This ranking evaluates how Fortune 500 companies are deploying AI, and how technology leaders value those investments relative to industry peers.

Fortune AIQ 75

The companies on the Global 500 employ 70.2 million people, and their revenue represents more than one-third of the world’s GDP.

Fortune Global 500

With a combined revenue of $21 trillion and $2.1 trillion in profits, the 2026 Fortune 500 is the definitive list of America's largest companies.

Fortune 500

The 300 companies on this year’s list brought in over $12.5 trillion in revenue for the latest 12 months, with the median revenue figure at $24 billion.

America's Most Innovative Companies

AI is a major force shaping this year’s list—but it’s far from the only story.

World's Most Admired Companies

Fortune AIQ 50

The corporations on our annual list of the world's 500 largest companies combined to generate $41.7 trillion in revenue over the past year.

Almost $20 trillion in revenue—and a record-breaking $1.87 trillion in profits. Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500, the definitive list of the biggest companies in America.

The 300 companies on this year’s list brought in over $12.6 trillion in revenue for the latest 12 months, with the median revenue figure at $22 billion.

Leaders in all industries rely more than ever on Big Tech—and appreciate the giants that deliver, at scale, without drama.

The corporations on our annual list posted aggregate revenues of $41 trillion for the second year in a row.

Industries included in the sector are banks, insurance, and real estate companies.

Fortune Sector Leaders: Financials

The Fortune 500, in its 70th year in 2024, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

The 200 companies on this list are transforming industries from the inside out.

The 26th edition of the list shows how much esteem Big Tech giants command among other business leaders.

WMA 2024-JPMorgan Chase

The 25th Fortune World’s Most Admired Companies list suggests that tech giants’ peers respect them as much as ever.

WMAC 2023-JPMorgan Chase

The corporations on our annual list of the world’s largest companies delivered a record $41 trillion in aggregate revenues.

G500-2023-JPMorgan Chase

The companies on this list are mobilizing the creative tools of capitalism to help solve social problems.

CTW 2023-

In the summer of 2013, Detroit hit economic rock-bottom. With the city’s population down more than 60% from its 1950s peak, and the auto industry still reeling from the Great Recession, the city declared bankruptcy; its unemployment rate at one point topped 25%. To help the city bounce back, JPMorgan Chase teamed up with local government, other employers, and nonprofits on Invested in Detroit, a program through which the company has poured over $200 million into Detroit’s economy in the form of job training, loans for small businesses, and real estate financing. The bank’s biggest innovations involved extending credit to entrepreneurs and property buyers who lacked the collateral or credit histories to qualify for traditional loans—a major problem in underserved and lower-income communities. To date, Invested in Detroit has helped place some 72,000 Detroiters into apprenticeships or jobs, while providing financing or technical aid to 13,000 small businesses. Detroit’s jobless rate is now just 6.4%. JPMorgan Chase, meanwhile, has benefited from a healthier economy: Since 2017, its numbers of consumer and business accounts, market share, and commercial lending in the metro area have all grown by double-digit percentages. And the bank has taken some of its innovations national: Its Entrepreneurs of Color Fund, first launched in Detroit, has made more than 2,100 loans, worth over $115 million, to entrepreneurs nationwide.

Change the World

The Fortune 500, in its 69th year in 2023, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

F500 2023-JPMorgan Chase

The largest bank in the U.S. got even bigger in early 2023 after acquiring failed lender First Republic. It reported record revenues of $154.8 billion for 2022, up 22% from the year prior. 
<ul> 
 	<li>JPMorgan Chase acquired the $173 billion loan portfolio and $30 billion of securities held by First Republic in May 2023, after First Republic was seized by the federal government amid broader turmoil in the banking sector that started in March when Silicon Valley Bank experienced a run on its deposits.</li> 
 	<li>The bank posted $37.7 billion in profits for 2022. That was down 22% from the year prior, but still made JPMorgan Chase the most profitable commercial bank or financial services company on the Fortune 500.</li> 
</ul>

Just as it dominates our economy, Big Tech now dominates Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation.

