PEG

A month has gone by since the last earnings report for PSEG (PEG). Shares have lost about 2.9% in that time frame, underperforming the S&P 500. But investors have to be wondering, will the recent negative trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is PSEG due for a breakout? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at its most recent earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important catalysts. PEG Q2 Earnings Outpace Expectations, Revenues Decrease Y/YPublic Service Enterprise Group Incorporated, or PSEG, reported second-quarter 2026 adjusted earnings of 86 cents per share, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 80 cents by 7.5%. Earnings increased 11.7% from the prior-year reported figure of 77 cents.The company reported GAAP earnings per share (EPS) of 67 cents compared with $1.17 in the corresponding period of 2025. Operating revenues totaled $2.55 billion, which missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $2.70 billion by 5.4%. The top line also declined 8.9% from the year-ago figure of $2.81 billion. Electric sales increased 2% year over year to 9,629 million kilowatt-hours (kWh). Residential sales rose 3% to 3,242 million kWh, while commercial and industrial sales jumped 1% to 6,316 million kWh.Total gas sales declined 23% to 541 million therms. Firm gas sales slipped 1% to 351 million therms, as residential volumes decreased 4%, and commercial and industrial volumes increased 1%. Non-firm commercial and industrial sales fell 45% to 190 million therms. The operating income totaled $461 million compared with $817 million in the year-ago period, reflecting a decline of 43.6%.Total operating expenses were $2.09 billion, up 5.3% from the year-ago figure.Interest expenses amounted to $269 million, which increased 8.5% year over year. PSE&G revenues increased 5.2% to $2.14 billion from $2.03 billion in the prior-year period. The regulated utility generated net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $342 million, up from $332 million. Results benefited from ongoing investments in energy efficiency, gas system modernization and transmission. PSEG Power & Other revenues declined 42% to $534 million from $920 million a year earlier. Despite the revenue decrease, non-GAAP operating earnings increased to $83 million from $52 million. The improvement reflected higher realized prices and increased nuclear generation. The long-term debt (including the current portion of the long-term debt) as of June 30, 2026 was $23.59 billion compared with $22.55 billion as of Dec. 31, 2025.The net cash flow from operating activities was $1.82 billion during the first six months of 2026 compared with $1.53 billion during the first six months of 2025. PEG expects adjusted earnings to be in the range of $4.28-$4.40 per share. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is currently pegged at $4.36, which is at the higher end of the company’s guided range. In the past month, investors have witnessed a upward trend in fresh estimates. Currently, PSEG has a subpar Growth Score of D, however its Momentum Score is doing a lot better with a B. Charting a somewhat similar path, the stock has a grade of C on the value side, putting it in the middle 20% for value investors. Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of C. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in. Estimates have been trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions looks promising. Interestingly, PSEG has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). We expect an in-line 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 Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated (PEG) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

Infrastructure projects across New Jersey are delivering measurable results: 50% improvement in reliability achieved across the 20 upgraded circuits by replacing approximately 22,000 utility poles from 2023 through July 2026 Photos and video from today's event available here NEWARK, N.J., Aug. 28, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Public Service Electric & Gas (PSE&G), New Jersey's oldest and largest utility, today reported new key systemwide reliability results as continued initiatives to modernize New Jersey's electric and gas infrastructure are helping deliver safe, reliable service to customers across the state. These projects are also strengthening PSE&G's year-round preparedness for severe weather as the region enters the peak of Atlantic hurricane season. As a recipient of the ReliabilityOne® Award for superior electric system reliability in the Mid-Atlantic region for 24 consecutive years, PSE&G has long been recognized as one of the nation's top utilities for system resiliency and integrated planning including reliability and grid modernization initiatives. Continued infrastructure improvements are helping sustain that strong performance, with the following measurable benefits for customers across New Jersey: Since 2023, just under 22,000 poles have been proactively replaced through July 2026, resulting in a 50% improvement in reliability across the 20 circuits with the highest number of pole replacements compared to their 2020-2024 average. More than 30% improvement in resiliency and reliability from strengthening neighborhood electric circuits: 32 circuits upgraded with overhead electric infrastructure are now 37% more resilient and 31% more reliable. 22% fewer outage incidents and 23% fewer customers affected on average on circuits upgraded through PSE&G's Infrastructure Advancement Program. Adding capacity to meet customers' changing energy needs. Since 2023, PSE&G has completed construction of six new high-capacity 13kV stations to address system overloads, replace aging equipment and increase capacity to accommodate solar generation. Modernizing New Jersey's gas system. Since 2016, PSE&G has upgraded more than 1,655 miles of gas main in more than 340 municipalities. PSE&G plans to continue that work by replacing an additional 525 miles of cast-iron and unprotected steel gas main in more than 70 municipalities over the next three years. "These projects are delivering real tangible benefits where they matter — in the homes, businesses and communities that depend on us every day," said Paul Toscarelli, PSE&G vice president, electric operations. "At the end of every pole, wire and piece of equipment are customers who count on us to safely deliver the energy they need. We take that responsibility seriously, and we will continue strengthening our systems to provide safe, reliable service today and prepare for customers' changing energy needs." Brian Clark, PSE&G, senior vice president, gas operations, continues: "Reliability starts with the strength of the system and the dedicated workforce behind it. By replacing aging infrastructure, we're reducing the risk of leaks and strengthening the gas system that nearly two million customers depend on every day. These programs help us deliver safe, reliable service today while preparing the system to serve our customers for years to come." Infrastructure Initiatives Deliver Customer Benefits These strong reliability results were highlighted during an event today at PSE&G's Livingston 230kV substation, an example of ongoing infrastructure initiatives across New Jersey to strengthen reliability and resiliency while adding capacity to support future growth. Placed in service in 2024, the substation supports the heavy and increased load of western Essex County. The project constructed a new substation within PSE&G's existing right‑of‑way and utilizes the existing 230kV transmission line to establish a more robust and flexible feed into the station. This alleviated the potential for overload conditions and adding capacity to support future load growth in western Essex County and the surrounding communities. Since its completion, customers served by the Livingston substation have benefited from a more resilient and reliable electric system, with improved performance during severe weather events and reduced risk of service interruptions. "PSE&G has been a longstanding partner of New Jersey's Building Trades and one of the largest employers of our skilled union workforce. The commitments they make in our electric and gas infrastructure are commitments not only to improved reliability and resiliency, but to good-paying union jobs, apprenticeship opportunities and family-sustaining careers for New Jersey residents," said William T. Mullen, president, New Jersey State Building & Construction Trades Council. "Our members take tremendous pride in building and maintaining the infrastructure that keeps our communities and economy moving, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with PSE&G as we prepare New Jersey's energy systems for the future." PSE&G's infrastructure initiatives are designed to improve the performance of its electric and gas systems and provide lasting benefits for customers, including: Fewer and shorter electric outages as upgraded equipment and technology help prevent interruptions, isolate problems and support faster restoration. A stronger, more resilient electric system that is better prepared for severe weather and changing customer energy needs. A safer, more reliable gas system as older cast-iron and unprotected steel mains are replaced with modern infrastructure that reduces the risk of leaks. Greater capacity for the future as electric-system upgrades address overloaded equipment and accommodate changing demand and additional solar generation. Over the last decade, PSE&G has completed $30 billion in projects across its electric and gas systems, with nearly 75% dedicated to reliability and resiliency. PSE&G prepares year-round for extreme weather and continues to plan and execute programs to maintain reliable service and improve system performance. That work has included strengthening substations, upgrading transmission and distribution equipment and modernizing technology across the state. Infrastructure programs made over the past decade have also included raising 42 substations above Superstorm Sandy flood levels and installing more than 1,500 smart switching devices that can help crews identify problems and reroute power during outages. PSE&G has also continued to modernize its natural gas network. Replacing aging cast-iron and unprotected steel infrastructure with modern gas mains helps reduce leaks, improve safety and strengthen the reliability of service for PSE&G's 1.9 million gas customers. All while maintaining the lowest residential gas rates in the region for our customers. Learn more about PSE&G's gas system modernization work here About PSE&G Public Service Electric & Gas Co. is New Jersey's oldest and largest gas and electric delivery public utility, as well as one of the nation's largest utilities. PSE&G has won the ReliabilityOne® Award for superior electric system reliability in the Mid-Atlantic region for 24 consecutive years. In 2025, for the fourth consecutive year, J.D. Power named PSE&G number one in customer satisfaction for residential electric service in the East among large utilities. PSE&G is a subsidiary of Public Service Enterprise Group Inc., (PSEG) (NYSE:PEG), a predominantly regulated infrastructure company named to the Dow Jones Best in Class Index for North America for 18 consecutive years (www.pseg.com). Media [email protected] View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ahead-of-peak-hurricane-season-pseg-highlights-strong-reliability-results-302862944.html

Image source: The Motley Fool. Aug. 4, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. ET Chair, President, and CEO - Ralph LaRossa Executive Vice President and CFO - Daniel Cregg Investor Relations - Carlotta Chan Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Rob, and I'm your event operator today. I would like to welcome everyone to today's conference, Public Service Enterprise Group's Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded today, August 4, 2026, and will be available for replay as an audio webcast on the PSEG's Investor Relations website at https://investor.pseg.com. I would now like to turn the conference over to Carlotta Chan. Please go ahead. Carlotta Chan: Good morning, and welcome to PSEG's Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Presentation. On today's call are Ralph LaRossa, Chair, President, and CEO; and Dan Cregg, Executive Vice President and CFO. The press release, attachments, and slides for today's discussion are posted on our IR website at investor.pseg.com, and our 10-Q will be filed later today. PSEG's earnings release and other matters discussed during today's call contain forward-looking statements and estimates that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We will also discuss non-GAAP operating earnings, which differs from net income or loss, as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles or GAAP in the United States. We include reconciliations of our non-GAAP financial measures and a disclaimer regarding forward-looking statements on our IR website and in today's materials. Following our prepared remarks, we will conduct a 30-minute question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call over to Ralph LaRossa. Ralph LaRossa: Thank you, Carlotta, and thank you for joining us to review PSEG's second quarter 2026 results. Starting with our financial results, PSEG reported net income of $0.67 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings of $0.86 per share, bringing our first-half results to $2.15 per share of net