing what is under our control and positioning ourselves for an eventual recovery. Sulfur affordability and availability remain key drivers, but we know the situation will improve. We've curtailed production, and we're relying on our strong balance sheet as a bridge to a more sustainable environment. Here are some key examples from the quarter. We further curtailed phosphate production and minimized our purchases of high-cost raw materials. We've locked in a significant portion of our third quarter sulfur supply at reasonable prices that, while historically elevated, are still well below the current spot market. Across our business, we're aggressively managing our costs, which you can see in SG&A. These are real savings that we expect to be permanent. We fortified our liquidity by terming out short-term debt. If this environment persists, we have full access to our untapped $2.5 billion revolver. And we've addressed all of these near-term issues without sacrificing our long-term goals. We're reallocating underperforming capital away from non-core assets to support future opportunities. We continue to explore strategic opportunities for certain assets, including Araxa and Patrocinio while investing in new areas like our fast-growing and resilient Mosaic Biosciences business. Before I get into our business performance, let's address the sulfur situation in our markets. The ongoing Strait of Hormuz closure and the more recent Kazakhstan blockade continue to impact the global flow of sulfur and spot prices remain unsustainably high. We have curtailed production in the U.S. and Brazil simply because phosphate industry economics cannot accommodate current sulfur prices. That said, Mosaic is in a better position to weather the storm than most of our competitors are. Our long-standing relationships with Gulf Coast refiners and other global suppliers give us reliable access to sulfur. In fact, we were recently able to negotiate third quarter U.S. sulfur supply at a price that is considerably below the spot market. We are producing to meet as much demand as possible while trying to preserve margins and avoid high-cost inventory building. The sulfur situation is more than just an inconvenience for our industry. We believe global phosphate production will fall well short of last year by up to 30 million tonnes. With last year's low application rates, especially in the U.S. and limited fertilizer availability this year, crop yields will suffer, which could lead to food security challenges around the world in the near term. We are already seeing evidence of challenges. In Brazil, for example, despite significant acreage expansion, total crop production forecasts for the year have not kept up, suggesting significant yield impacts. Another season of under application will only exacerbate the problem. Only recently have crop prices begun to acknowledge the reality of production challenges around the world. In the past month, major ag commodity prices have moved up, providing some relief from high input costs for the world's farmers. The outlook for farm incomes is improving, which should be a catalyst for fertilizer demand. We're seeing early signs of this in Brazil. While shipments remain below historical levels as a result of ongoing credit issues, over the past several weeks, fertilizer shipments to Brazil have been very strong as growers respond to improved crop pricing. We expect phosphate prices to remain at current levels with sulfur-driven supply challenges as well as severely reduced Chinese exports, availability is likely to remain limited in many parts of the world. As we expected, the temporary suspension of the U.S. countervailing duties on phosphate imports from Morocco has not yet had an impact on NOLA prices. Phosphate prices remain higher in other key regions of the world and producers can realize higher netbacks selling in markets outside the U.S. So there is little incentive for producers to send fertilizer to the U.S. In addition, as part of the ongoing sunset review, the U.S. Department of Commerce has determined that the illegal subsidies that led to the duties in the first place remain in place in both Russia and Morocco. And the U.S. Court of International Trade recently reaffirmed the International Trade Commission's determination that the subsidies cause injury in the U.S. market. We are confident that the duties should continue once the suspension ends. While phosphate and sulfur markets are quite volatile, the potash supply and demand picture is much more balanced with product moving freely around the world and global supply meeting strong demand in all major potash-consuming regions. In fact, our summer fill program was fully subscribed. Strong palm oil economics and inventory replenishment in China bode well for ongoing good potash demand. Overall, we expect the potash market to remain constructive through this year. And longer term, we continue to believe that announced potash capacity expansions will be absorbed by steadily growing demand. Let's move on to our business, which is performing well, all things considered. Our global market access remains an important advantage. During the second quarter, we produced and sold 1.4 million tonnes of phosphate despite all the turmoil in the market. We were able to achieve these numbers because we have strong customer relationships across key agricultural markets, and we optimize our product mix to meet shifting demand. In addition, our ability to flex production and manage through the cycle is supported by the extensive work we completed over the past 18 months to fortify our assets. We're prepared to ramp back up to full production rates when market and raw material conditions improve. Potash remains a steady earnings and cash flow contributor and our recent investments, including the HydroFloat project at Esterhazy will provide meaningful benefits. In Brazil, where we have curtailed all phosphate production, except for high-margin products due to sulfur availability, our business continues to perform well. Given the overall market conditions, our $60 million of EBITDA for the quarter highlights the resilience of our Fertilizantes franchise. Capital allocation remains an important pillar of our strategy, and we continue to make good progress. We closed the Carlsbad sale. We're optimizing our Brazil portfolio with the advancing process to divest our Araxa complex, and we're allocating capital in pursuit of promising growth opportunities. The Rainbow Rare Earth Elements project in Brazil continues to show good potential, and our Mosaic Biosciences business is on track to double its revenues once again this year. I want to note that Biosciences growth is strong despite current farm economics, a clear indicator that growers are finding real value in our proven products. To summarize, we are attacking a difficult market situation by doing all we can to keep the company strong and preserve our ability to benefit from improving markets. Now over to Luciano for more detail on our financials. Luciano Pires: Thank you, Bruce. If there is one takeaway for investors regarding our financials, it's that we are effectively managing factors under our control as we wait for a more sustainable market environment. In Phosphates and Fertilizantes, our operating costs were impacted by reduced absorption due to curtailed volumes. We're now doing 2 things simultaneously. First, we're aggressively removing fixed costs where we can, especially in Brazil to better cope with the temporary curtailments and to enable us to come back leaner when we restart. Second, we're maintaining our focus on asset health so that we can return to full production rates when the time is right. In the near term, however, ongoing curtailments are expected to result in limited fixed cost absorption and elevated idle expenses in Phosphates and in Fertilizantes in the third quarter, but this is temporary and does not represent what this business is capable of in normal operating conditions. In our U.S. Phosphate business, we've shown an ability to manage our input costs. In quarter 2, our raw materials costs averaged $522 per long ton for sulfur and $621 per tonne for ammonia, resulting in an average realized stripping margin of $422 per tonne. For quarter 3, as Bruce discussed, we settled a sulfur contract at $705 per ton. While much of this new contract price will be reflected in fourth quarter sales, we do expect some impact later in the third quarter. Given the dynamic nature of the market, we have chosen to once again provide some guidance for near-term raw materials costs. Therefore, for the third quarter, we expect realized sulfur costs of approximately $700 to $710 per ton and ammonia costs of approximately $610 to $620 per tonne. Combining this with our DAP FOB pricing guidance of $820 to $840 per tonne yields an implied realized stripping margin well above historical averages, which is a good result. In Potash, we successfully completed Esterhazy's annual turnaround during the second quarter. Looking ahead, the segment should see lower unit costs, especially with the additional volumes from Esterhazy's HydroFloat project. Second