WMAC-2022-10-JPMorgan Chase

Aggregate sales hit $37.8 trillion last year—an increase of 19%, the highest annual growth rate in the list’s history.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 68th running of the list.

F500 2022 JPMorganChase

A Wall Street boom fueled record profits for JPMorgan Chase in 2021: The company delivered $48.3 billion in earnings for the year, as fees from mergers and acquisitions and trading revenue swelled the bank’s margins. That said, the megabank’s leadership has signaled that the party could be winding down. CEO Jamie Dimon said in April 2022 that the global economy was facing “unprecedented” risks, warning that factors such as the war in Ukraine and high inflation could possibly lead to recession. In February 2022, JPMorgan Chase became the first commercial bank to enter the metaverse, setting up a virtual shop in the Metajuku mall. In the real-world workplace, the bank has been less bullish about virtual interaction, with Dimon urging reluctant employees to return full-time to the office.

After a year in which humanity leaned more heavily than ever on tech giants, see which companies topped Fortune's ranking of corporate reputation.

WMAC 2021-08-JPMorgan Chase

Total revenue for the world’s biggest companies fell 4.8% to $31.7 trillion this year—the first decline in half a decade.

G500-2021-43-JPMorgan Chase

As COVID-19 began its global spread, CEO Jamie Dimon publicly worried there would be another great financial crisis. But despite the financial challenges faced by many Americans, the nation’s largest bank remained largely unfazed. In 2020, JPMorgan Chase posted record net revenues of $119.5 billion, though profits sank 20% from the year prior, owing in part to billions set aside to cover bad loans. One bright spot was JPMorgan’s markets revenues, which came in at a record $29.5 billion in 2020 as traders capitalized on volatile swings in the prices of stocks and other assets. Fees from the firm’s investment banking activities, meanwhile, rose 25%. In 2021, Dimon is singing quite a different tune to shareholders: He has predicted a “boom” that could “easily run into 2023.” Indeed, the firm has started to release some of those loan loss reserves it built up in 2020—a vote of confidence that the recovery has truly taken hold.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 67th running of the list.

F500-2021-19-JPMorgan Chase

For an astounding 13th straight year, Apple claims the top spot in Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation, based on a survey of almost 3,800 executives, directors, and analysts.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $33.3 trillion in revenues and $2.1 trillion in profits.

G500-2020-038-JPMorgan

As the U.S. plunged into a pandemic-related recession this year, the nation’s largest bank was armed with an exceptionally strong balance sheet. JPMorgan Chase moved up three spots in the rankings from last year, thanks to a 6% increase in net revenue to a record $118.7 billion, with $2.7 trillion in assets. The company posted $36.4 billion in net income—its ninth record result in the past 10 years. However, the outlook for 2020 is less bullish thanks to the coronavirus crisis. CEO Jamie Dimon issued a warning to shareholders: Best-case scenario, he predicted, the pandemic will create “financial stress similar to the global financial crisis of 2008,” including a “meaningful” hit to profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 66th running of the list.

F500-2020-017-JPMorgan-Chase

Heading into a recession in 2020, the nation’s largest bank is armed with a strong balance sheet. JPMorgan Chase moved up one spot from last year, thanks to a 6% increase in net revenue to a record $118.7 billion, with $2.7 trillion in assets. The company posted $36.4 billion in net income—the ninth record result in the past 10 years. However, this year looks different. Since the coronavirus crisis began, CEO Jamie Dimon issued a warning to shareholders: Best-case scenario, he predicted, the pandemic will create “financial stress similar to the global financial crisis of 2008,” including a “meaningful” hit to profits.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2019 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.7 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 65th running of the list.

These 52 companies from across the globe are doing well by doing good.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2018 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 64th running of the list.

Here’s our look at 57 companies that do well by doing good.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2017 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 63rd running of the list.

Here’s our look at 50 companies that do well by doing good.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2016 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.6 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 62nd running of the list.

Business insiders have spoken: Asked which companies they most admire, more than 4,100 executives, directors, and analysts chose these top 50 All-Stars.

The world's 500 largest companies generated $31.2 trillion in revenues and $1.7 trillion in profits in 2014. Together, this year's Fortune Global 500 employ 65 million people worldwide and are represented by 36 countries.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 61st running of the list. Wal-Mart claims the top spot again. See who made the list.