income and $2.41 per share of non-GAAP operating earnings. Our ongoing investments in PSE&G system replacement, reliability and energy efficiency were the main drivers of growth in our financial results in the second quarter. And at PSEG Power, an increase in realized market prices, higher nuclear generation and gas operations, more than offset the absence of the Zero Emission Certificate programs that concluded in May of 2025. With results for the first half of 2026 coming in as expected, we are pleased to reaffirm our full-year non-GAAP operating earnings guidance in the range of $4.28 to $4.40 per share. Now our operational results may have even been better as we successfully managed one of the most challenging storm restorations in our company's history. Over the July 4 holiday weekend, a series of heat waves and successive thunderstorms hit our service area, accompanied by winds of over 70 miles per hour. PSE&G reconnected approximately 380,000 customers, with nearly all customers restored within 24 hours of losing power, demonstrating the value of our system reliability investments and our crews' steadfast commitment to our customers. PSE&G's round-the-clock restoration efforts were led by over 330 crews and were supported by over 10 million proactive customer communications. In addition to thanking our employees who participated in the storm response, I also want to highlight that we worked this multi-day restoration effort with an excellent safety record and provided PSE&G crews to help our neighboring utilities with their restorations. We support and welcome the upcoming review of our storm response by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, and we will be submitting a comprehensive post-event performance report to them tomorrow, August 5. During the heat wave, PSE&G reached a peak summer load of 10,446 megawatts, the highest level in 14 years, and activated demand response, part of our Clean Energy Future programs, during three separate events in early July, helping to keep peak energy costs down for customers. Our Clean Energy Future programs now generate more than $1 billion in annual customer savings, helping nearly 525,000 residential and business customers save energy and lower utility bills since we began the CEF-EE program back in October of 2020. Our EE investments have also supported approximately 9,300 jobs statewide over the past 6 years, including a network of more than 1,000 trade and union allies. We are proud of our strong performance to date in this program, including the success of our job programs, including the use of union labor for this work. We expect to file our proposal to implement the BPU's recently adopted framework for a one-year extension of the EE2 Triennium by September 30. And more good news for customers: This month, we are implementing residential bill credits consistent with Executive Order 1 and continuing the 12-month scheduled refund of approximately $166 million of the Zero Emission Certificate that started back in June. PSE&G has also filed with the BPU to lower residential gas bills by more than 5% beginning October 1, continuing to benefit our customers with the lowest gas utility bills in New Jersey and the region. We are also pleased to mention that PJM made a filing at FERC in June to implement a favorable prospective change to transmission cost allocation rules effective June 1, 2026. Based on public data from PJM, this prospective change will result in approximately $33 million benefit to our zonal transmission customers for the period running from June 1 through year-end 2026, with an expected prospective annual benefit of approximately $65 million. This is another example of how we continue to advocate on behalf of our customers. Since Governor Sherrill's inauguration, her administration has been focused on New Jersey affordability. The governor's first executive order directed the BPU to study modernizing the electric utility business model. And last month, the BPU released its consultant report, which also marked the conclusion of Phase 1 of this directive. While no formal recommendation was issued, several examples of promising regulatory frameworks from other states and multiple reforms were highlighted. These included multiyear rate plans, performance-based rates, performance incentive metrics, earnings sharing mechanisms, decoupling, and shared saving mechanisms, all of which can further alignment and transparency between the utility business model, state energy policy goals, and affordability in the state. The BPU will now proceed to Phase 2 of this effort, which is expected to focus on cost discipline, financing modernization, targeting incentives and shared savings, and stage performance-based ratemaking. PSE&G will fully participate in this proceeding, and we expect to file comments by September 18. We are encouraged by the report's balanced assessment of the extent to which the business model changes can address affordability, as well as the report highlighting the value of utilizing multiple criteria in its decision-making. As we prepare for these upcoming stakeholder proceedings, combined with the growing regulatory lag that comes from our historical test year and our robust capital program -- we believe there is an opportunity to bridge Governor Sherrill's call for greater accountability and transparency with our regulatory requirement to recover prudently invested capital and update our cost of service. PSE&G's last base rate case, settled in October of 2024, established a requirement to file our next base case no later than 2029. However, we have stated before that we could file sooner if conditions warranted. When you consider that we have added a significant amount of distribution rate base at a time when there have been fewer infrastructure investment programs, the alternative is more frequent base rate cases. As a result, PSE&G currently anticipates filing by year-end 2026 to update base rates. Now turning to PSEG Power. PSEG Nuclear also performed well during the quarter, supplying the grid with 7.8 terawatt-hours of carbon-free, 24/7 baseload generation and achieving a capacity factor of 92% that included the second consecutive breaker-to-breaker run at Salem Unit 2. As widely expected, PJM's latest capacity auction priced at $325 per megawatt-day, the upper end of the price collar, and fell 6.8 gigawatts short of PJM's targeted reliability requirement. This collar will remain in place during the upcoming December 2026 auction, covering capacity pricing into mid-2030. The uncapped price in the latest auction would have been $555 per megawatt-day, but the reserve margin still falls well below PJM's reliability requirement. We are continuing to review PJM's recent filings detailing the reliability backstop procurement and IRAS rules, the Interim Resource Adequacy Service, formerly known as Connect and Manage, including PJM's Friday submission to FERC. As part of the bilateral phase of PJM's RBP, PSEG Power recently submitted several project proposals throughout the region that may qualify as new dispatchable generation that could be paired with new large loads through bilateral contracts. Turning to long-term resource adequacy here in New Jersey, Governor Sherrill recently signed the Power New Jersey Act into law, establishing a new nuclear procurement process at the BPU to procure at least 1,100 megawatts through a state-backed program. As the only operator of existing nuclear generating facilities in New Jersey, PSEG Nuclear has been engaging in efforts to enable new nuclear development at our site in Salem County since 2016, when we obtained an Early Site Permit from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1 of only 6 currently issued in the United States. We believe that new nuclear generation represents a compelling long-term solution to address New Jersey's growing resource adequacy needs and support economic development in South Jersey, and a successful framework for new nuclear will require an appropriate allocation of project risk. At the same time, PSEG Power is continuing discussions with interested parties that see value in our existing nuclear production, future nuclear upgrades and other generation opportunities. In summary, our teams delivered solid financial and operational results for the second quarter and first half of 2026, enabling us to maintain PSEG's full year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance. We are also reaffirming PSEG's 5-year non-GAAP operating earnings growth outlook of 6% to 8% through 2030 as we continue to pursue opportunities incremental to our long-term forecast, including the potential to contract our nuclear output under multiyear agreements. Importantly, our solid balance sheet enables the funding of PSEG's total 5-year capital investment program of $24 billion to $28 billion without the need to issue new equity or sell assets and provides the opportunity for consistent and sustainable dividend growth. I'll now turn the call over to Dan, who will review the quarter's results and then rejoin the call for the Q&A session. Daniel Cregg: Great. Thank you, Ralph, and good morning, everybody. PSEG reported net income of $0.67 per share for the second quarter of 2026 compared to $1.17 per share in 2025, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $0.86 per share in the second quarter of 2026 compared to $0.77 per share in 2025. These quarterly results bring first-half 2026 net income to $2.15 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings to $2.41 per share. We've provided you with information on Slides 8 and 10 regarding the contribution to net income and non-GAAP operating earnings by business for the second quarter and first half of 2026. Slides 9 and 11 contain waterfall charts that take you through the net changes for the quarter and year-to-date periods over the prior year in non-GAAP operating earnings per share, also by major business. Starting with PSE&G, which reported second quarter net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $342 million for 2026 compared to $332 million in 2025. The utility's results were driven by ongoing investment in our energy efficiency and gas system modernization programs. Referring to the waterfall on Slide 9. Transmission margin was flat compared to the year-ago quarter as higher investment was offset by a prior-year true-up and our distribution margin increased by $0.05 per share compared to the year ago period, largely reflecting incremental gas margin from GSMP II extension roll-ins and higher investment in energy efficiency. Compared to the second quarter of 2025, distribution O&M expense was up by $0.01 per share, reflecting an increase in operational costs due to inflation, and depreciation and interest expense each rose by $0.01 per share due to ongoing capital investments and higher long-term interest rates. And utility taxes and other had a net favorable impact of $0.01 per share. Weather conditions during the second quarter, as measured by the Temperature Humidity Index, were 29% warmer than normal and 9% warmer than the second quarter of 2025. As a reminder, the Conservation Incentive Program, or CIP, mechanism decouples weather and other economic sales variances from a significant portion of our distribution margin while helping PSE&G promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation, including energy efficiency and solar programs. Under the CIP, the number of electric and gas customers drives margin, and residential customer growth for electric was about 1% and gas was flat over the past year. The CIP is also benefiting customers as higher revenues from last year's warmer-than-normal summer weather will continue to be refunded to electric customers, and PSE&G has a 5% decrease pending for residential gas customers, driven by the higher revenues from the colder-than-normal winter earlier this year. On the capital front, PSE&G invested approximately $1 billion during the second quarter and is on track to execute our full-year 2026 regulated capital investment plan of approximately $4.2 billion, focused on continued investments in infrastructure modernization, energy efficiency, electrification initiatives, and load growth. We have also maintained our 5-year regulated capital investment plan of $22.5 billion to $25.5 billion through 2030. We completed the GSMP II extension program in 2025, and we were approved to roll in $23 million effective April 2026, as planned. PSE&G continues to execute on the GSMP III program approved by the BPU last November. We expect to invest a total of $1.4 billion over a 3-year period, with approximately $1 billion of the total program receiving accelerated recovery, with the balance in stipulated base to be recovered in our next base rate case. And as Ralph mentioned earlier, we expect the cadence of more frequent base rate cases in the future as fewer clause-based IIPs cover our capital program. And since our last rate case concluded in 2024, PSE&G has made significant investments in distribution rate base to support the reliability of our system. We continue to explore the details of the E3 consultants report addressing Governor Sherrill's Executive Order 1 related to New Jersey's regulatory construct. Elements of the report provide opportunities to enhance the transparency of the regulatory model, which would be helpful for setting customer expectations, as well as the inclusions of performance-based metrics, which, based on our high level of service and customer satisfaction, we would welcome. Switching to transmission and following