quarter MOP costs of $84 per tonne reflected a production mix that was more heavily weighted towards Colonsay volumes, but we expect to revert lower in the second half of the year. To offset some of the second quarter's curtailment impacts, we've become more aggressive in our review of corporate spending. You can see in our results that we've brought SG&A costs down by 20% year-over-year despite persistent inflation. Increased spending discipline, reduced support labor costs, lower bad debt expenses and benefits from recent divestitures are driving these savings. In the second half of the year, we expect SG&A to decline further as more of these savings are realized. From a cash flow perspective, we're starting to see the results of our actions. Mosaic's cash flow from operations improved through the first half of the year, and it is expected to rise further in the third quarter as working capital is released, mostly in Brazil and as additional cost reductions are realized. These are expected to more than offset any impact from higher raw materials costs. Combined with our lower CapEx expectation for the year of $1.2 billion, down from $1.25 billion, we expect sequential improvements in free cash flow in the third and in the fourth quarters. Our strong balance sheet continues to provide us with the flexibility to manage through this environment. In the second quarter, we put in place a $1 billion term loan to replace and extend very short-term commercial paper maturities. We refinanced $500 million of our commercial paper in June and the rest was done in July. We have a very comfortable short-term liquidity position. We have not tapped our revolver at all, and we will continue to evaluate opportunities to optimize our balance sheet. On the capital reallocation front, we continue to evaluate opportunities to optimize our portfolio and reallocate capital. We're advancing the process around Araxa, and we are progressing several opportunities involving our landholdings. To close, we've taken decisive actions and executed well as we work through the sulfur situation. The steps we have taken, first, across our operations; second, in our cost structure; third, in our capital spending; and fourth, in our balance sheet have all positioned us well for an ultimate recovery as market conditions normalize. And with that, I'll turn the call back to the operator for Q&A. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And the first question for today will come from Duffy Fischer with Goldman Sachs. Patrick Fischer: Question is just really around consumption in the Americas. So we know that last fall, we didn't put down -- and I saw on phosphate that we shorted the market on phosphate. Speculation is we did the same thing in the first half. So for this crop year, what's your best estimate for how much below normal phosphate application was for North America? And then a similar question, although it's looking forward, what do you think will be the application of phosphate in Latin America relative to normal? Bruce Bodine: Duffy, thanks for the question. You're right. We did see, as you said, application in North America down on phosphate last year. We're seeing the same thing this year. I'll turn it over to Jenny to give more details, but we also expect declines in Brazil and Latin America as well, mostly driven by Brazil. So let me turn it over to Jenny to give you details. Jenny Wang: Sure. So as you said, Duffy, last year, we believe North America phosphate application was down close to 15% versus the normal year. And this year, we are forecasting this application rate to further cut by around 20%. So if you compare with the normal typical phosphate application in North America, we're talking about over 30% phosphate down this year in '27. This is a combination of farm economic challenges, affordability issues but also it's an availability issue. So over to Latin America, especially in Brazil, last year, phosphate application didn't really go down. So that was normal last year. We actually saw some growth in Brazil last year. However, this year, we are forecasting similar percentage of the phosphate application down in Brazil by 30% at nutrient level. And this is likely going to be applied in the rest of the Latin America market. In fact, this under application of phosphate are going to have profound impact to the yield -- specifically for North America and Brazil, by looking at what has been applied to the field and also what has been the yield over the last 2 years, we are seeing additional phosphate removal from the field in Brazil could be up to 1.3 million tonnes of DAP equivalent, for that number in North America, in the U.S., that's 1.4 million tonnes additional removal of the nutrient. So as you can imagine, with this additional removal of phosphorus from the soil, that will have impact to the yield. And specifically, we have started to see yield impact in some of the major states in Brazil for the last crops. We see despite increased harvest areas, but the yield actually came down. That was evident in terms of the yield impact from this under application of phosphorus. U.S. market, we may see the impact this year, which can be even more evident with the weather event. Operator: Your next question will come from Joel Jackson with BMO. Joel Jackson: I'm trying to understand a bit about some of your guidance around phosphate in Q3. It's the ammonia cost you gave of $610 to $620 a tonne. It seems surprising considering I imagine that these run rates you're running at really just tonnes, cost and cost plus. I just want to ask about what's going on there? And second part of the question would be, does this sort of imply that phosphate earnings are lower in Q3 by a little bit, a lot. So can you just give us color about Q3 phosphate earnings, all the things you're talking about and what that implies like relatively versus Q2 earnings? Bruce Bodine: Yes, Joel, thanks for the question. We did -- as Luciano pointed out, ammonia will go up a little bit. Part of that is due to the flow-through of inventory of the contracts that were settled in June and July. So June, July, August came down, we'll see that actually flow through COGS in quarter 4 on the ammonia side. But to your point, a mix just because of lower production is going to be more heavily weighted towards those contract negotiations and our own internal production. So we're going to see a peak of that in Q3, which does kind of hurt stripping margins a little bit as well as the ammonia that Luciano talked about. But I would use those as factors as you're looking towards guidance. The other factors to think about are cost absorption for the additional production down in North America. Quarter 2 didn't represent all of those curtailments. Quarter 3, given that those curtailments are likely to be sustained barring some unforeseen circumstance in the market, we'll have to absorb more of that. So that will affect some of our conversion costs on the margin as well. So expect stripping margins to be down, but still the good news is well above kind of historic levels. So we're feeling good about where they are, even though there are some headwinds, we should start to see some tailwinds on pricing. As Jenny alluded to on yield impacts, we're starting to see crop -- ag commodity prices respond in a favorable level, which should raise the affordability piece on the farm side, which really is another constraint that may not be seen because of supply constraint. But that demand constraint definitely is out there if supply were to come back. Luciano, I don't know if you want to add anything? Luciano Pires: And again, because we're guiding for sales between 1.1 million tonnes to 1.4 million tonnes compared to this quarter, 1.4 million tonnes, again, depending on how the market goes, there could be a little bit of downside in volumes as well. Operator: The next question will come from Vincent Andrews with Morgan Stanley. Vincent Andrews: My recollection is that you were previously expecting about a $400 million outflow of working capital through the course of the year. Is that still a good number to work with? Or do you think it will be more or less based on what you know today? Bruce Bodine: Yes, Vincent, I think we've said $300 million to $500 million so $400 million is, yes, the midpoint of that kind of range. We do still expect that type of liberation. We saw some of that in Phosphate in the first half, but the bigger one that we've been pointing to comes often many times in this time of year historically is the liberation of working capital in Brazil. But we actually see that being more acute this year because our B2B business, our production is down. So you actually see more liberation. But Luciano has some details on that. I'll let him talk about it. Luciano Pires: Okay. Vincent, so bear with me, this is going to be a little longer answer. So in Q1, we actually were kind of flat in working capital compared to a big investment the year prior. So that was a result of the destocking of phosphate inventories. In Q2, we actually increased inventories again by $200 million, but mostly in Brazil. And we