Global business is back. After limping through a worldwide financial crisis and economic slowdown, the 500 largest companies ranked by revenues shattered all sorts of performance records in 2013: They racked up combined revenues of $31.1 trillion, up 2.5% from 2012, and profits soared 27% to nearly $2 trillion. China’s 95 companies (up from 89 last year) posted $5.8 trillion in revenues. The U.S. has four fewer companies on the list than last year but remains (for now) the country leader, with 128 corporations on the list—including No. 1 Wal-Mart Stores—reporting $8.6 trillion in revenues. 

Wal-Mart stayed on top as its sales crept closer to half-a-trillion dollars. Apple moved into the top five. And UnitedHealth Group continued its steady climb. 

Change The World

Impact Segment

Sector

Industry

Current All-Star Rank

Previous All-Star Rank

Industry Rank

Previous Industry Rank

Overall Score

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

Strongest Dimension

Years on list

Previous rank

State

Key Financials (last Fiscal Year)

Revenues ($M)

Profits ($M)

Assets ($M)

Total Stockholder Equity ($M)

Profit Ratios

Profit as % of Revenues

Profits as % of Assets

Profits as % of Stockholder Equity

Earnings Per Share (last Fiscal Year)

Earnings Per Share ($)

EPS % Change (from prior fiscal year)

EPS % Change (5 year annual rate)

EPS % Change (10 year annual rate)

Total Return

Total Return to Investors (last year)

Total Return to Investors (5 year, annualized)

Total Return to Investors (10 year, annualized)

JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co. is the largest of the United States’ “Big Four” banks and a global financial-services company headquartered in New York City. Its principal businesses include Consumer &amp; Community Banking; Commercial &amp; Investment Banking; and Asset &amp; Wealth Management, alongside corporate functions. The present company was created through the 2000 merger of J.P. Morgan &amp; Co. and Chase Manhattan Corporation, and it also reflects the histories of firms including Bank One, Chemical Bank, Manufacturers Hanover, and Washington Mutual. Jamie Dimon has served as chairman and CEO since 2006, leading the bank through the 2008 global financial crisis; in 2026, Doug Petno and Troy Rohrbaugh were named co-presidents as the bank continues its CEO-succession planning.

Q2 2026

Q1 2026

Q4 2025

Q2 2025

Q1 2025

Q4 2024

JPMorgan Chase (JPM): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

JPMorgan Chase

jpmorgan chase

Morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to JPMorgan Chase's Second Quarter twenty twenty five Earnings Call. This call is being recorded. Your line will be muted for the duration of the call. We will now go live to the presentation.

The presentation is available on JPMorgan Chase's website. Please refer to the disclaimer in the back concerning forward looking statements. Please stand by. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to JPMorgan Chase's Chairman and CEO, Jamie Dimon and Chief Financial Officer, Jeremy Barnum. Mr. Barnum, please go ahead.

Thank you very much, and good morning, everyone. This quarter, the firm reported net income of $15,000,000,000 EPS of $5.24 on revenue of $45,700,000,000 and an ROTCE of 21%. These results included an income tax benefit of $774,000,000 which we describe in more detail in the earnings press release. On the next page, we have some more detail. The firm reported revenue of $45,700,000,000 down $5,300,000,000 or 10% year on year.

NIIX Markets was down $185,000,000 or 1%, driven by the impact of lower rates and deposit margin compression, predominantly offset by higher wholesale deposits, higher revolving balances in card, as well as the impact of securities activity, including from prior quarters. NIR Ex Markets was down $6,300,000,000 or 31%, and excluding the net gain related to Visa shares and net investment securities losses in the prior year was up $1,000,000,000 or 8%, driven by higher asset management fees, higher auto lease income, higher investment banking fees, and higher payments fees. And markets revenue was up £1,100,000,000 or 15%. Expenses of £23,800,000,000 were up £66,000,000 and excluding last year's Visa stock contribution to the firm's foundation, was up £1,100,000,000 or 5%, primarily driven by compensation, higher brokerage and distribution fees, as well as higher auto lease depreciation. And credit costs were £2,800,000,000 with net charge offs of $2,400,000,000 and a net reserve build of $439,000,000 The build was driven by new lending activity, largely offset by a decrease in the probabilities that we attached to the adverse scenarios in the allowance estimation.