up on the potential earnings impact of the recent legislation that could eliminate the 50 basis point RTO incentive, we estimated in our 2025 10-K that loss of that incentive could represent an annual headwind of $40 million of net income, or approximately $0.08 per share. Last February, we considered the possibility that the RTO incentive earnings might be eliminated at some point when we rolled forward our long-term non-GAAP operating earnings guidance to 6% to 8% through 2030. I would also note that the effective date of this legislation is January 2027, so there will not be an impact on 2026 results. Moving now to PSEG Power and Other. For the second quarter, PSEG Power and Other reported a net loss of $8 million in 2026 compared to net income of $253 million in 2025, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $83 million in the second quarter of 2026 compared to $52 million in the second quarter of 2025. Referring again to the waterfall on Slide 9. For the second quarter of 2026 versus 2025, net energy margin rose by $0.08 per share, driven by higher generation volume, higher capacity prices, and higher gas operations, partly offset by the absence of both Zero Emission Certificates and the LIPA-related fuel and energy management fees. O&M was flat compared to the second quarter of 2025, and interest expense rose by $0.01 per share, reflecting incremental debt at higher interest rates. Lastly, taxes and other items had a net unfavorable impact of $0.01 per share in the second quarter compared to 2025. In July, PSEG Nuclear cleared approximately 3,600 megawatts of its eligible nuclear capacity in PJM's Base Residual Auction at $325 per megawatt-day for the energy year beginning June 1, 2028, and going through May 31, 2029. This latest result represents a modest decline from the $333 per megawatt-day price set in the prior PJM capacity auction. Touching on some recent financing activity. PSEG had strong available liquidity totaling $3.4 billion as of the end of June. This includes approximately $200 million of cash on hand. On the financing front, in June, PSEG issued $500 million of 4.8% unsecured senior notes due 2031 and used the proceeds to prepay $500 million of a 364-day term loan initiated in February of 2026. PSEG's level of variable rate debt represented approximately 3% of our total debt as of the end of June. Our variable rate debt consisted of the unhedged portion or about half of the $500 million 364-day term loan at PSEG Power maturing in December of 2026 and commercial paper. Looking ahead, our solid balance sheet continues to support the execution of PSEG's 5-year capital spending plan, dominated by regulated CapEx without the need to issue new equity or sell assets and provides the opportunity for consistent and sustainable dividend growth. In closing, we delivered solid operating and financial performance in the second quarter and first half of 2026, enabling us to maintain PSEG's full year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share. We're also reaffirming our 6% to 8% compound annual growth rate for non-GAAP operating earnings outlook through 2030 based on our confidence of executing our 5-year regulated capital investment plan that also supports a 6% to 7.5% compound annual growth in rate base over the same period. We continue to pursue nuclear revenue opportunities, competitive transmission projects and incremental utility infrastructure projects, including making incremental system investments to connect solar and battery storage resources to the grid to meet new demand, which could provide upside to our current growth outlook through 2030. That concludes our formal remarks, and we are now ready to begin the question-and-answer session. Operator: [Operator Instructions] The first question is from the line of Nicholas Campanella with Barclays. Nicholas Campanella: So I guess, Ralph, you said in your prepared just in regards to the base rate filing, you kind of talked about fewer investment infrastructure programs and the alternative is just more frequent base rate cases. Can you just maybe juxtapose that against this BPU report? And how much of the decision to file is on the back of the report versus, I guess, anything that's transpired from the RTO adder that you brought up or the EE spend? And then what parts of this report and recommendations do you think make it into this base rate review? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Thanks, Nick. So I don't expect a lot to make it in -- to this filing, and that's exactly why I think the timing of the filing aligns pretty well with the state's goals here. I think for all of us, as we look at the EO1 report, we see a state that's looking for a little more transparency, a little more performance-based ratemaking and potential for some multiyear rate plans. To be set up appropriately for that, you need a base rate case. And so the timing of that aligned with the fact that we haven't had anything on the electric side and upwards of 5 years for an IIP kind of puts us in a place where this makes a ton of sense for us right now. And I think it makes a ton of sense for the state. If you look across the utilities in New Jersey, most of the gas utilities have been in for a base rate case. And I think we heard from some of the others in New Jersey, the other electrics that they were planning to come in. And I think Orange & Rockland just settled. So if you look across the spectrum, we think this fits and it would keep us from being an outlier as we go into the next phase of EO1. Nicholas Campanella: Okay. And then maybe just a lot has kind of changed since you gave the 6% to 8%, and I know you're reaffirming that today. But I guess you're maybe pulling forward a base rate review. There's the RTO adder that's out there that I know you addressed is not going to be really impactful until '27. Just taking into kind of account the moving pieces, just where do you kind of see yourself in this range? Ralph LaRossa: Yes, Nick, we see ourselves in the 6% to 8%, as we've been saying. So that hasn't changed. We reaffirmed. We believe there's other opportunities that are presenting itself in the industry that we have opportunities to participate in. I think you talked -- we talked a little bit about the RBA, a few other things that are happening in PJM, our potential upgrades at our nuclear plant that we've talked about quite for a few different times on these different calls. So we remain confident in the 6% to 8% and the RTO adder was one of the scenarios that we had planned for. Operator: The next question is from the line of Richard Sunderland with Truist Securities. Richard Sunderland: Picking up the RBA commentary there, can you speak a little bit more to the project proposals? And I guess, any way to frame the scale and type of opportunity that you're seeing for PSEG Power in that? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. No, Rich, thanks for that. So look, I think people have -- in some degree, forgotten a little bit about the capabilities that we have inside the company as it goes to generation. We were one of the -- we built some of the last generation plants in PJM and certainly in PJM East when we completed Sewaren and Keys -- but we exited that because it was a market-based solution that really existed and was not something that we were -- we wanted to be part of. Now as PJM is moving into this RBA and there's more opportunities for long-term PPA type or utility-like agreements, we see an opportunity that might present itself. So we've got a few opportunities, we think, inside New Jersey, a few outside New Jersey that we're taking a look at. And I don't want to go much further than that right now because things are still changing at PJM, and we'll read the tea leaves on that just like everyone else is. I think even the load forecast is going to change. We saw some things on that as recently as yesterday. So as those opportunities present themselves, we'll look at it. But we have a skill set here that exists, and we kept the people. I just for those that may not recall, when we did exit the fossil business, we offered those employees an opportunity to stay along with us in the utility and many people did at all sorts of levels in the organization. So we think we've got the skill set to put that group back together, and we think that there's opportunities now that are more utility-like, which kind of align exactly with the investments we're looking to make. Richard Sunderland: Got it. That's super helpful. And then I guess turning to the PSE&G side, but in similar light to a few of the opportunities you outlined in terms of the 6% to 8% range and upside. Can you speak a little bit more to what you're focused on right now in terms of capturing some of that distribution investment upside or other areas of focus and kind of the time line to crystallize that and have a view on what may move into the plan over the next few years? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Look, we'll roll forward our CapEx at the beginning of next year as we have in the past couple of years. So that cycle is going to remain the same. I think our gas distribution business is focused, as it always has been, on replacement of cast iron. That's still something that I don't see changing. I think on the electric side, you've seen a lot from Governor Sherrill's administration about being ready for solar, more distributed energy resources, batteries, and so on. And I think that you'll see more alignment with our last mile conversations that we've had over the last few years and our -- they have a specific PSUP program that they've talked about at the Board of Public Utilities. And as the new Board President gets his feet under him at the Board there, I think you'll see a little more focus on driving the electric utilities in that direction. And any updates we'll have will roll out in the first quarter of next year. Operator: The next question is from the line of Carly Davenport with Goldman Sachs. Carly Davenport: Just two questions on the power side for me. One, could you provide any updates in terms of hedging activity beyond 2026, so where you are in '27 or '28 at this point? Daniel Cregg: Carly, there's nothing incremental for us to disclose. There's nothing in the materials that we have disclosed. We're working our way through the future years as we step through time. Carly Davenport: Okay. Got it. And then I guess just as you're thinking about potentially getting towards more regulatory certainty in PJM, I'm curious if you have seen any inflections in interest from data center or other large load customers for PPAs at Power relative to prior quarters? Daniel Cregg: Yes, I wouldn't say there's inflections, Carly. I think there's been some continued interest and pursuit on some things. I think that continues. I think that the process in PJM is something that people have, I think, for the past few months, no one is out there. They've tried to figure out where it's going and what it's going to mean from the standpoint of new load. And I do think that this whole RVP and IRAS processes are going to help folks figure out what is going to be expected of them so they can work against that backdrop. And so I think really the only change we've seen is just maybe just a caveat in the discussions related to the fact that if something has to happen, they are not boxing themselves into any kind of an agreement to trouble that thing that they need to stay in compliance with. But I wouldn't call it inflections. I would just call it people reading the context of where we are with respect to PJM. Operator: The next question is from the line of Michael Sullivan with Wolfe Research. Michael Sullivan: Ralph, on the BPU review that's ongoing, any sense to when that's just fully wrapped up? And then on the rate case that you're about to file, any sense of size of rate increase? Or could it potentially be a decrease to align with the governor? How should we be thinking about that? Ralph LaRossa: Yes, Michael, I would say the next step is Phase 2. I think all that information is in the public, and I don't want to front-run anything at the BPU. I think they've got their own timeline. And as I mentioned, we've got a new President at the BPU who is getting up to speed, and we'll see what -- if he wants to make any changes to the timeline that was published, but I don't expect that to be the case. And then as far as our rate case goes, look, we haven't disclosed anything more on that. And I'll leave -- we wanted to signal to you all that we were getting aligned again with the state and the timing that was going to be required to adequately execute on EO1. And so put those two pieces together, and we wanted to make sure that we were transparent about that with the investment community. So we got that information out, but no more details than that at this time. Michael Sullivan: Okay. Great. And then on the power side, can you just give a sense of to the extent you're pursuing opportunities in the RBP, what sort of returns you'd be targeting and how the math works with the $555 price cap in there? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. That's a great question, but I'm going to give that to Dan. Look, I think a lot of that is a TBD, Michael, but it's -- right now, the way that process is set up, you have to raise your hand first. And so we've raised our hand, and we wanted to, again, remind folks that we're in that business, but I'll give -- turn it to Dan for a little more. Daniel Cregg: Yes, Michael, we see potential in what is there to explore and determine whether something there is going to be attractive. It would be foolish to provide what an expectation would be of returns in a competitive situation. So I won't do that. But I do think that there's enough there for us to be interested in exploring, getting into the process and seeing if it meets the criteria, which what we've talked about is whether it's going to be utility-like or contracted enough to be attractive to us. And so all of those elements that I just talked about go into kind of risk and you're going to compare your return to the risk that you're taking. So obviously, it's more complicated than just providing a number to you with respect to what the return would be. Ralph LaRossa: Michael, I just -- let me just double down on what Dan said regarding the risk profile in the utility-like. I just want to reinforce that. We said it to an earlier question as well, but that's really important to us. However, I do think that, as you said, there's some more clarity in the PJM regulatory construct they're putting together. I think it's getting closer to utility-like with at least some of these opportunities that exist. Operator: Our next question is from the line of Jeremy Tonet with JPMorgan. Jeremy Tonet: I just wanted to go back to the bilateral discussions as you touched on before. And sorry if you had already said this, but in these conversations for -- with bilaterals, is it interest in existing assets, new assets or both? Or how should we think about that? Daniel Cregg: Yes. I think it's both, but more interest in new, right? If you think about the entire tone, I think across the country with respect to new load coming on, you don't have discussions about new load coming on with at least a preference for having incremental generation to join that. So I think there's also an understanding that new generation takes a while to come on. And so I think there is a preference to have something new to kind of fit within that overall dialogue. But I would say there is not solely an interest in new is how I would describe it. Jeremy Tonet: Got it. And so is there -- is it like kind of a 1:1, would you say? Or is there any ratio or is this all just kind of varies? Daniel Cregg: No, there's not a fixed ratio. It's just a preference, that's all. Jeremy Tonet: Got it. One last quick one, if I could. Obviously, a lot of new supply needs. How do you think new nuclear could fit in here? Do you think it is possible or it's just too far off at this point? Just any thoughts there would be great. Ralph LaRossa: I think, Jeremy, you as you kind of answered your own question there, is it potentially too far off, right? It depends upon the time line that you're looking at. I do believe that new nuclear makes sense, as we said in the prepared remarks. I think it's aligned again with the policies of the state. So we've always done that. And so we're trying to enable that as best we can. But whether or not those units, whether it's in New Jersey or across the country, come on quick enough for some of the load that's looking to connect. These are 12 years, 12-year long projects. I won't revisit what's happened in the past. So we need short-term solutions as well as long-term solutions. And I think that the new nuclear certainly falls in the long-term bucket. Daniel Cregg: And even if you take a look at what the RBP is talking about, they're talking about an in-service date of 2032. So that's half the time to get to the 12 years that Ralph just talked about. So I think there's near term, medium term and long-term nuclear is certainly on the longer term. Operator: The next question is from the line of Rinny Singh with Bank of America. Rinny Singh: I guess, first on the comments around the Phase I study, there's a pretty broad range of reforms that they propose. I guess how are you thinking about as we move forward, this negotiation and your input into the stakeholder process and what would have the most merit in New Jersey, both like as utility owners and then the conversations with the BPU? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. I think, look, we see multiple paths. And you kind of said there's multiple things that they put forth in EO1. I thought they really just put forth a number of options, but not necessarily a number of reforms, right? There's multiyear rate plans, there's performance-based rates, but these are things we've seen before in the industry and that it will provide more transparency for our customers. So I welcome everything that's being discussed. I think more transparency for customers is helpful for us, especially when you have some of the billing cycles like we've gone through. I think one of the best things that came out of the report was the reference to only 25% of the bill is distribution. And I think that was a number that was quoted in the EO1. And so I look at that and I say, I welcome the transparency. I think that's very helpful for us as a company. And from a performance-based rates, we started the prepared comments as we do always with financial, but move quickly into operational because we are very proud of the operational results that we have as a company. And so from a performance-based rate standpoint, we welcome that. So I kind of tie those two pieces together. And I think the paths that we see are all positive. I think we have to all the devils in the details, and we'll work through that with policymakers. But I feel pretty good about where we are. And I think that our filing of a base rate case shows our willingness to be aligned from a timing standpoint with the next steps that we'll see in this process. Rinny Singh: Okay. That makes sense. And then I think that kind of gets to my second question. Power is a big portion of the cost increases, and we have this RBP structure and the cost is kind of allocated down to the state basis. How do you think about the process there and the time line for states, I guess, specifically New Jersey to create this cost allocation basis? And what is it kind of favorable in that regard that it is down to the states? And then I guess on the flexibility procedures, how are you thinking about the mandatory flexibility down to the transmission owner tariff versus PJM just dictating it? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Look, I think that there's still -- again, we got to look for a little more detail. We got to see what comes out of FERC when they finally approve everything. But the state will be involved because the BPU will have some time lines that they'll have to meet. Right now, I think it's set up at 12 months, but we'll see how that changes over time, and I don't want to be locked into anything specific there until we see what comes out of FERC. But I do think that working together with the BPU, we can be very helpful here. And I'm going to point to something that recently happened, which is the transmission cost allocations process where we had -- I think it was again in our prepared remarks where we talked a little bit about how some of that cost allocation was done and working with the state, we now as recently as, I guess, the last 2 days, we saw that, that filing that we had made for the cost allocations was approved by FERC. And the result is going to be a $65 million a year savings going forward. That's not just a onetime, that's every year going forward for our customers. So we've proven we can work with the state in that particular case. That cost allocation was something we really advocated for strongly as a company ourselves. And then we worked with the state to get over some of the last-minute hurdles here. And I think we can do the same when we get into this -- into the RBA. I think we'll be able to figure out exactly the right way to do this to help from a customer cost standpoint as best we can. Operator: Next question is from the line of Sophie Karp with KeyBanc. Sophie Karp: It's been discussed already from several angles, but maybe let me try this one. Are you guys seeing attractive opportunities to contract bilaterally for new builds like outside of the PJM contract, like not as a part of the immediate bilateral auction, but on your own with customers to facilitate their large load build-out in the PJM footprint. Sort of like some of your peers are trying? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Sophie, I'm going to give that to Dan. I just want to just -- PJM isn't the only process that's being stood up right now to go through these bilateral contracts. So it's a great question, and I'll give it to Dan. Daniel Cregg: Yes. I think to the extent that you are new load, you're going to end up getting pushed into that. But I also think that there's states that are seeing their supply-demand balances not necessarily be where they want them and maybe looking to do something to prompt some generation there. And so I think that's got some potential as well. I think to your question, it sounded like are you seeing folks come in and, in particular, new load looking for new generation. I think that will get caught up into that RBP process, though. So I think there are other venues, and I think we've got one of the best sites that are out there with respect to the infrastructure in place. But we'll see what happens throughout as we go forward through a couple of different processes as they move forward. Sophie Karp: And maybe just to build on that, like as you consider these types of investments, how do you think about the target IRR or return that you would need to jump on to that? Like what's your thinking process here? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Sophie, I'm going to, again, just kind of give -- reinforce something Dan said earlier. It all depends upon the risk, right? And we have said we don't want to be in a high-risk market. I would consider PJM marketplace to be high risk. We're looking for utility-like returns. So I think in saying that utility-like investments, we're saying utility-like returns because we're looking for utility-like risk. And I don't want to go much further than that other than just to reinforce utility-like, utility-like, utility-like. Operator: The next question is from the line of Ryan Levine with Citi. Ryan Levine: Given the New Jersey BPU and other PJM state level discussions around virtual power plants, how are you thinking about the opportunity for PEG? Ralph LaRossa: Yes, Ryan, thanks. Listen, I think from a PEG standpoint, again, it's an opportunity for us to show alignment with the state policy. There's not a tremendous financial opportunity on the VPP side that we see. I think maybe nationwide, if you were in that game or you're doing some other things. But for our New Jersey customers, it's more about aligning with policy and enabling that policy than it is about a financial return. Ryan Levine: Okay. But are there any initiatives that you have underway to address that alignment? Ralph LaRossa: Yes, we have some -- I think we've worked with the BPU on a couple of different items where we've put forth some pilot programs. And I think they're going to initiate more of a process there. So again, we'd be front-running them if we got ahead of that curve. But we've done that more through the regulatory conversations than we have with actual implementation of programs. But we do have some pilots that we've proposed. Operator: Next questions are from the line of Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates. Paul Patterson: Just wanted to sort of follow up on the expected rate case and what have you. And sort of get your -- and I apologize if I missed this, but the energy efficiency order that came out and how you see that -- what is that -- it seems a little unusual in terms of their return and what have you. I'm just wondering if you could sort of give me a better feeling for what -- how you see that in the whole context of the regulatory environment there. Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Look, I look at that as a very specific piece of the regulatory process, not overarching. I think, again, the state is looking for affordability. So understand the goals that were put forth in that framework. But it is a framework. It's not mandated. So we have the opportunity to talk about how our programs differentiate from others. I think one of the biggest ones for us is our use of union labor and the percentage in which we use union labor to achieve the goals that were put forth for all of the -- for us by the BPU. So I do think there are some differentiating factors that are worth discussion. I also think that it's important to note that this is prospective from an asset standpoint. This is dealing with the extension assets, the dollars that we're putting forth to support that investment, not for all the investments. So that's also important. And I think it's also a reflection of the amount of, I'd say, the loan program, the on-bill financing that we're doing and the perceived risk around that specific part of the program. So there's a lot of specifics in what I just said to you, which makes it kind of unique, and it's consistent from an affordability standpoint, but it's unique from an investment standpoint as we think about it. Paul Patterson: Okay. Great. And then just back on nuclear, I just -- I'm wondering if you could give a flavor for what stakeholders actually think or what their comprehension about what the affordability impact of nuclear might be? I mean, this is around the country. There seems to be bipartisan buy-in to this, and I understand its appeal. But I'm just wondering when you're speaking to policymakers, et cetera, or maybe you can tell me if there's been a big change in the cost of nuclear. I mean I know there is SMR technology, et cetera. But I mean, is there -- do you think there's a full understanding about -- I mean, with respect to this buy-in about what the cost of new nuclear might be? Do you follow what I'm saying? Ralph LaRossa: Yes. Look, I think there's plenty of levelized cost of energy reports out there that give policymakers a clear line of sight into what the costs are going to be. I think there's a question about the timing of the projects coming online and when -- what the cost will be at that point, right? So that's always a conversation that you have with policymakers. I think the biggest open item for everyone is, while there's bipartisan support for building new nuclear, there's also bipartisan support to protect ratepayers from cost overruns. And so the question comes down to where do we -- how does that risk get adequately allocated amongst the players in any given project? And that's why whenever we've talked about it, we've talked about enabling new nuclear because of the concern that we have about how does that become utility-like if there's high risk associated with it. So more to come on that. I think we're, again, very well positioned. I think our site is very well positioned and we look forward to doing what we can to enable new nuclear in New Jersey. But I think to your specific question, is there a line of sight for policymakers on the cost? I think there's plenty of studies out there, and I think there's plenty of conversation about where these costs are and, more importantly, where they could go to. Operator: Our final question is from the line of Travis Miller with Morningstar. Travis Miller: You answered most of my questions, a lot of details. I appreciate it. Just one quick follow-up on that. EO1 and the process from here. Is the ball now in your court in terms of putting together proposals, best ideas, stuff like that to present to the BPU? Or are you still waiting for some more guidance either from governor's office or BPU or some other entity before you start putting filings out? Ralph LaRossa: Yes, Travis, there's a clear Phase 2 that the Board of Public Utilities will go through as the next step in this process. So we'll participate in that. We'll have comments. There's plenty of stakeholder meetings that have been scheduled by the Board that we will participate in and others. So it's more, at this point, still an open item that we wait for finalization of the orders from the Board of Public Utilities. Travis Miller: Okay. So you think in terms of putting together actual proposals and stuff that comes after the base rate case? Ralph LaRossa: Well, no, I think, we said we file by the end of the year. There's a time line associated with that. If you kind of play it out, there'll be some sort of a framework that will come out for EO1. I would expect that to happen in the last quarter, beginning of next year, put that framework together and now you've got your base rate filing that's been recently approved or is about to be approved for any utility in the state. And then you can start to move efficiently into the next framework because you've got that base to work off of. Travis Miller: Okay. That makes sense. A lot of work to do in '27. Stay busy. Ralph LaRossa: Thanks, Travis. Operator: At this time, I'll turn the floor back to Mr. LaRossa for closing comments. Ralph LaRossa: Well, thank you. Just a couple of things. I appreciate all the interest as always. I just want to reinforce the way we started, which was on the great work by the teams here in New Jersey and in Long Island to respond to the storms over the July 4 holiday season and just the fact that people were away from their families and from their barbecues and from everything that they wanted to be doing otherwise during that weekend. Without that operational excellence, we couldn't even be having conversations about what we can potentially do moving forward. And I think as I look forward, we've continued to get more regulatory clarity, both at PJM with some of the steps that they've taken and how that might play out on the generation side and here in New Jersey on the distribution side as we've moved through the EO1 process and ongoing conversations there. So regulatory clarity is starting to take place. And then I think on top of that, there's opportunity sets that remain in front of us that are presented both by the regulatory clarity at PJM and in New Jersey as it pertains to that last mile and getting the system ready for the solar and batteries that we know we need in the near term. So I put all those pieces together, and I feel pretty good about where we are. So I look forward to the next time that we're together. And I'll just end by wishing Carlotta a belated happy birthday for all of you that are on the call and interact with her all the time. When you give her a buzz next time, just make sure you say happy birthday. Thanks for dialing in. Operator: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation. Before you buy stock in Public Service Enterprise Group, 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 Public Service Enterprise Group 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. PSEG (PEG) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript was originally published by The Motley Fool

Interested in Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated? Here are five stocks we like better. PSEG reaffirmed its 2026 operating-earnings guidance of $4.28–$4.40 per share and its target for 6%–8% annual growth through 2030, despite lower year-over-year GAAP earnings. Second-quarter non-GAAP operating earnings increased to $0.86 per share from $0.77. PSE&G invested about $1 billion in utility infrastructure during the quarter and remains on track for roughly $4.2 billion in regulated capital spending in 2026. The utility now expects to file a base-rate case by the end of 2026, earlier than previously planned. PSEG Power benefited from higher market prices, stronger nuclear generation and gas operations, while its nuclear fleet achieved a 92% capacity factor. The company is evaluating additional nuclear, uprate and dispatchable-generation opportunities, but emphasized that new investments must have contracted or utility-like risk profiles. Public Service Enterprise Group (NYSE:PEG) reaffirmed its full-year 2026 operating-earnings outlook after reporting second-quarter results supported by utility infrastructure investments and improved performance at its power business. The company reported second-quarter net income of $0.67 per share, compared with $1.17 per share a year earlier. Non-GAAP operating earnings rose to $0.86 per share from $0.77 per share in the prior-year quarter. For the first half, PSEG reported net income of $2.15 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings of $2.41 per share. → SpaceX’s First Earnings Report Could Decide Whether Shorts or Bulls Have Control Chair, President and CEO Ralph LaRossa said investments in system replacement, reliability and energy efficiency were major drivers of second-quarter financial growth. At PSEG Power, higher realized market prices, greater nuclear generation and gas operations more than offset the expiration of Zero Emission Certificate programs in May 2025. PSEG maintained its 2026 non-GAAP operating-earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share and reaffirmed its outlook for 6% to 8% annual operating-earnings growth through 2030. → 3 Drone Stocks That Should Soar After the Summer Slump PSE&G recorded second-quarter net income and operating earnings of $342 million, up from $332 million in the year-earlier quarter. CFO Dan Cregg said results reflected continued investment in energy efficiency and gas-system modernization. Distribution margin increased by $0.05 per share year over year, largely due to incremental gas margin from GSMP 2 extension roll-ins and higher energy-efficiency investment. The utility invested approximately $1 billion during the quarter and remains on track to spend about $4.2 billion in regulated capital investments during 2026. Its five-year regulated capital plan remains $22.5 billion to $25.5 billion through 2030. → Why Rare Earth Processing Could Be the Real 2027 Opportunity LaRossa also highlighted PSEG’s response to severe weather over the July 4 holiday weekend. Heat waves and successive thunderstorms with winds exceeding 70 miles per hour affected the service territory, and the company reconnected about 380,000 customers. Nearly all affected customers were restored within 24 hours, according to LaRossa. The restoration effort involved more than 330 crews and more than 10 million proactive customer communications. PSEG said it will submit a post-event performance report to the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on Aug. 5 and supports the agency’s review of the response. During the heat wave, PSE&G reached a peak summer load of 10,446 megawatts, its highest level in 14 years. The company activated demand-response programs during three events in early July. LaRossa said PSEG’s Clean Energy Future programs generate more than $1 billion in annual customer savings and have helped nearly 525,000 residential and business customers reduce energy use and bills since October 2020. PSEG said PSE&G now expects to file a base-rate case by the end of 2026, earlier than the 2029 deadline established in the utility’s prior base-rate settlement. LaRossa said the potential earlier filing reflects significant additions to distribution rate base and fewer infrastructure investment programs that provide accelerated recovery. The timing also coincides with New Jersey’s review of the electric-utility business model under Governor Sherrill’s Executive Order 1. A consultant report released by the BPU included examples of multi-year rate plans, performance-based rates, performance metrics, earnings-sharing mechanisms, decoupling and shared-savings mechanisms. LaRossa said PSEG does not expect many elements of that framework to be incorporated directly into the upcoming rate filing, but said a base-rate case would help establish a foundation for later regulatory changes. PSEG expects to submit comments in the next phase of the BPU process by Sept. 18. The company also cited customer-affordability actions, including residential bill credits and an ongoing 12-month refund of approximately $166 million in Zero Emission Certificates. PSE&G has filed to reduce residential gas bills by more than 5% beginning Oct. 1. PSEG said a PJM filing at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is expected to produce about $33 million in benefits for its zonal transmission customers from June through year-end 2026, with an expected annual benefit of approximately $65 million going forward. PSEG Nuclear produced 7.8 terawatt-hours of carbon-free baseload generation in the quarter and achieved a 92% capacity factor. The performance included Salem Unit 2’s second consecutive breaker-to-breaker run, LaRossa said. In PJM’s latest capacity auction, PSEG Nuclear cleared about 3,600 megawatts of eligible nuclear capacity at $325 per megawatt-day for the period running from June 1, 2028, through May 31, 2029. That was modestly below the $333 per megawatt-day result in the prior auction. LaRossa said PSEG Power has submitted several proposals in PJM’s bilateral Reliability Backstop Procurement process for potential dispatchable generation projects that could be paired with large new loads under bilateral contracts. Management did not disclose prospective project returns, emphasizing that any investment would need to have a utility-like or sufficiently contracted risk profile. The company is also evaluating opportunities related to existing nuclear output, possible nuclear uprates and other generation projects. New Jersey’s Power in New Jersey Act established a BPU nuclear procurement process for at least 1,100 megawatts of capacity. PSEG said its Salem County site holds an early site permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, though LaRossa described new nuclear as a longer-term solution because such projects can take about 12 years to develop. PSEG ended June with $3.4 billion in available liquidity, including about $200 million in cash. In June, the company issued $500 million of 4.8% senior notes due in 2031 and used the proceeds to prepay a $500 million term loan. Management said its balance sheet supports its $24 billion to $28 billion total five-year capital plan without new equity issuance or asset sales. Public Service Enterprise Group (NYSE: PEG) is a diversified energy company that operates primarily in New Jersey. Its core businesses include a regulated utility that delivers electric and natural gas service to residential, commercial and industrial customers, as well as generation and energy services operations that participate in wholesale power markets. The company's activities encompass transmission and distribution, power generation operations, and related energy infrastructure services. The regulated utility arm, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), is responsible for owning and maintaining electric and gas networks, connecting customers, performing meter and billing services, and managing system reliability and storm response. 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 "Public Service Enterprise Group Q2 Earnings Call Highlights" was originally published by MarketBeat. View MarketBeat's top stocks for August 2026.