actually collected a lot of the sales from the Q1 excess inventory that we discharge in Phosphates. So therefore, the working capital kind of situation in Q2 was negative, but not by a large amount. Again, which is -- if you compare it to prior year, it's a little better given the quarter we're talking about because of these collections from Q1. What really disappointed in Q2 were actually the prepayments in Brazil. If you look a year back, there was -- if you look in the cash flow statement, there was a very strong cash inflow from what we call accrued liabilities, which include prepayments we received from our customers in Brazil in anticipation for the sales of Q3. But there has been a clear change in buyer behavior because of many factors. So prepayments didn't come in as much, so close to 0. So the prepayments did not offset this small decline in working capital. But the consequence of that is that because prepayments didn't come in Q2 that farmers will actually need to pay for the product in Q3. And so the sales in Q3 will be, as they've always been substantially higher. Just to give you a number, in the last 3 years, Brazil has sold 600,000 tonnes on average more in Q3 than in Q2. So these sales will kind of repeat this year. And the collections that are going to come from these sales are going to come mostly in Q4. So we should expect, first, some release of working capital in Q3, maybe between $100 million and $200 million, but the bulk of the $300 million to $500 million will come in the second quarter -- in the fourth quarter when the collections come in. So I would say we are still subscribed to the $300 million to $500 million release. The dynamics has changed a little bit. But -- and yes, the last point that Bruce mentioned, this one is important because the distribution business in Brazil, you buy and you sell. So the cycle is comparatively short. The production business, you produce all over the year and then you sell mostly in Q3, which means that if we were producing, we would be rebuilding inventories in production in Q3 and in Q4. But because we are mostly curtailed in Brazil, that will not happen. And so therefore, the release in the distribution business will not be partially offset by another build in the production side. So again, that's another factor that the reason why we believe the $300 million to $500 million will come. Again, maybe 1/3 of it will come in Q3 and 2/3 in Q4. Operator: The next question will come from Chris Parkinson with Wolfe Research. Christopher Parkinson: Got it. Can we just kind of take a step back, just given all the noise of curtailments, and I think those have been notoriously well publicized. But you said in your release that you're operating Bartow about 40%. Louisiana is entirely offline. Given the guidance of kind of production and volume sales at least for the third quarter, does that basically imply both New Wales and Riverview are somewhere in the low to mid-70s? I mean, obviously, I know there were some maintenance activity in the first half. But in terms of getting those -- both of those facilities, specifically New Wales back to an operating rate, which you'd be eventually happy with and the implications in a normalized environment. Bruce, I'd just love to hear your thoughts on kind of where we are in the third quarter, how we're progressing and how we should think about that if and when things finally normalize in terms of how you can operate your network? Bruce Bodine: Yes, Chris, I think you're pretty spot on, on the operating rates in the mid-70s at the other facilities. So let me just go back maybe a little bit and set the stage. I think of what you're looking for -- as we came out of Q1, Q2 turnaround at New Wales, prior to the big announcements of curtailments and conserving sulfur inventory that was lower cost out of Q1 and Q2, New Wales was running at its kind of full utilization rate. So we were seeing great signs of that. Then came -- we pulled the brakes back on everything in Louisiana and kind of the Central Florida network to conserve sulfur. So we saw great signs on a sustained basis for good parts of the month following start-up out of turnaround. Riverview also had a turnaround, came up, it never really had a chance to stretch its legs at full capacity because we were already kind of sulfur curtailed, if you want to look at it that way. So we've seen good signs at all of our facilities. Now I think the last one out there was at New Wales, and we did get to stretch its legs following turnaround, and we're very encouraged by what we saw running at its full capacity target. The sulfur thing, as you pointed out, has put a constraint. We are only dealing with sulfur based on our contract volumes, which provide that full run rate that you just described, Chris, which is still a little bit down at New Wales and Riverview, 40% at Bartow and then 100% down at New Wales. So that sulfur supply -- I'm sorry, at Louisiana, that sulfur supply is what we're now constrained to and how we're trying to optimize. Now what will happen in any given week or any given month depending on what product demand there is because we don't have endless product capability at every facility. Those are the general targets that we're shooting for. But if we have higher DAP demand coming out of the international market, and we need to run Bartow a little bit more and run Riverview or New Wales a little bit less because that's where we can make more DAP for an active market, that's what we'll do. So it is a little bit messy during this constrained period of time, but we're managing to the sulfur constraint and then pairing that up to where active demand is with highest netbacks and what product mix we can make at what facility. There are a number of other factors like water balance, utilization of people around the network, et cetera, et cetera, that go into that decision. But the decision right now is not to try to run hard at any one site. It's to try to optimize for the constraint of sulfur for what the active product in whatever markets that are active and then producing that in Central Florida now because Louisiana is 100% down. I hope that answers. I know it's complicated. I wish there was an easier way to formulaically tell you something, but we'd be happy to follow up on a call if necessary. Operator: The next question will come from Jeff Zekauskas with JPMorgan. Jeffrey Zekauskas: It's a 2-part question. Your cash flows from operations are about $270 million year-to-date and your overall spending on CapEx loss and dividends is about $1.5 billion. So order of magnitude, will you -- maybe cash flow from operations this year can be $900 million if you hit your working capital targets or $1 billion. So are you going to be maybe about $500 million or so short of the cash outlays that you have to make? And secondly, Faustina is your lowest cost source of ammonia. Why is Faustina being closed down? Is it that you have commitments to buy ammonia and so you would have too much. What's your strategy there? Bruce Bodine: I'm going to let -- thanks, Jeff, for sure. Let Luciano answer the first part of the question, but let me address the Faustina thing because there's some misunderstanding there. We are used -- running Faustina's ammonia plant full, and we're using that within the Florida network. So again, it becomes what a product mix issue is, how we can manage water going into hurricane season and what outlets we have at individual facilities. Louisiana has a lot of flexibility to be 100% down in that regard on fertilizer production. But no doubt, we're going to take advantage of the producer economics, ammonia and use that by shipping it across Gulf into Florida. And if we have excess, we would sell it into the market because it's quite attractive from a profitability standpoint. But the intent is not to run it, to sell it. It's -- the first intent is run the ammonia plant to utilize within the Florida network. Luciano, over to you on cash flow. Luciano Pires: So Jeff, your numbers are -- yes, are correct, both for the cash flows from operations for the full year and for the sum of the capital expenditures with the dividend, which means, yes, we're going to be down around $500 million for the year. But most of it is passed already. So I would say our expectation is to be indebtedness kind of stable in Q3 and then go down a little bit in Q4. And of course, if this is -- goes into 2027, which we do not believe we need to pull additional levers to try to balance those things. But again, the message is, so far, we're managing for a temporary situation. And we believe not only this is unsustainable, but maybe as a follow-up to the first question on under application, whenever the bounce back comes, it will come up with a lot of pent-up demand. As much as people are talking about, for example, the need to replenish strategic oil reserves following the resolution of the conflict as much as there was a lot of revenge travel following COVID, there will be some revenge fertilizer application for years to come to support, we think, the business. So it's just a question to how to manage until we get there. Operator: The next question will come from Ben Theurer with Barclays. Benjamin Theurer: I wanted to dig a little bit into your outlook for the back half in Fertilizantes, just given that the purely the focus shifts towards South America. So you've mentioned in your release and in the commentary that you expect profitability to be down in the third quarter compared to the second quarter. Can you help us understand what the main drivers are behind that? Is that just associated with your own production? Is that part of the distribution business coming? Is it all of it? And then how should we conceptually think as you look into these dynamics around increased crop pricing and so on for the business in South America as we move into the fourth quarter? Bruce Bodine: Yes, I appreciate the question there, Ben. Let me tee it up and then Luciano can get into some details on more on the EBITDA and how to think about that out of Fertilizantes. But let's start with kind of volume out of quarter 3. Quarter 3 is always kind of the peak volume quarter within the calendar year. So we expect that to be the same this year. However, historically, we see Q3 over Q2, roughly about 600,000 tonnes to 800,000 tonnes more quarter-over-quarter. And we would expect the same this year. But what's muting the full potential of what's historic is actually our production business being down. We are not making or making very little commodity fertilizers in Brazil, given the sulfur availability and affordability issue. And so that is what's driving kind of demand being down or supply to feed demand, however you want to look at it in Brazil. And Jenny addressed that being down, what, up to 20% -- 20%, 30% this year on phosphate. So that is what will give you kind of to help figure out on volume. So better than quarter 2. Typically, quarter 2 is up 600,000 tonnes to 800,000 tonnes. Obviously, our quarter 2 this year was down, but then it is constrained because we don't have our B2B production volumes to be able to sell. So with that, that already is going to handicap EBITDA. And then we're going to be more down than we were in quarter 2. And Luciano can kind of talk about how to think about how the EBITDA puts and takes work with Fertilizantes. Luciano Pires: Yes. I would say that the goal throughout these curtailments is to make, for example, the production business stand on its own, so be kind of a 0 net contributor and how this is achieved, like the contribution margin of our animal feed sales plus a little bit of the sulfuric acid sales plus co-products should match the fixed costs and the turnaround costs. And we're actually kind of seeing Q3 even a little surplus because it's a strong quarter for coproducts as well. And a reminder, when we talk about coproducts, people usually associate, well, if I'm not producing, where are the coproducts? About half of our revenue from coproducts comes from the sale of gypsum, which we actually have a very large stockpile. So to sell gypsum for the Brazilian farmers, we don't need actually to produce. So the sales are going to be there irregardless of curtailments, gypsum only, which is about half of the co-product sales. So this is the first bucket. So the margin we make in animal feed, sulfuric acid and coproducts should pay for all of the fixed costs and turnaround costs in the production business. And then the other bucket is the distribution. So Q3 is very strong for distribution. So -- and margins are not yet where we would like it to be, but they are slowly improving. And Q3, actually, we're going to start having some contribution from Biosciences in Brazil. We expect around $30 million of sales of Biosciences only in Brazil with a kind of a margin contribution margin of around 40%. And so you start seeing maybe it's not a lot, but it's the beginning, right? $12 million of contribution from Biosciences in Brazil only. So if you add the distribution margin plus Biosciences, on the one hand, you have SG&A on the other. And so there will be a surplus in Q3, and we hope that we can maintain a kind of surplus going forward so that Brazil could keep in positive territory. Again, it's going to be hard for the Q4 because we have a less prominent quarter as usual. But for Q3, we're confident that we're going to be positive, albeit as we signaled maybe the $60 million will not be achieved in Q3. Bruce Bodine: Now to your question about improving crop prices, that's actually some upside that maybe we're not baking in. We have seen recently, and Jenny can provide details over the last few weeks have actually returned to pretty normal buying patterns. And if that were to continue, we probably would have some upside potential in Brazil. Anything to add there, Jenny? I think I covered it. So thanks again, Ben. Operator: The next question will come from Matt DeYoe with Bank of America. Matthew DeYoe: I appreciate that there's a lot of uncertainty out there and just trying to get a sense, I guess, for the idle turnaround costs in the third quarter in Phosphates, right? It was $60 million in 2Q and the implied commentary was that it goes up. So I mean, order of magnitude, is $100 million the right number for the third quarter? Could it be $120 million? How do we frame that? And then guiding potash realizations to be relatively flat quarter-over-quarter, maybe like plus $10. Maybe a little bit soft of our expectations and what we've seen in the market. So is that just a function of higher freight rates driving lower netbacks to FOB. Or what else -- is that sell forward? What's going on there? Bruce Bodine: Let me take the back half of your question, and Luciano can talk a little bit about the idle turnaround. You're spot on with freight rates, particularly on the export side. So Canpotex is definitely seeing higher freight rate. So the netback impact is there. The other thing is in the mix. So where we're seeing growth in Potash is through Canpotex. And so the contribution, it's a channel mix issue. There's more export in Q3 than what we have historically seen. We're not losing anything in North America. It's just more international growth through Canpotex that is at a lower netback and then being discounted even more because of those higher freight rates. So I think that's probably what hopefully squares the circle or circles the square for you on why there might be a disconnect. Luciano, maybe over to you on turnaround idle. Luciano Pires: So Matt, the $60 million in Q2 is basically half and half, half idle, half turnaround. And so yes, for Q3, that idle component, it's probably going to double, right? So it's another $30 million. But the turnaround component is going to half probably. So maybe we're talking about $15 million, let's just put a bracket $10 million to $20 million additional from Q3 to Q2. But in the fourth quarter, you're going to have an additional reduction in turnaround because you're not doing turnaround on something which is either, right? So you're going to probably go back to the -- with the [ 6 ] handle in the fourth quarter. So it's not $100 million, it's not $120 million. It's well below that. Bruce Bodine: And maybe just to highlight on that. I mean, these plants, if you take Louisiana, it's now 100% down. They are basically being put in a frozen stasis. So they're not being utilized. The planned turnaround schedules will be delayed. So CapEx that may be invested associated with a normal type turnaround is going to be deferred. That does not mean we're deferring CapEx for asset structural health. So as these assets are not running, we're still sticking to its running turnaround time schedule. But while they're down, we are taking advantage of both CapEx and turnaround costs that will be deferred until these things are back up and running and utilize that run time for turnaround. So it is, again, complicated, but this is -- we're looking very detailed at everything and taking advantage of everything we can, as we've talked about, the things we can control to wring costs out in a way that doesn't damage asset health for the long term. Luciano Pires: By the way, we didn't have the opportunity, but the CapEx profile. So you remember, we started the year with $1.5 billion, then we got back to $1.25 billion and then now $1.2 billion. The pace at which you kind of slam the brakes matters here. So CapEx will still be in Q3 somehow around like $300 million, with a [ 3 ] handle, but then it will drop substantially in Q4. So it's another reason why Q4 should be a stronger quarter for cash flows just because that's the way you manage, right? You cannot just stop all of a sudden. So you have to manage through and then you're going to see a step change in CapEx down for Q4. Operator: The next question will come from Edlain Rodriguez with Mizuho. Edlain Rodriguez: Bruce, in terms of the affordability issue in phosphate, like how long can this go on? And how do you think it gets addressed? Is it crop prices moving up or phosphate prices moving down or combo? And what's your preference? Bruce Bodine: Edlain, no, thanks. I always appreciate the question. Yes, it's impossible to know exactly. I think it's probably a combination of both. In