On to the balance sheet on page three. We ended the quarter with a CET1 ratio of 15%, down 40 basis points versus the prior quarter, as net income was more than offset by capital distributions and higher RWA. This quarter's higher RWA is primarily driven by an increase in wholesale lending across both CIB markets and banking, an increase in other markets activity, as well as an increase in card loans. As you know, we completed CCAR a couple of weeks ago, and under the current rules, our indicative SCB is lowered at 2.5% and goes into effect in 4Q twenty five. Our new SCB also reflects the Board's intention to increase the dividend to 1.5 per share in the third quarter.

Now let's go to our businesses, starting with CCB. CCB reported net income of $5,200,000,000 on revenue of $18,800,000,000 which was up 6% year on year. In banking and wealth management, revenue was up 3%, largely driven by growth in wealth management revenue, with deposit NII relatively flat. Average deposits were down 1% year on year and flat sequentially. Client investment assets were up 14% year on year, driven by market performance and continued healthy flows into managed products.

In home lending, revenue was down 5% year on year, predominantly driven by lower NII. Turning to card services and auto, revenue was up 15% year on year, predominantly driven by card NII on higher revolving balances, as well as higher operating lease income in auto. Card outstandings were up 9% due to strong account acquisition, and auto originations were up 5%, driven by higher lease volumes. Expenses of $9,900,000,000 were up 5% year on year, largely driven by growth in technology and auto lease depreciation. Credit costs were £2,100,000,000 reflecting net charge offs of £2,100,000,000 relatively flat year on year, in line with expectations.

Next, the Commercial and Investment Bank. CIB reported net income of £6,700,000,000 on revenue of £19,500,000,000 which was up 9% year on year. IB fees were up 7% year on year, and we continue to rank number one with wallet share of 8.9%. In advisory, fees were up 8%, benefiting from increased sponsor activity. Debt underwriting fees were up 12%, primarily driven by a few large deals.

In equity underwriting, fees were down 6% year on year. Our pipeline remains robust, and the outlook, along with the market tone and sentiment, is notably more upbeat. Payments revenue was up 3% year on year excluding equity investments, driven by higher deposit balances and fee growth, predominantly offset by deposit margin compression. Lending revenue was down 6% year on year, reflecting higher losses on hedges. Moving to markets, total revenue was up 15% year on year.

Fixed Income was up 14%, with improved performance in Unseas and Emerging Markets, rates, and commodities. This was partially offset by fewer opportunities in securitized products and fixed income financing. Equities was up 15%. We continue to see strong performance across products, most notably in derivatives. Securities services revenue was up 12% year on year, driven by higher deposit balances and fee growth.

Expenses of $9,600,000,000 were up 5% year on year, driven by higher compensation, brokerage and technology expense, partially offset by lower legal expense. Average banking and payments loans were down 2% year on year and up 2% quarter on quarter, with sequential growth primarily driven by new loans with larger corporates. Average client deposits were up 16% year on year and up 5% sequentially, reflecting increased activity across payments and securities services. Finally, credit costs were $696,000,000 driven by builds in our C and I portfolio, including new lending activity and downgrades to a handful of names, partially offset by the scenario probability adjustment I mentioned upfront. Turning to Asset and Wealth Management to complete our lines of business.

AWM reported net income of £1,500,000,000 with pre tax margin of 34%. Revenue of £5,800,000,000 was up 10% year on year, driven by growth in management fees on strong net inflows and higher average market levels, as well as higher brokerage activity and higher deposit balances. Expenses of $3,700,000,000 were up 5% year on year, driven by higher compensation, including revenue related compensation, and continued growth in our private banking advisor teams, as well as higher distribution fees. Long term net inflows were $31,000,000,000 for the quarter, led by fixed income and equities. In liquidity, we saw net inflows of £5,000,000,000 AUM of £4,300,000,000,000 was up 18% year on year, and client assets of £6,400,000,000,000 were up 19% year on year, driven by continued net inflows and higher market levels.