Never miss an important update on your stock portfolio and cut through the noise. Over 7 million investors trust Simply Wall St to stay informed where it matters for FREE. Public Service Enterprise Group stock has risen about 40.5% over the past five years, yet its current checks suggest a mixed picture, with the Dividend Discount Model (DDM) pointing to a price close to intrinsic value while market multiples appear more supportive. Over five years, shareholders are up roughly 40.5%, which points to a steady but not runaway gain for a regulated utility stock. New proposals to supply power to data centers through PJM’s reliability initiative can support long term cash flow expectations. However, any shift in regulatory support or allowed returns in New Jersey remains a key risk for how the market prices Public Service Enterprise Group. The company scores 3 out of 6 on the broader valuation checks. This means Public Service Enterprise Group looks neither clearly cheap nor clearly expensive overall, even though multiples lean undervalued and the DDM suggests the stock is fairly valued according to its intrinsic value estimate 3. The issue now is whether the recent share price leaves enough upside versus intrinsic value and earnings based signals to justify new money going into Public Service Enterprise Group at current levels. Find out why Public Service Enterprise Group's -9.1% return over the last year is lagging behind its peers. The Dividend Discount Model (DDM) values Public Service Enterprise Group by projecting future dividends and discounting them back to today. For this stock, the model uses a recent annual dividend of about $2.90 per share, an estimated return on equity of 12.58% and a payout ratio close to 60%. That supports an assumed long run dividend growth rate of 3.54%, capped below the higher 5.07% growth signal from other inputs to keep the forecast more restrained. Based on these assumptions, the DDM indicates an intrinsic value of about $81.16 per share. This is roughly 6.9% above the current share price and suggests the stock may be mildly undervalued rather than deeply mispriced. PSEG’s recent proposals to supply power to data centers through PJM’s reliability initiative give some context for that gap, as the market may still be weighing how much additional earnings and dividend capacity such projects can realistically support. Overall, the Dividend Discount Model suggests Public Service Enterprise Group stock appears to be roughly fairly valued with only a modest margin relative to its intrinsic estimate. Public Service Enterprise Group is fairly valued according to our Dividend Discount Model (DDM), but this can change at a moment's notice. Track the value in your watchlist or portfolio and be alerted on when to act. Head to the Valuation section of our Company Report for more details on how we arrive at this Fair Value for Public Service Enterprise Group. P/E is a useful lens for Public Service Enterprise Group because earnings are a core driver for regulated utilities that return a large share of profits as dividends. Public Service Enterprise Group currently trades on a P/E of about 18.7x. That is close to the Integrated Utilities average of around 18.5x and sits below both the peer group average of 20.7x and the modelled fair P/E of roughly 22.7x that reflects its risk profile and expected growth. The gap between the current 18.7x and the fair 22.7x suggests investors are not paying a premium for Public Service Enterprise Group, even though the stock screens slightly richer than the sector as a whole. Instead, the stock sits at a modest discount to similar utilities on earnings while still lining up reasonably with broader industry norms. On the P/E multiple, Public Service Enterprise Group stock appears undervalued relative to what its earnings profile would typically command. See what the numbers say about this price — find out in our valuation breakdown. Simply Wall St Narratives pick up where the valuation checks on Public Service Enterprise Group leave off and focus on what would need to happen in the business for the stock to be worth significantly more or less than today’s price. Rather than relying on a single multiple or model result, each narrative lays out the assumptions behind its view of fair value so you can compare those expectations with Public Service Enterprise Group's actual performance as new results arrive. Share a data driven narrative on Public Service Enterprise Group's stock to add your voice to the Simply Wall St community and set out a clear case that can be tracked as new results arrive. This is a chance to lay out your view on whether Public Service Enterprise Group's data center supply proposals in PJM and its earnings outlook justify where the stock trades today. Do you think there's more to the story for Public Service Enterprise Group? Head over to our Community to see what others are saying! The Dividend Discount Model (DDM) puts Public Service Enterprise Group only modestly above the current share price, while earnings multiples point to an undervalued stock versus similar utilities. Taken together, those signals and the mixed overall valuation checks suggest there is some cushion, but not a wide margin. The key issue from here is whether Public Service Enterprise Group can translate its data center and PJM opportunities into steady, regulator-supported cash flows that justify a stronger earnings multiple without stretching the intrinsic value case. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include PEG. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email [email protected]

$0.67 PER SHARE NET INCOME $0.86 PER SHARE NON-GAAP OPERATING EARNINGS Maintains 2026 Non-GAAP Operating Earnings Guidance of $4.28 - $4.40 Per Share NEWARK, N.J., Aug. 4, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Public Service Enterprise Group (NYSE: PEG) reported the following results for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2026: "The efficient execution of PSEG's strategic plan continues to benefit our customers with a resilient and reliable electric and gas system. In early July, these systems withstood a series of heatwaves and successive thunderstorms – accompanied by 70 mile per hour winds – that resulted in one of the most damaging storms in our history," said Ralph LaRossa, PSEG's chair, president and CEO. LaRossa continued, "PSE&G reconnected approximately 380,000 customers with nearly all customers restored within 24 hours of losing power, demonstrating the value of our system-reliability investments as well as our ability to respond quickly and safely. PSE&G's around-the-clock restoration efforts were led by over 330 crews and over 10 million proactive customer communications." "PSE&G reached a peak summer load of 10,446 MW on July 2, the highest in 14 years, and activated Demand Response – part of our Clean Energy Future programs – during three separate events throughout the early July heatwave. These peak demands amplify the importance of our suite of award-winning Clean Energy Future programs, which now generate more than $1 billion in annual customer savings, helping nearly 525,000 residential and business customers save energy and lower utility bills since the program started in 2020. PSE&G's energy efficiency investments have supported approximately 9,300 jobs statewide, including a network of more than 1,000 trade and union allies." "During the quarter, PSE&G filed with the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities to lower residential gas bills by 5%, beginning October 1, continuing to benefit our customers with the lowest gas utility bills in New Jersey and the Mid-Atlantic Region." "PSEG Nuclear also performed well during the quarter, supplying the grid with 7.8 TWh of carbon-free, 24 by 7 baseload generation and achieving a capacity factor of 92.0% that included a second consecutive breaker to breaker run at Salem Unit 2." "In addition to an exemplary storm response, our teams delivered solid financial and operational results for the second quarter and first half of 2026, enabling us to maintain PSEG's full-year 2026 non-GAAP Operating Earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share. We are also reaffirming PSEG's five-year, non-GAAP Operating Earnings growth outlook of 6% to 8% through 2030 as we continue to pursue opportunities incremental to our long-term forecast, including the potential to contract our nuclear output under multi-year agreements. Importantly, our solid balance sheet enables the funding of PSEG's total five-year capital investment program of $24 billion to $28 billion without the need to issue new equity or sell assets and provides the opportunity for consistent and sustainable dividend growth," LaRossa concluded. PSE&G's results for the second quarter reflect ongoing investments in Energy Efficiency, Gas System Modernization and Transmission. These results were partially offset by higher operation and maintenance costs as well as higher depreciation and interest expense related to incremental investments and a prior year Transmission true up. PSEG Power & Other results for the quarter reflect higher realized prices and an increase in nuclear generation, partly offset by the absence of zero emission certificates which ended May 2025, and higher interest expense and taxes. ### PSEG will host a conference call to review its second quarter 2026 results, earnings guidance, and other matters with the financial community at 11:00 a.m. ET today. Please register to access this event by visiting: https://investor.pseg.com/investor-news-and-events About PSEG Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) (NYSE: PEG) is a predominantly regulated infrastructure company operating New Jersey's largest transmission and distribution utility, serving approximately 2.4 million electric and 1.9 million natural gas customers. PSEG also owns an independent fleet of 3,758 MW of carbon-free, baseload nuclear power generating units in NJ and PA. PSEG aims to power a future where people use energy more efficiently, and it's safer and delivered more reliably than ever. PSEG is a member of the S&P 500 Index and has been named to the Dow Jones Best in Class North America Index for 18 consecutive years. PSEG's businesses include Public Service Electric and Gas Co. (PSE&G), PSEG Power and PSEG Long Island (https://corporate.pseg.com). Non-GAAP Financial Measures Management uses non-GAAP Operating Earnings in its internal analysis, and in communications with investors and analysts, as a consistent measure for comparing PSEG's financial performance to previous financial results. Operating Earnings is a non-GAAP financial measure that differs from Net Income. Non-GAAP Operating Earnings exclude the impact of gains (losses) associated with the Nuclear Decommissioning Trust (NDT), Mark-to-Market (MTM) accounting and other material infrequent items. See Attachments 8 and 9 for a complete list of items excluded from Net Income/(Loss) in the determination of non-GAAP Operating Earnings. The presentation of non-GAAP Operating Earnings is intended to complement and should not be considered an alternative to the presentation of Net Income/(Loss), which is an indicator of financial performance determined in accordance with GAAP. In addition, non-GAAP Operating Earnings as presented in this report may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies. Due to the forward-looking nature of non-GAAP Operating Earnings guidance, PSEG is unable to reconcile this non-GAAP financial measure to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure because comparable GAAP measures are not reasonably accessible or reliable due to the inherent difficulty in forecasting and quantifying measures that would be required for such reconciliation. Namely, we are not able to reliably project without unreasonable effort MTM and NDT gains (losses), for future periods due to market volatility. These items are uncertain, depend on various factors, and may have a material impact on our future GAAP results. Forward-Looking Statements Certain of the matters discussed in this report