what proportion, I don't know. I don't think that I have a preference to be quite honest, Edlain. I think in my mind, what's most certain is, as Jenny outlined, there has been up to 30 million tonnes this year of production that just won't happen, depending on how long this sulfur availability thing is prolonged. If it goes to the end of the year, the number can be up to 30 -- it could be the high end, 30 million tonnes based on our calculation. Already less phosphate applied last year, a significant reduction this year in Latin America and in the U.S., the agronomic science has not changed. So this will have an impact on yields at some point and then layer into the risk of what does El Nino do globally. So I think ag commodity prices are set to continue to rise as more evidence as crop gets removed over the course of the next 3 months, 4 months, 6 months, which is going to provide tailwinds for farmer demand. It won't take much for farmers to change the -- to feel differently about the narrative on affordability. If corn hits $5, north of $5, that is going to provide a lot of sentiment positivity. It's going to provide a lot of tailwinds. And the most -- the place that I would look first is in Brazil because the soil type just doesn't have the ability to bank nutrient value for mining it later as much as North America. But as Jenny said, in North America even, we've mined almost 2.7 million tonnes over 2 years of phosphate out of the crop removal from '25 and now '26 projection above what is average, and we aren't applying average nutrients to replenish that. So I think crop prices are going to rise. What happens with raw materials, your guess is as good as mine. But what we are in today is not sustainable. There will have to be a new economic equilibrium hit in order to not have yields on a long-term sustained basis, stay negatively impacted. Operator: The next question will come from Kristen Owen with Oppenheimer. Kristen Owen: I did want to ask 2 things here. First, there was a write-down in the period. Can you just articulate what that was? And then my real question just is on your inventory levels. You finished the quarter at about 125 days. Can you just help us parse out how much of that is raw versus finished goods? And how we should think about that being sort of elevated levels versus elevated prices? Just provide a little bit more color on that inventory level, please? Bruce Bodine: No, Kristen, thank you. The write-down was a capital project that we had looked pursuing in the past, which was purified phosphoric acid and going into battery cathode material. I think we had talked about that publicly 2, 3 years ago. It became the point that we pretty much ruled out that ever being a possibility and took the write-down noncash. On the inventory, Luciano, I'll turn it over to you, maybe you got some more color on what's driving... Luciano Pires: Yes. So Kristen, there's -- you probably looked into it. There's a footnote in our financial statements. I think it's footnote 5, which gives the breakdown of inventories in the various categories. So raw materials have been on a trend up because of prices, of course. But I would say they tend to go down now because even if you keep the same days of inventory, like you were running less facilities and especially in Brazil, where sulfur inventories are pretty much going to go down all the way to 0. The same is going to probably happen with work in progress as well. So you may remember past conference calls, we talked about an accumulation of rock inventories. And again, there was still a little bit of buildup in Q2 because, again, you stop the facilities and then you're still like processing rock and -- but structurally, these tend to go down a little bit as well. Finished goods, I would say that there's -- in terms of physical inventories, there's no different pattern for Phosphates or for Potash than we observed in the past. You remember, there was an uptick in finished good inventory for Phosphates in Q4 last year. We ended up with close to 1 million tonnes of finished goods, but now we're down to kind of 700,000 tonnes, 600,000 tonnes. This is more like a healthier level. If there's a rebound in demand, we might even go lower than that. MRO inventory, it's kind of stable, flat as well. So I'd say other than the traditional seasonality of Brazil, which will have the behavior I described earlier -- very quickly. I'd say from the physical perspective, the absolute trend for inventories is coming down. And of course, you layer on top of it the price effects. Operator: The next question will come from Lucas Beaumont with UBS. Lucas Beaumont: So I guess just want to get back to kind of the Phosphates volume outlook. So based on the current conditions, what you know today in terms of the pricing, input costs and sulfur and ammonia, if conditions kind of remain where they are now, what would you expect to do from a production footprint reduction standpoint as we go into the fourth quarter? Would you keep things the same in the U.S.? Would you reduce them? Or would you be able to increase it further? Bruce Bodine: Yes. Lucas, I appreciate the question. Under your assumption, which I don't -- would say is not that disconnected from probably where we're assuming right now, production would stay the way it currently is. We would consume what we believe we have is advantaged sulfur to the competition. And we know there are enough active markets globally to be able to utilize that sulfur and constrain ourselves to that advantaged contract sulfur that we have in the active markets. And based on that, we kind of see that production volume -- listen, it may fluctuate 100,000 tonnes, 200,000 tonnes here or there, we'll see. But generally, in that ZIP code is probably a good assumption. Operator: The next question will come from Andrew Wong with RBC. Andrew Wong: Just have a couple here. When things do normalize and you like to get back to the regular operating rates, how quickly could that ramp up look like? Like could we -- let's say, the Strait opens up today, could you get back to regular operating rates by like September? And then my second question is on the sulfur contracts. $705 per long ton was pretty -- it was well below spot prices. Can you just kind of talk about how that came about? And let's say, if the Strait does remain closed into Q4, could you still sign another contract at the roughly similar level? Bruce Bodine: Let me start, Andrew, with the latter part. I think it's worth talking about that we were able to create a separation on that settlement cost from what spot solid sulfur was. And I think that is a testament to the relationship that's very symbiotic that we have with the Gulf Coast producers here in the United States to be able to take their molten supply and give them a baseload that's very ratable and doesn't jeopardize their primary existence, which is to produce oil and gas, right? So that is a relationship that has worked in ways that favor us and in ways that favor them over the decades that we've had this advantaged relationship here in North America. So I can't speak to what we should expect. I think they appreciate, as we've appreciated when economics have been tough for them in the past that we are riding the edge on economics because we can't pass through that on the demand side because then we will run up against demand disruption. So we found this way to thread the needle. I think they appreciate that. They appreciate our relationship and our expectation is that, that continues to stay there. I can't guarantee what that is going to be, but I think we've proven in Q3 that we have that relationship, and we would expect to continue to see something there. How fast we can ramp back up? It's going to depend on -- well, in your scenario that magically things just return, which, by the way, they won't. It's going to take time to recover. Even if the Strait's opened up tomorrow, there's damage in refineries that are producing sulfur, what's going on in Russia and Ukraine is independent of the Strait's opening up, what's happening with Kazakhstan restrictions, that has to change as well. I mean all of those things have to happen. But if magically if sulfur were to return, we can ramp up pretty quick. As we talked about, we are making a priority to protect asset health and any of the decisions we're making about capital prioritization to do just that. Now granted, if things become protracted for even longer, that may add a little bit of time. But I'd say we're talking weeks, not months to get back to production. Operator: The next question will come from David Symonds with BNP. David Symonds: It's just a follow-up on Jeff's question about the realized ammonia costs in Faustina. You talked about $610 per tonne to $620 per tonne realized ammonia cost in Q3. I just want to understand, does that include the internal buying of Faustina and the kind of advantaged supply there? And if it does, I would have thought Faustina would be quite a large portion of your ammonia supply at the guided production rates of phosphates. So could we see a big drop in the ammonia realized cost in Q4? Bruce