And finally, loans were up 7% year on year and 3% quarter on quarter, and deposits were up 9% year on year and 2% sequentially. Turning to Corporate. Corporate reported net income of £1,700,000,000 and includes the tax item I mentioned up front. Revenue was $1,500,000,000 for the quarter. NII was $1,500,000,000 down $875,000,000 year on year.

NIR was a net gain of $49,000,000 up $148,000,000 year on year, excluding the prior year's visa related gains. Expenses of $547,000,000 were down $32,000,000 year on year, excluding the Foundation contributions from the prior year that I mentioned earlier. To finish out, I'll touch on the outlook. You'll recall that at Investor Day, I made a couple of comments previewing the potential evolution of the outlook, so now let me formalize that and give you updated guidance. First, we now expect NII ex markets to be approximately $92,000,000,000 with the increase driven by changes in the forward curve and strong deposit growth in payments, security services, as well as balance growth in court.

Total NII guidance is now about £95,500,000,000 implying 3,500,000,000 of market's NII. Second, on adjusted expense, we now expect it to be about £95,500,000,000 primarily driven by the impact of the weaker dollar, largely bottom line neutral. And finally, on credit, we continue to expect the card net charge off rate to be approximately 3.6%. So reflecting on the quarter, while the environment remains dynamic, in many ways navigating uncertainty is the norm for both us and our clients. We're now happy to take your questions, so let's open the line for Q and A.

Thank you. Please stand by. Our first question will come from Christopher McGratty with QBW. Your line is open.

Great, good morning. Thanks for the question. Jamie, relative to three months ago, there's a lot of optimism. Great. Thanks for having me.

Just wanted to welcome you to the call before we get started.

Great. Thanks so much. Relative to three months ago, there's a lot of optimism on financial deregulation and really going to break in the bank's favor. I'm interested if you agree, number one, this optimism and anything specifically you could point to. And secondarily on capital, I'm interested in what's on or off the table in terms of uses of capital, what do you need to see from the macro regulatory and how should we be thinking about the timing? Thank you.

Let me take the second part of that first. We have our centered capital hierarchy that we recite a lot, and I don't want to bore you by reciting it again, but I think it's important because it does serve as a guide in this context. We deploy our capital against organic and inorganic growth, and we ensure a sustainable dividend, and with what's left, we do buybacks. We've talked about how excess capital is earnings in store. You saw this quarter that we actually had some financial resource usage that came through and actually meant that despite keeping the buybacks relatively constant and having organic capital generation be relatively constant, the CET1 ratio dropped a little bit as a function of increased usage organically showing up in RWA expansion.

We're doing what we want to do, but clearly it is a big amount of excess, and that does mean that everything is on the table, as it always is, and that includes potentially inorganic things. Now obviously that needs to be done carefully. I think acquisitions have a high bar, both financially, strategically, and importantly in some cases culturally, and we also need to think carefully about things that work outside the regulated perimeter might not work inside the regulated perimeter as well. We have learned some lessons. We don't want to over learn those lessons, but in the end, sometimes we lean in a little more, sometimes we lean in a little less, but we wouldn't be doing our jobs if we weren't thinking about it.

I don't particularly think, other than fundamentally whether things are permissible or not, that the regulatory environment right now particularly shapes our thinking on that front.

Can you say just a broader point about regulations? I think it is very important that the regulators step back and kind of look at the big picture now. It's not just one thing so nothing's happened yet. I think they should be looking at all these things. But if you look at SLR, GSIPI, CCAR, Basel III, FSRT, the overlap, the duplication, I actually believe that you can make the system simpler, cheaper, more effective, more transparent, and safer.

And the things like Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic did not need to happen if you just modify some things and you create more liquidity, more loans, and a safer system. And that's really what they should be looking at, not just SLR. And so I'm hoping that over time they do that. And the second thing I'd add to that, which I think is even maybe more important, is they should answer the question, what do they actually want in our public markets versus our private markets, etcetera? We've gone from 8,000 public companies until about twenty five years ago to 4,000 today.