about our and our subsidiaries' future performance, including, without limitation, future revenues, earnings, strategies, prospects, consequences, and all other statements that are not purely historical constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. Such statements are based on management's beliefs as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to management. When used herein, the words "anticipate," "intend," "estimate," "believe," "expect," "plan," "should," "hypothetical," "potential," "forecast," "project," variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ are often presented with the forward-looking statements themselves. Other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in any forward-looking statements made by us herein are discussed in filings we make with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K. These factors include, but are not limited to: any inability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, or construct transmission and distribution, and our nuclear generation projects; significant resource adequacy challenges that present affordability and reliability concerns and that could causepolicymakers to implement responsive measures that could have a material, adverse impact on our business, strategy, growth rates, cash flows, results of operations, and financial condition and increase regulatory uncertainty for utility investment initiatives and programs; the physical, financial and transition risks related to climate change, including risks relating to potentially increased legislative and regulatory burdens, changing customer preferences and lawsuits; any equipment failures, gas explosions, accidents, critical operating technology or business system failures, natural disasters, severe weather events, acts of war, terrorism or other acts of violence, sabotage, physical attacks or security breaches, cyberattacks or other incidents that may impact our ability to provide safe and reliable service to our customers; any inability to recover the carrying amount of our long-lived assets; disruptions or cost increases in our supply chain, including labor shortages; any inability to maintain sufficient liquidity or access sufficient capital on commercially reasonable terms; the impact of cybersecurity attacks or intrusions or other disruptions to our information technology, operational or other systems; failure to attract and retain a qualified workforce; increases in the costs of equipment, materials, fuel, services and labor; the impact of our covenants in our debt instruments and credit agreements on our business; adverse performance of our defined benefit plan trust funds and Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund and increases in funding requirements; any inability to enter into or extend certain significant contracts; development, adoption and use of Artificial Intelligence by us and our third-party vendors; fluctuations in, or third-party default risk in wholesale power and natural gas markets, including the potential impacts on the economic viability of our generation units; the ability to obtain adequate nuclear fuel supply; changes in technology related to energy generation, distribution and consumption and changes in customer usage patterns; third-party credit risk relating to our sale of nuclear generation output and purchase of nuclear fuel; any inability to meet our commitments under forward sale obligations and Regional Transmission Organization rules; risks associated with generation activities at, and operation of, the Peach Bottom plants, which are similar to those to which nuclear generation plants that we operate are subject; the impact of changes in state and federal legislation and regulations on our business, including PSE&G's ability to recover costs and earn returns on authorized investments; PSE&G's proposed investment projects or programs may not be fully approved by regulators and its capital investment may be lower than planned; our ability to receive sufficient financial support for our New Jersey nuclear plants from the markets, and/or production tax credits; adverse changes in and non-compliance with energy industry laws, policies, regulations and standards, including market structures and transmission planning and transmission returns; risks associated with our ownership and operation of nuclear facilities, including increased nuclear fuel storage costs, regulatory risks, such as compliance with the Atomic Energy Act and trade control, environmental and other regulations, as well as operational, financial, environmental and health and safety risks; changes in or violation of federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations and enforcement; delays in receipt of, or an inability to receive, necessary licenses and permits and siting approvals; and changes in tax laws and regulations. All of the forward-looking statements made in this report are qualified by these cautionary statements and we cannot assure you that the results or developments anticipated by management will be realized or even if realized, will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, us or our business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements in making any investment decision. Forward-looking statements made in this report apply only as of the date of this report. While we may elect to update forward-looking statements from time to time, we specifically disclaim any obligation to do so, even in light of new information or future events, unless otherwise required by applicable securities laws. The forward-looking statements contained in this report are intended to qualify for the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Net Gains (Losses) on Trust Investments103--103Net Other Income (Deductions)83(2)3253Net Non-Operating Pension and OPEB Credits (Costs)32-35(3)Interest Expense(489)2(318)(173)INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES 1,343-955388Income Tax Expense(169)-(77)(92)NET INCOME$ 1,174$ -$ 878$ 296Reconciling Items Excluded from Net Income(b)(72)--(72)OPERATING EARNINGS (non-GAAP)$ 1,102$ -$ 878$ 224Earnings Per ShareNET INCOME$ 2.35Reconciling Items Excluded from Net Income(b)(0.15)OPERATING EARNINGS (non-GAAP)$ 2.20 View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pseg-announces-second-quarter-2026-results-302842353.html

PSEG (PEG) came out with quarterly earnings of $0.86 per share, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $0.8 per share. This compares to earnings of $0.77 per share a year ago. These figures are adjusted for non-recurring items. This quarterly report represents an earnings surprise of +7.50%. A quarter ago, it was expected that this parent company of PSEG Power and Public Service Electric & Gas Co. would post earnings of $1.47 per share when it actually produced earnings of $1.55, delivering a surprise of +5.44%. Over the last four quarters, the company has surpassed consensus EPS estimates four times. PSEG, which belongs to the Zacks Utility - Electric Power industry, posted revenues of $2.55 billion for the quarter ended June 2026, missing the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 5.38%. This compares to year-ago revenues of $2.81 billion. The company has topped consensus revenue estimates three times over the last four quarters. The sustainability of the stock's immediate price movement based on the recently-released numbers and future earnings expectations will mostly depend on management's commentary on the earnings call. PSEG shares have lost about 4.6% since the beginning of the year versus the S&P 500's gain of 11%. While PSEG has underperformed the market so far this year, the question that comes to investors' minds is: what's next for the stock? There are no easy answers to this key question, but one reliable measure that can help investors address this is the company's earnings outlook. Not only does this include current consensus earnings expectations for the coming quarter(s), but also how these expectations have changed lately. Empirical research shows a strong correlation between near-term stock movements and trends in earnings estimate revisions. Investors can track such revisions by themselves or rely on a tried-and-tested rating tool like the Zacks Rank, which has an impressive track record of harnessing the power of earnings estimate revisions. Ahead of this earnings release, the estimate revisions trend for PSEG was mixed. While the magnitude and direction of estimate revisions could change following the company's just-released earnings report, the current status translates into a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) for the stock. So, the shares are expected to perform in line with the market in the near future. You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. It will be interesting to see how estimates for the coming quarters and the current fiscal year change in the days ahead. The current consensus EPS estimate is $1.18 on $3.31 billion in revenues for the coming quarter and $4.37 on $12.71 billion in revenues for the current fiscal year. Investors should be mindful of the fact that the outlook for the industry can have a material impact on the performance of the stock as well. In terms of the Zacks Industry Rank, Utility - Electric Power is currently in the bottom 29% of the 250 plus Zacks industries. Our research shows that the top 50% of the Zacks-ranked industries outperform the bottom 50% by a factor of more than 2 to 1. Vistra Corp. (VST), another stock in the same industry, has yet to report results for the quarter ended June 2026. The results are expected to be released on August 7. This company is expected to post quarterly earnings of $1.83 per share in its upcoming report, which represents a year-over-year change of +81.2%. The consensus EPS estimate for the quarter has been revised 20% higher over the last 30 days to the current level. Vistra Corp.'s revenues are expected to be $6.29 billion, up 48.1% from the year-ago quarter. 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 Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated (PEG) : Free Stock Analysis Report Vistra Corp. (VST) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated PEG, or PSEG, reported second-quarter 2026 adjusted earnings of 86 cents per share, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 80 cents by 7.5%. Earnings increased 11.7% from the prior-year reported figure of 77 cents.The company reported GAAP earnings per share (EPS) of 67 cents compared with $1.17 in the corresponding period of 2025. Operating revenues totaled $2.55 billion, which missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $2.70 billion by 5.4%. The top line also declined 8.9% from the year-ago figure of $2.81 billion. Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated price-consensus-eps-surprise-chart | Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated Quote Electric sales increased 2% year over year to 9,629 million kilowatt-hours (kWh). Residential sales rose 3% to 3,242 million kWh, while commercial and industrial sales jumped 1% to 6,316 million kWh.Total gas sales declined 23% to 541 million therms. Firm gas sales slipped 1% to 351 million therms, as residential volumes decreased 4%, and commercial and industrial volumes increased 1%. Non-firm commercial and industrial sales fell 45% to 190 million therms. The operating income totaled $461 million compared with $817 million in the year-ago period, reflecting a decline of 43.6%.Total operating expenses were $2.09 billion, up 5.3% from the year-ago figure.Interest expenses amounted to $269 million, which increased 8.5% year over year. PSE&G revenues increased 5.2% to $2.14 billion from $2.03 billion in the prior-year period. The regulated utility generated net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $342 million, up from $332 million. Results benefited from ongoing investments in energy efficiency, gas system modernization and transmission. PSEG Power & Other revenues declined 42% to $534 million from $920 million a year earlier. Despite the revenue decrease, non-GAAP operating earnings increased to $83 million from $52 million. The improvement reflected higher realized prices and increased nuclear generation. The long-term debt (including the current portion of the long-term debt) as of June 30, 2026 was $23.59 billion compared with $22.55 billion as of Dec. 31, 2025.The net cash flow from operating activities was $1.82 billion during the first six months of 2026 compared with $1.53 billion during the first six months of 2025. PEG expects adjusted earnings to be in the range of $4.28-$4.40 per share. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is currently pegged at $4.37, which is at the higher end of the company’s guided range. PEG currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Edison International EIX reported second-quarter 2026 core earnings of $1.54 per share, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.02 by 51%. The bottom line surged 58.8% from 97 cents in the year-ago quarter.Edison International's second-quarter operating revenues totaled $4.36 billion, which missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $4.72 billion by 7.7%. The top line also decreased 4.1% from the year-ago quarter’s figure of $4.54 billion.IDACORP, Inc. IDA reported second-quarter 2026 earnings of $1.79 per share, which topped the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.75 by 2.3%. The company’s earnings also improved 1.7% from $1.76 in the year-ago quarter.Total revenues in the second quarter of 2026 were $469.8 million, lagging the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $478 million by 1.8%. However, the metric rose 4.2% from $450.9 million in the year-ago quarter.PG&E Corporation PCG reported second-quarter 2026 adjusted earnings per share of 40 cents, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 37 cents by 8.1%. The bottom line also increased 29% from the year-ago quarter’s figure of 31 cents.PCG reported second-quarter total revenues of $5.902 billion, up 0.1% from $5.898 billion registered in the year-ago period. However, the top line missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $6.31 billion by 6.4%. 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 Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated (PEG) : Free Stock Analysis Report Edison International (EIX) : Free Stock Analysis Report Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PCG) : Free Stock Analysis Report IDACORP, Inc. (IDA) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com). Zacks Investment Research

This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Net Income (GAAP): $0.67 per share for Q2 2026, compared to $1.17 per share in Q2 2025. Non-GAAP Operating Earnings: $0.86 per share for Q2 2026, compared to $0.77 per share in Q2 2025. First-Half Net Income (GAAP): $2.15 per share for the first half of 2026. First-Half Non-GAAP Operating Earnings: $2.41 per share for the first half of 2026. Full-Year 2026 Guidance: Reaffirmed non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share. PSE&G (Utility) Q2 Earnings: Net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $342 million, up from $332 million in Q2 2025. PSEG Power & Other Q2 Earnings: Non-GAAP operating earnings of $83 million, up from $52 million in Q2 2025; net loss of $8 million, compared to net income of $253 million in Q2 2025. PSE&G Capital Investment: Approximately $1 billion invested in Q2 2026; full-year 2026 regulated capital plan of approximately $4.2 billion. Five-Year Capital Investment Plan: Total of $24 billion to $28 billion for PSEG; $22.5 billion to $25.5 billion for regulated capital through 2030. Nuclear Generation: 7.8 terawatt hours generated in Q2 2026, with a capacity factor of 92%. PJM Capacity Auction: PSEG Nuclear cleared approximately 3,600 megawatts at $325 per megawatt-day for the energy year beginning June 1, 2028. Transmission Cost Allocation Benefit: Expected $33 million benefit to Salem transmission customers for June 1 through year-end 2026; prospective annual benefit of approximately $65 million. Liquidity: Available liquidity of $3.4 billion as of the end of June, including approximately $200 million of cash on hand. Debt Issuance: Issued $500 million of 4.8% unsecured senior notes due 2031 in June. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Signs with PEG. Is PEG fairly valued? Test your thesis with our free DCF calculator. Release Date: August 04, 2026 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. Public Service Enterprise Group Inc (NYSE:PEG) reaffirmed its full-year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share and its 6% to 8% long-term earnings growth outlook through 2030. The company's Clean Energy Future Program generates over $1 billion in annual customer savings and has supported approximately 9,300 jobs statewide since 2020. PSEG Nuclear achieved a 92% capacity factor in Q2 2026, supplying 7.8 terawatt hours of carbon-free baseload generation. A favorable PJM transmission cost allocation change will provide an estimated $33 million benefit to Salem transmission customers in 2026 and an expected $65 million annual benefit going forward. The company maintains a solid balance sheet with $3.4 billion in liquidity, enabling it to fund its $24 billion to $28 billion five-year capital plan without issuing new equity or selling assets. PSEG successfully managed one of its most challenging storm restorations, reconnecting approximately 380,000 customers, with nearly all restored within 24 hours. PSEG anticipates filing a base rate case by year-end 2026 due to regulatory lag from its historical test year and a robust capital program, which could lead to more frequent rate cases. The potential elimination of the 50-basis-point RTO incentive could represent an annual headwind of $40 million in net income, or approximately $0.08 per share, effective January 2027. PJM's latest capacity auction priced at $325 per megawatt day, the upper end of the price collar, and fell 6.8 gigawatts short of the targeted reliability requirement, indicating ongoing resource adequacy challenges. The company faces uncertainty regarding the allocation of project risk for new nuclear development, which is a long-term solution (12-year projects) that may not address near-term load growth needs. PSEG Power's net income declined significantly in Q2 2026, reporting a net loss of $8 million compared to net income of $253 million in the prior year, partly due to the absence of the Zero Emission Certificate Program. The company noted increased distribution O&M expenses due to inflation and higher interest expenses from incremental debt at higher rates. Q: Can you juxtapose the decision to file a base rate case by year-end 2026 against the BPU's E01 report, and what parts of the report might make it into this filing? A: Ralph LaRossa (Chairman, President, and CEO) explained that the timing of the filing aligns well with the state's goals, as the E01 report signals a desire for more transparency and performance-based ratemaking. He noted that a base rate case is necessary to set up for these reforms, and since PSE&G hasn't had an electric IIP in roughly five years, the timing makes sense. He expects little from the report to make it into this specific filing, but it positions the company well for the next phase of E01. Q: Given the recent changes like the RTO adder elimination and the pull-forward of the base rate review, where do you see yourself within the reaffirmed 6% to 8% growth range? A: Ralph LaRossa reaffirmed the company's position within the 6% to 8% range, stating that the RTO adder loss was already a scenario planned for when the guidance was rolled forward. He highlighted other opportunities, such as the RBP process at PJM and potential nuclear uprates, as reasons for continued confidence in the outlook. Q: Can you speak to the scale and type of opportunity PSEG Power is seeing with the project proposals submitted under PJM's Reliability Backstop Procurement (RBP)? A: Ralph LaRossa noted that the company has capabilities in generation that may be forgotten, having built some of the last plants in PJM East. He stated that as PJM moves into the RBA with more opportunities for long-term, utility-like agreements, PSEG sees opportunities both inside and outside New Jersey. He declined to provide specifics as the PJM rules are still evolving, but emphasized the company's retained skill set and alignment with utility-like investments. Q: What are you focused on to capture distribution investment upside, and what is the timeline to crystallize that into the plan? A: Ralph LaRossa stated that the company will roll forward its CapEx plan at the beginning of next year. He highlighted the gas distribution business's focus on cast iron replacement and the electric side's alignment with the Governor's administration's push for solar, DERs, and batteries. He expects more focus on "last mile" investments and updates to roll out in the first quarter of next year. Q: Have you seen any inflection in interest from data centers or large load customers for PPAs at PSEG Power? A: Daniel Cregg (CFO) responded that there hasn't been an inflection, but rather continued interest. He noted that the ongoing PJM processes (RBP and IRAS) are helping potential customers understand what will be expected of them, which is a factor in their discussions. The interest is steady, with parties being cautious not to box themselves in before regulatory clarity is achieved. Q: What sort of returns would you be targeting for opportunities in the RBP, and how does the math work with the $555 price cap? A: Daniel Cregg stated it would be foolish to provide an expected return in a competitive situation, but the company is interested in exploring opportunities that meet its criteria of being "utility-like" or contracted enough to be attractive. Ralph LaRossa added that the risk profile is crucial, and as PJM's regulatory construct becomes clearer, some opportunities are getting closer to utility-like, which is important to the company. Q: In the bilateral discussions, is the interest in existing assets, new builds, or both? A: Daniel Cregg clarified that it's both, but there is more interest in new generation. He explained that new load coming online typically prefers incremental generation to join it, but there is also an understanding that new generation takes time to develop, so existing assets are also part of the dialogue. There is no fixed ratio, just a preference for new. Q: How do you think new nuclear fits into the supply needs, and is it possible or too far off? A: Ralph LaRossa acknowledged that new nuclear is a long-term solution, with projects taking around 12 years. He believes it makes sense and aligns with state policy, but it may not come online quickly enough for some of the load looking to connect. Daniel Cregg added that even the RBP is targeting 2032, which is half the time needed for new nuclear, placing it in the longer-term bucket. Q: How are you thinking about the negotiation and input into the stakeholder process for the E01 reforms, and what would have the most merit in New Jersey? A: Ralph LaRossa welcomed the transparency and performance-based metrics discussed in the report, noting that only 25% of the bill is distribution, which is helpful for customer expectations. He stated that the company is proud of its operational results and welcomes performance-based ratemaking. He sees the paths as positive and believes the base rate case filing shows alignment with the state's timing. Q: Are you seeing attractive opportunities to contract bilaterally for new builds outside of the PJM construct, and what is your thinking on target IRRs? A: Daniel Cregg noted that new load will likely be pushed into the RVP process, but states with supply-demand imbalances may prompt generation, offering potential. Ralph LaRossa reinforced that the company is looking for utility-like returns with utility-like risk, and will not engage in high-risk market ventures. The focus is on opportunities that align with this risk profile. For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.