Bodine: It does include that, and it is -- yes. So it does include that. It's just based on the other contracts that we have settled and how that's going to flow through inventory. So a good chunk, the majority of our production is either internal gas-based or gas tied contracts. We do still have some spot that's in there. But the settlement prices for our strategic contracts that are tied to market negotiation on a monthly basis, that's all included in the -- in what Luciano was talking about on how that would impact on COGS. So that does include our Louisiana tonnes. Operator: This will conclude our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to management for any closing remarks. Please go ahead. Bruce Bodine: To conclude our call, I'd like to restate our key points. While sulfur affordability and availability are challenging for everyone in the phosphate industry, we know that the crisis will come to an end. We're taking all the necessary actions to weather the storm, cutting capital and other costs, idling facilities where necessary, redeploying capital in pursuit of higher returns and further strengthening our balance sheet, all while preserving our ability to thrive when conditions improve. So to be clear, Mosaic remains in an advantageous position with access to U.S. sulfur and open shipping channels in the Americas. In fact, our raw material advantage moves us down the cost curve at times of stress like we're feeling right now. At the same time, we're pushing to grow with incremental tonnes in potash, our very promising Mosaic Biosciences business and potential for new minerals extraction. Put simply, this is a tough time, but Mosaic is strong and resilient and better markets are ahead. So thank you, and have a great and safe day. Operator: The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect. Before you buy stock in Mosaic, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Mosaic wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut are built for long-term growth and could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $411,427!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,335,252!* That performance is why people listen. With a track record of beating the S&P 500 by 4x, Stock Advisor offers a distinct advantage. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built for the long haul. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 11, 2026. This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Mosaic (MOS) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript was originally published by The Motley Fool

Interested in The Mosaic Company? Here are five stocks we like better. Sulfur shortages are forcing Mosaic to curtail phosphate production in the U.S. and Brazil, with Louisiana fully idled and some Florida facilities operating at reduced rates. Management warned that persistent supply constraints could sharply reduce global phosphate output and fertilizer application, potentially pressuring crop yields. Mosaic expects third-quarter phosphate volumes to decline to 1.1–1.4 million tons, while sulfur costs rise to approximately $700–$710 per ton. Despite lower sequential stripping margins and higher idle costs, DAP pricing of $820–$840 per ton should keep margins above historical averages. The company is strengthening liquidity and cash flow by cutting SG&A, reducing 2026 capital spending guidance to $1.2 billion, and targeting a $300–$500 million working-capital release. Mosaic also secured a $1 billion term loan to refinance commercial-paper maturities without drawing its $2.5 billion revolving credit facility. 3 Agriculture Stocks to Buy as Food Inflation Stays Elevated in 2026 Mosaic (NYSE:MOS) said it is managing production, costs and liquidity through what Chief Executive Officer Bruce Bodine described as a difficult phosphate market shaped by unusually high sulfur prices and constrained supply. The company has curtailed phosphate production in the United States and Brazil, limiting purchases of high-cost raw materials while maintaining the condition of its assets for an eventual return to higher operating rates. Bodine said Mosaic secured a significant portion of its third-quarter U.S. sulfur needs at prices below the spot market, though still at historically elevated levels. → Sandisk Just Delivered a Blowout Quarter—Here's Why the Stock Is Falling Not Just Oil: 3 Fertilizer Stocks Boosted by Hormuz Closure “Mosaic is working through a difficult market by successfully managing what is under our control and positioning ourselves for an eventual recovery,” Bodine said during the company’s second-quarter 2026 earnings call. Mosaic cited the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz and a Kazakhstan blockade as factors disrupting global sulfur flows. The company said current spot sulfur prices are not economically sustainable for the phosphate industry and have prompted production reductions across the sector. → 4 Oil and Gas ETF Plays as Prices Stay Sky-High 3 Underfollowed Stocks Wall Street Still Likes—And for Good Reason Bodine estimated that global phosphate production could fall short of last year’s output by as much as 30 million tons if supply constraints persist. He said the lower availability of fertilizer, combined with reduced application rates in prior periods, could affect crop yields and create food-security challenges. In North America, Executive Vice President of Commercial Jenny Wang said Mosaic estimates phosphate application fell nearly 15% below normal last year and could decline another 20% this year. Compared with typical application levels, that would represent a reduction of more than 30% in 2027, she said. → No Hangover: Revisiting Microsoft One Week After Earnings In Brazil, Mosaic expects phosphate application to decline by roughly 30% at the nutrient level this year, after application was relatively normal and showed some growth last year. Wang said Mosaic has observed yield pressure in some major Brazilian states despite increased harvest acreage. The company said it expects phosphate prices to remain near current levels because sulfur-related supply challenges and lower Chinese exports are limiting global availability. Bodine also said the temporary suspension of U.S. countervailing duties on phosphate imports from Morocco has not affected New Orleans prices, as producers can obtain higher netbacks in markets outside the U.S. Chief Financial Officer Luciano Siani Pires said second-quarter U.S. phosphate raw-material costs averaged $522 per long ton for sulfur and $621 per ton for ammonia. These costs resulted in an average realized stripping margin of $422 per ton. For the third quarter, Mosaic expects realized sulfur costs of approximately $700 to $710 per ton and ammonia costs of approximately $610 to $620 per ton. The company guided for DAP FOB prices of $820 to $840 per ton, which Pires said implies a realized stripping margin above historical averages despite higher input costs. Management cautioned that curtailments will reduce fixed-cost absorption and increase idle expenses in the phosphate and Fertilizantes segments during the third quarter. Bodine said stripping margins are expected to decline sequentially but remain above historical levels. The company also expects phosphate sales volumes of 1.1 million to 1.4 million tons in the third quarter, compared with 1.4 million tons produced and sold during the second quarter. Mosaic’s Louisiana fertilizer production is fully idled, while Bartow is operating at approximately 40%, according to management’s discussion with analysts. Other Central Florida facilities are running at rates in the mid-70% range, constrained by sulfur availability. Bodine said the company could restore production within weeks, rather than months, if sulfur supply conditions normalized. Mosaic characterized potash conditions as comparatively balanced, with supply meeting demand in major consuming regions. The company said its summer fill program was fully subscribed, and it expects the potash market to remain constructive through the year. The company completed Esterhazy’s annual turnaround in the second quarter and expects lower potash unit costs in the second half as volumes from the Hydrofloat Project increase. Second-quarter MOP costs of $84 per ton reflected a production mix weighted toward higher-cost Colonsay volumes, Pires said. In Brazil, Mosaic curtailed commodity phosphate production because of sulfur conditions but reported $60 million of EBITDA from its Fertilizantes business in the second quarter. Management expects third-quarter profitability to be below that level, although the seasonally stronger distribution business, co-product sales and an expected contribution from Mosaic Biosciences should support positive results. Pires said Mosaic expects approximately $30 million in Biosciences sales in Brazil during the third quarter, with a contribution margin near 40%. Bodine said Mosaic Biosciences remains on track to double its revenue again this year. Mosaic reduced SG&A expenses by 20% year over year in the second quarter, citing spending discipline, lower support-labor costs, lower bad-debt expense