That's happened overseas. Public markets overseas have gotten smaller and smaller. Obviously, I'm not against private credit. Private credit is growing. And how do you really want to structure this?

And why is it happening? Is that a good thing for America? And so I just it is time that they take a step back. There's been I hear sometimes from some pundits that there's been relaxing of rules and regulations absolutely not. There's been nothing but increasing them for the better part of fifteen years.

They should take a deep breath, step back, and look at the system and answer the question, how can we make it better and stronger for the economy and all involved?

And maybe you've sort of gone a bit long here, but just to spend and go into a little bit of detail there, I will note Vice Chair Bowman gave a speech on her vision of having come into the new seat for ongoing work and regulation, and I think it's a speech that's pretty comprehensive and lays out some of what Jamie's saying in terms of the to do list. I think at the margin, we do understand the desire to sort of knock some things off the to do list that have been on it for a long time and clearly need to be addressed, like SOR, but at the same time that that happens, the holistic review done properly across not only capital but also liquidity resolution, etcetera, is clearly quite important. More narrowly, in the near term, I think we continue to feel very strongly that of all the things that are out there, one of the worst is GSIB, in the sense of both the original gold plating, the sort of deep conceptual flaws in the framework itself, and the failure to recalibrate it for growth since it was put into effect. I think one of the things that's maybe a little bit under discussed there is the extent to which it specifically creates strongest incentives for American banks to be strong and globally competitive.

And that seems to me the exact opposite of what we want. So that's really one of the ones that needs to get attacked pretty aggressively, I would say.

I appreciate all the color. If I could ask on a follow-up, the inorganic comments. I'm interested in capital allocation between your businesses, where you think if that were to present an opportunity, where which businesses would most likely be the use of that capital? Thanks.

We've talked about that a little bit over time. Obviously we're not fundamentally capital constrained right now, so in addition to the fact that capital isn't the only financial resource that we need to allocate, I would say the larger point is that any good franchise business that it makes sense from a risk perspective and clears the cost of equity is going to get done within reason, subject to obvious caveats.

You know Inorganic, it's a good discipline to always be looking. I would have high expectations that would be how we use a lot of capital. And I think it's a very big plus that we grow organically in every business we're in without having to stretch.

Thank you. You. Next we will go to the line of Betsy Graseck from Morgan Stanley. You may proceed.

First two on the RWA utilization via organic, as you described. I wanted to understand in wholesale lending where you highlighted the CIB was a driver of much of this. Could you speak to the drivers of those drivers? In other words, is it private credit? Is it M and A financing?

Is it inventory? What are you seeing in the market here that you're delivering on that's raising that lending profile?

It's all of the above, Betsy, because we are the switcherland of financing. We do everything, and we saw a lot of activity come in late in the quarter.

Okay, great. All right, thank you. And then, Jamie, you've there's been a lot of discussion around stablecoin, how stablecoin is going to be impacting banks. And I believe you have an opinion on this. Would love to hear if you could highlight how JPM is thinking about utilizing, leveraging, competing with stablecoin and how the JPMD deposit token feeds into all of this as well? Thank you.

So deposit token is effectively the same thing. You're moving money by token, you can pay interest. It's JPMorgan deposit and stablecoins. We're going to be involved in both JPMorgan Depositcoin and Stablecoins to understand it, to be good at it. We don't know exactly and I think they're real, but I don't know why you'd want a Stablecoin as opposed to just payment.

But I do think you'd have fintech. These guys are very smart. They're trying to figure out a way to create bank accounts and get into payment systems and rewards programs. We have to be cognizant of that. Way to be cognizant is to be involved.

So we're going to be in it and learning a lot and player.

Okay, super. And then separately on the topic of open banking, I think that's on hold right now with the CFPB, on hold right now. But just wanted to understand, does this hold period give you an opportunity to change how you're pricing for your open banking and fintech relationships here?

So this is very important. So if we get pricing for a second, we are in favor of customer. So we think the customer has the right to if they want to share their information. What we ask people to do is do they do they actually know what's being shared? What is actually being shared?