and benefits from divestitures. The company expects further SG&A reductions in the second half. The company lowered its full-year capital expenditure outlook to $1.2 billion from $1.25 billion previously and from an earlier $1.5 billion level. Management expects free cash flow to improve sequentially in the third and fourth quarters, supported by lower spending, cost reductions and a projected $300 million to $500 million working-capital release. Pires said roughly $100 million to $200 million of the working-capital release may occur in the third quarter, with the larger portion expected in the fourth quarter as Brazil customer collections increase. During the second quarter, Mosaic put in place a $1 billion term loan to replace and extend short-term commercial-paper maturities. The company refinanced $500 million of commercial paper in June and the remainder in July. Mosaic said it has not drawn on its $2.5 billion revolving credit facility. Separately, the company said it completed the sale of Carlsbad, continues to advance a potential divestiture of its Araxá complex, and is evaluating opportunities involving land holdings. Mosaic also recorded a noncash write-down related to a previously considered purified phosphoric acid and battery cathode materials project, which Bodine said the company no longer expects to pursue. Mosaic Co is one of the world's leading producers and marketers of concentrated phosphate and potash crop nutrients. The company's primary business activities center on the extraction, processing and distribution of phosphate rock, phosphate-based fertilizers and potash products. These core nutrients are essential components in modern agriculture, supporting crop yields and soil health across a range of farming applications. In its phosphate segment, Mosaic operates mining and production facilities that convert phosphate rock into concentrated phosphates, finished phosphate fertilizers and feed phosphates for animal nutrition. This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected]. The article "Mosaic Q2 Earnings Call Highlights" was originally published by MarketBeat. View MarketBeat's top stocks for August 2026.

Mosaic (MOS) reported $2.82 billion in revenue for the quarter ended June 2026, representing a year-over-year decline of 6%. EPS of $0.13 for the same period compares to $0.51 a year ago. The reported revenue represents a surprise of -7.3% over the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $3.05 billion. With the consensus EPS estimate being $0.09, the EPS surprise was +44.44%. While investors closely watch year-over-year changes in headline numbers -- revenue and earnings -- and how they compare to Wall Street expectations to determine their next course of action, some key metrics always provide a better insight into a company's underlying performance. As these metrics influence top- and bottom-line performance, comparing them to the year-ago numbers and what analysts estimated helps investors project a stock's price performance more accurately. Here is how Mosaic performed in the just reported quarter in terms of the metrics most widely monitored and projected by Wall Street analysts: Mosaic Fertilizantes - Sales volumes - Total Finished Product: 1,520.00 KTon versus the four-analyst average estimate of 2,073.15 KTon. Potash - Average finished product selling price: $280.00 compared to the $283.48 average estimate based on four analysts. Phosphates - Sales volumes - Total Finished Product: 1,406.00 KTon versus 1,566.53 KTon estimated by four analysts on average. Potash - Sales volumes - Total Finished Product: 2,019.00 KTon versus 2,066.18 KTon estimated by four analysts on average. Mosaic Fertilizantes - Average finished product selling price: $585.00 compared to the $652.70 average estimate based on three analysts. Phosphates - Average finished product selling price: $754.00 versus $797.91 estimated by three analysts on average. Phosphates - Sales volumes - DAP/MAP: 777.00 KTon versus 784.06 KTon estimated by two analysts on average. Phosphates - Sales volumes - Performance & other products: 513.00 KTon versus the two-analyst average estimate of 771.68 KTon. Net Sales- Phosphates: $1.25 billion versus $1.27 billion estimated by four analysts on average. Compared to the year-ago quarter, this number represents a +6.2% change. Net Sales- Mosaic Fertilizantes: $1.03 billion versus $1.21 billion estimated by four analysts on average. Compared to the year-ago quarter, this number represents a -12% change. Net Sales- Potash: $650 million versus the four-analyst average estimate of $603.84 million. The reported number represents a year-over-year change of -8.5%. Net Sales- Corporate and Other: $-106 million versus $-38.4 million estimated by three analysts on average. Compared to the year-ago quarter, this number represents a +100% change. View all Key Company Metrics for Mosaic here>>> Shares of Mosaic have returned +3% over the past month versus the Zacks S&P 500 composite's +1.7% change. The stock currently has a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell), indicating that it could underperform the broader market in the near term. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The Mosaic Company (MOS) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

The Mosaic Company MOS posted second-quarter 2026 net loss of $273 million or 86 cents per share, down sharply from a profit of $411 million or $1.29 per share in the year-ago quarter. Barring one-time items, adjusted earnings were 13 cents per share, down 74.5% from adjusted earnings of 51 cents a year ago. The figure beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 9 cents. Net sales declined 6% year over year to $2,824.1 million from $3,005.7 million in the prior-year quarter. Revenue missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $3,046.4 million. Lower sales volumes and elevated raw material costs, particularly sulfur, more than offset the benefit of higher phosphate and potash prices. The Mosaic Company price-consensus-eps-surprise-chart | The Mosaic Company Quote MOS’ Phosphate segment generated net sales of $1.25 billion, up from $1.17 billion a year ago. Sales volumes declined to 1.4 million tons from 1.5 million tons due to production curtailments. Net sales missed our estimate of $1.27 billion. Gross margin deteriorated to negative $4 per ton from $67 per ton a year ago as higher sulfur and ammonia costs offset stronger DAP pricing. The average DAP selling price increased to $773 per ton from $668 per ton. The Potash segment delivered net sales of $650 million, down from $711 million a year ago. Sales volumes fell to 2 million tons from 2.3 million tons because of turnaround activities and the Carlsbad divestiture. However, net sales beat our estimate of $603.8 million. Gross margin improved to $103 per ton from $89 per ton, supported by higher realized prices. The average MOP selling price rose to $275 per ton from $261 per ton. Mosaic Fertilizantes reported net sales of $1.03 billion, down from $1.18 billion in the year-ago quarter. Sales volumes declined to 1.5 million tons from 2.2 million tons, reflecting curtailed domestic production and softer demand. Revenue missed our estimate of $1.21 billion. Gross margin fell to $4 per ton from $73 per ton, while the average finished product selling price increased to $585 per ton from $474 per ton. Higher sulfur costs and lower production volumes weighed on profitability. Mosaic ended the quarter with cash and cash equivalents of $294 million compared with $276.6 million at the end of 2025. Long-term debt (net of current maturities) increased to $4,767.7 million from $4,250.9 million at year-end 2025. Cash flow from operating activities totaled $167.4 million in the second quarter, down from $609.5 million a year ago. Capital expenditures were $320.3 million, resulting in negative free cash flow of $152.9 million. Mosaic paid a regular dividend of 22 cents per share during the quarter. Mosaic reduced its 2026 capital expenditure guidance to $1.2 billion from the prior expectation of $1.25 billion while maintaining its potash production outlook of about 9 million tons. For the third quarter, phosphate sales volumes are expected to be 1.1-1.4 million tons with DAP prices of $820-$840 per ton, while potash sales volumes are projected at 2-2.2 million tons with MOP prices of $270-$290 per ton. The company now expects SG&A expenses of $510-$530 million, net interest expense of $220-$240 million and cash taxes of $250-$300 million for 2026. MOS shares have lost 26.5% in the past year compared with the industry's 47.6% decline. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research MOS currently carries a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell). Some better-ranked stocks in the Basic Materials space are Avient Corporation AVNT, Neo Performance Materials Inc. NOPMF and Skeena Resources Limited SKE. Avient is scheduled to report second-quarter results on Aug. 6. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for AVNT’s second-quarter earnings is pegged at 89 cents per share. It carries a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) at present. NOPMF is slated to report second-quarter results on Aug. 11. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is pegged at 5 cents per share. NOPMF has a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) at present. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. Skeena Resources is expected to report second-quarter results on Aug. 13. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for SKE’s second-quarter loss is pegged at 11 cents per share. It currently carries a Zacks Rank #2. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The Mosaic Company (MOS) : Free Stock Analysis Report Avient Corporation (AVNT) : Free Stock Analysis Report Skeena Resources Limited (SKE) : Free Stock Analysis Report Neo Performance Materials Inc. (NOPMF) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Release Date: August 05, 2026 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. The Mosaic Co (NYSE:MOS) successfully negotiated third-quarter U.S. sulfur supply at prices considerably below the spot market, leveraging long-standing relationships with Gulf Coast refiners. The company is aggressively managing costs, with SG&A down 20% year-over-year, and expects further declines in the second half of the year. The Mosaic Co (NYSE:MOS) fortified its liquidity by terming out short-term debt and has full access to its untapped $2.5 billion revolver. Potash remains a steady earnings contributor, with the summer fill program fully subscribed and a constructive market outlook. The Mosaic Co (NYSE:MOS) is advancing strategic portfolio optimization, including the divestiture of Araxa and growth in Mosaic Biosciences, which is on track to double revenues again this year. The Mosaic Co (NYSE:MOS) has curtailed phosphate production in the U.S. and Brazil due to unsustainably high sulfur prices, leading to reduced volumes and elevated idle costs. Third-quarter phosphate earnings are expected to be impacted by higher raw material costs, including sulfur at $700-$710 per ton and ammonia at $610-$620 per tonne. The company faces significant working capital outflows, with a projected $500 million cash shortfall for the year, though most of it has already passed. Global phosphate production is expected to fall short by up to 30 million tonnes, leading to under-application and potential crop yield impacts, which could affect future demand. Fertilizantes profitability is expected to decline in the third quarter due to curtailed production and reduced fixed cost absorption, with Q3 EBITDA likely below the $60 million achieved in Q2. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 7 Warning Signs with MOS. Is MOS fairly valued? Test your thesis with our free DCF calculator. Q: What is your best estimate for how much below normal phosphate application was for North America this crop year, and what do you expect for Latin America? A: Jenny Wang, EVP Commercial, stated that North America phosphate application was down close to 15% last year versus a normal year, and this year it is forecast to be cut by a further 20%. This means total phosphate application in North America is over 30% below normal for the '27 crop year. In Brazil, phosphate application was normal last year, but this year it is forecast to be down by 30% at the nutrient level. This under-application is already causing yield impacts in major Brazilian states, and the additional phosphate removal from the soil is estimated at up to 1.3 million tonnes of DAP equivalent in Brazil and 1.4 million tonnes in the U.S. Q: Can you explain the Q3 phosphate guidance, particularly the ammonia cost of $610 to $620 per tonne, and does this imply lower phosphate earnings in Q3? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, explained that the higher ammonia cost is due to the flow-through of inventory from contracts settled in June and July, which will peak in Q3 and impact stripping margins. He noted that Q3 will also absorb more fixed costs from sustained curtailments, but stripping margins should remain well above historical levels. Luciano Pires, CFO, added that with sales guidance of 1.1 to 1.4 million tonnes, there could be a slight downside in volumes compared to Q2's 1.4 million tonnes. Q: Is the $400 million working capital outflow expectation for the year still accurate? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, confirmed the $300 million to $500 million range is still expected. Luciano Pires, CFO, provided detail, noting that Q2 saw a small negative working capital impact due to a $200 million inventory build in Brazil, offset by collections from Q1 phosphate sales. He explained that prepayments in Brazil were close to zero in Q2 due to changed buyer behavior, but this means farmers will pay for product in Q3, leading to a release of $100 million to $200 million in Q3 and the bulk of the $300 million to $500 million in Q4. The release is expected to be more acute because curtailed production in Brazil means no inventory rebuild. Q: Given the curtailments, what are the operating rates at your phosphate facilities, and how should we think about the network's ability to ramp back up? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, confirmed that Bartow is operating at 40%, Louisiana is entirely offline, and New Wales and Riverview are in the low to mid-70s. He explained that the company is managing to its advantaged sulfur contract volumes and optimizing product mix across facilities to meet active demand. He noted that New Wales successfully ran at full capacity after its turnaround before curtailments were implemented, and the company is prepared to ramp back up to full production rates in weeks, not months, when market conditions improve. Q: Will your cash flow from operations be about $500 million short of your cash outlays for CapEx and dividends this year? And why is Faustina being closed down? A: Luciano Pires, CFO, confirmed the numbers are correct, with cash flow from operations around $900 million to $1 billion and outlays around $1.5 billion, resulting in a $500 million shortfall for the year. He stated that most of this has already passed, with indebtedness expected to be stable in Q3 and decline in Q4. Bruce Bodine, CEO, clarified that Faustina's ammonia plant is running at full capacity, with the ammonia being used within the Florida network, and any excess is sold into the market at attractive profitability. The fertilizer production at Louisiana is what is fully curtailed. Q: What are the main drivers behind the expected decline in Fertilizantes profitability in Q3, and how should we think about the business in Q4? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, explained that Q3 is typically the peak volume quarter, with volumes up 600,000 to 800,000 tonnes versus Q2, but this year's potential is muted by curtailed production in Brazil. Luciano Pires, CFO, added that the production business is being managed to be a zero net contributor, with margins from animal feed, sulfuric acid, and coproducts (including gypsum from stockpiles) covering fixed costs. The distribution business is expected to be strong in Q3, with Biosciences contributing around $30 million in sales and a 40% contribution margin. He expects Q3 to be positive but potentially below the $60 million EBITDA achieved in Q2. Q: What are the idle and turnaround costs expected in Q3 for Phosphates, and why are potash realizations expected to be relatively flat? A: Luciano Pires, CFO, stated that Q2's $60 million was split evenly between idle and turnaround costs. In Q3, the idle component is expected to double to around $60 million, while turnaround costs should halve to around $15 million, resulting in an additional $10 million to $20 million versus Q2. Bruce Bodine, CEO, explained that potash realizations are impacted by higher freight rates on exports and a channel mix shift toward more Canpotex international sales, which have lower netbacks. Q: How long can the affordability issue in phosphate persist, and how will it be resolved? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, stated that it is impossible to know exactly, but it will likely be a combination of rising crop prices and lower input costs. He emphasized that global phosphate production could fall short by up to 30 million tonnes this year, and with two years of under-application, crop yields will suffer. He noted that ag commodity prices are already starting to rise, and if corn prices exceed $5, it would provide significant tailwinds for farmer demand. He expects Brazil to be the first market to respond due to its soil type's inability to bank nutrients. Q: Can you explain the write-down in the period and provide more color on inventory levels? A: Bruce Bodine, CEO, explained that the write-down was a non-cash charge related to a previously considered capital project for purified phosphoric acid and battery cathode material, which has been ruled out. Luciano Pires, CFO, provided inventory detail, noting that raw materials are trending down, especially sulfur in Brazil, and finished goods for Phosphates have normalized to around 600,000 to For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.