It should be everything. It should be what their customer wants. It should have a time limit because some these things went on for years. It should not be remarketed or resold to third parties. And so we're kind of in favor of all that done properly.

And then the payment, it just costs a lot of money to set up the APIs and stuff like that to run the system protection. So we just think it should be done and done right. And that's the main part. It's not like you can't do it. The last thing is a liability shift.

I don't think JPMorgan should be responsible if you've given your bank passcodes to third parties who market and do a whole bunch of stuff with it, and then you get scammed or fraud through them, they should be responsible. And we want real clarity about that. And if you see today, lot of these scams and frauds run through third party social media and stuff like that, there should be a little more responsibility on their part so we could all do a better job for the customer. That's why.

Excellent. Okay, thank you so much for that.

Thank you. Next we will go to the line of Steven Alexopoulos from TD Cowen. You may proceed.

Hey, good morning everyone. I wanted to start, Jeremy, going back to your comments on inorganic things being on the table in terms of use of excess capital. So when I look at the company, so you're the largest U. S. Bank by assets, you're also the largest in terms of the data you see every day and you may or may not have seen that Apple's looking at possibly their shatter getting into the AI gave more by looking at a company such as a Perplexity.

And just thinking out loud here, would it make sense for JPMorgan to consider acquiring an LLM, right? The last two quarters of buybacks are about the last valuation round for perplexity. I'm thinking of you guys, you could become the LLM for the financial services industry. What are your thoughts on this?

We use LLMs, and we're going to be agnostic about that, too. There's no reason for us to own one. At least we can't figure out why that would make sense. Yeah, and I wouldn't we will use it, and we will obviously be important in using our data to help our customers.

Yeah, and on the question of inorganic deployment, I would sort of blend my comments with Jamie's, right? In the end, I'm just asserting that of course we need to look at inorganic opportunities, and of course that's a question that comes up given our current excess capital position, but Jamie said clearly that he doesn't think that's particularly likely, for some of the reasons that you emphasized it's not easy to imagine a deal that would actually make sense.

We do a lot of small ones, by the way, which you've seen.

Yeah, yeah, okay. And then going back, Jamie, to your answer to Betsy's question on the tokenized deposit, I get it how that makes sense in terms of the customers that are inside your walled garden, but it doesn't help them much in terms of dealing with customers outside of your garden. What's holding up you guys and the other banks getting together to issue something joint, somewhat to what you've done with Zelle, and prevent these stablecoin companies like Circle coming in offering a more convenient solution to your customers?

That's a great question. I believe it remains a question.

Well, you're raising a very important point about interoperability of stablecoins and deposits and movement of money and what problem you're trying to solve, but you're raising great points. You can assume we're thinking about all that.

Okay. Fair enough. Thanks for taking my questions.

Thank you. Next, we will go to the line of Ebrahim Poonawala from Bank of America Merrill Lynch. You may proceed.

Good morning. This almost sounds like a fintech and AI call. But maybe just switching gears, I think, Jamie, your comments in the press release, give us a sense like when we think about middle market businesses in The U. S, what's the state of play there when we think about interest rates, tariffs, consumer spending slowing? Should we be concerned in terms of credit quality outlook looking out six, nine, twelve months?

Just what's your take based on all the data that we all look at?

You can ask about the data, very important, we love the middle market business. It drives a lot of business. Built I think 500 bankers in the innovation economy, which is kind of new to I think of what Silicon Valley Bank used to do and things like that. We still have a huge addressable market, the middle market business. We provide not just lending, and that can be leveraged lending, direct lending, but payment services, custody services, asset management services, FX services.

So we're going to grow that business regardless of what we predict the environment is going to be in the next six or nine months.

Got it. And I guess just as a follow on go ahead, Jeremy.

And I was just wondering in terms of your sense of just the state of play, the health of the balance sheets of these customers and also if you can expand that into the consumer, any areas of stress from a credit quality perspective that you are beginning to get more concerned today versus three or six months ago?

Yeah, right. Okay, because that's what I was going to try to clarify. Just wasn't sure if you were doing consumer, wholesale, or both. So let's do consumer quickly. I think we talk about this every quarter.

It's obviously a very important question. We look at it very closely. It obviously matters a lot for us as a company. But we continue to struggle to see signs of weakness. We just, you know, the consumer basically seems to be fine.

Now, know, few things are true. Like, if you look at indicators of stress, not surprisingly, you see a little bit more stress in the lower income bands than you see in the higher income bands, But that's always true. That's pretty much definitionally true. And nothing there is out of line with our expectations. Our delinquency rates are also in line with expectations.

You saw that we kept our net charge off guidance unchanged. So all of that looks kind of fine. And to be honest, as we've said before, fundamentally, while there are nuances around the edges, consumer credit is primarily about the labor market, and in a world with a 4.1% unemployment rate, it's just going to be hard, especially in our portfolio, to see a lot of weakness. Now, it is true that if you look at not our data, but the government's data, I think I was looking at this the other day, first half real consumer spending of this year versus second half of last year is down. Now, it's still positive, it's still growing, but it's down.

So it's kind of consistent, this soft landing narrative, which is also consistent with the GDP outlook that our economists are publishing. Our own data looked sort of in nominal terms on a cohort basis, actually shows spending up a little bit over the same period. So it's kind of the same narrative of things being fine with different signals pointing in slightly different directions, but nothing particularly concerning.

That was helpful. And would you say the same about commercial?

I mean, basically, yes. You you see some idiosyncratic things here and there. And on the point of tariffs, I guess, obviously, recall the slide that we did at Investor Day kind of highlighting that different sectors are going to have different experiences as a function of their margins, their sensitivity to input costs, their amount of pricing power, their amount of leverage, and where the rules actually land. But people are obviously getting some time to adjust, and we're watching it very closely. We'll see.

Thanks. Thank you. Our next question comes from John McDonald with Truist Securities. Your line is open.

Hi, good morning. Jeremy, quick follow-up on the consumer credit broader comments taken there. But in terms of the NPAs, the non accruals in consumers seem to have a bit of a jump. Is there something technical there? Maybe just talk to that.

Yeah, thanks for that, John. I'm glad I got a chance to clarify this. There is something technical, has to do with home lending customers in the LA area using our forbearance availability as a result of the wildfires. So that is resulting in an uptick in the non performing. But when you think about land value and the insurance there, the actual loss expectation is de minimis, I would say.

We always do that for customers when they have a real difficult time.

Exactly. So that's what's driving that one.

Okay, great. And I wanted to ask for some more color on retail deposits, maybe in the context of Mary Anne's presentation from Investor Day. Could you remind us of what's given you incremental confidence in seeing some improvement in deposit margin and kind of producing that mid to upper single digit deposit growth that Mary Anne talked about?

Yes, sure. So I think what you're referring to is a slide where Mary Anne talked about kind of the potential for 6% consumer deposit growth next year, and that's a nice number, and as you've written, would produce some nice revenue consequences, all else being equal. The way I think about that number is to kind of build it up step by step. So you start with, in general, the consumer deposit base in the system has grown probably slightly above nominal GDP. A thing that's been true for us recently is that as a result of our market position and our pricing choices, we've probably lost a little bit of share during the rate hiking cycle in isolation from yield seeking flows.

With the yield seeking flows having abated a little bit, that relative headwind is kind of behind us or increasingly behind us, and you've got some core growth reasserting itself. You saw us call out the growth in net new accounts in consumer checking this quarter, and that's one of the key drivers. And then as you know well, when you look at the franchise, we kind of have number one, ongoing expansion number two, seasoning of the old expansion, and number three, deepening in the core markets. So when you put all that together and you look at the history of the growth, macro environment, etcetera, that's how you get to that type of 6% number. Obviously things could change quite dramatically to produce a different number, among other things.

You'll recall that Mary Anne's slide also talked about a stress scenario with lower rates, which perhaps somewhat unintuitively would produce actually higher growth as a result of even less yield seeking flow and higher consumer savings rate, But the flip side of that is also true, which is an unexpectedly high rate environment would probably lead to lower balance growth, all else equal, in consumer. So we like to say those are all else being equal type numbers, but all else is never equal.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Company Participants