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

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.

Industries included in the sector are mining, oil and gas exploration and services, pipelines, refining, and utilities.

Fortune Sector Leaders: Energy

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

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

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

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

F500-2021-318-PSEG

The diversified energy company provides electricity and gas to more than 5 million customers in New Jersey and New York.

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

F500 2020 317 Public Service Enterprise Group

The New Jersey-based energy company provides electricity and gas to portions of New Jersey and New York and is one of the 10 largest electric companies in the U.S.

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

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

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

World's Most Admired Companies

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

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

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

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. 

Fortune Global 500

Company Info

Industry

Location

Industry Rank

Website

Overall Score

Key Attributes Of Reputation

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

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)

The Public Service Enterprise Group has been a cornerstone in providing reliable electric and natural gas services for more than a century. Its principal subsidiaries include Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&amp;G), New Jersey's largest provider of electric and gas services; PSEG Power, which manages energy-supply operations; and PSEG Long Island, responsible for operating the electric transmission and distribution system for the Long Island Power Authority. Serving millions of customers across New Jersey and Long Island, PSEG is committed to delivering safe, affordable, and sustainable energy solutions.

Q3 2026

Q2 2026

Q1 2026

Q4 2025

Q3 2025

Q2 2025

Q1 2025

Q4 2024

Q3 2024

Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

Public Service Enterprise Group

public service enterprise group

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Shamali, and I am your event operator today. I would like to welcome everyone to today's conference, Public Service Enterprise Group's third quarter 2026 earnings conference call and webcast. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session for members of the financial community. At that time, if you have a question, you will need to press the star and the number one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, please press star and the number two. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, [audio distortion]

[audio distortion]. 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.

Thank you, Carlotta, and thank you for joining us to review PSEG's results for the third quarter of 2026. Starting with our financials, PSEG reported net income of $0.76 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings of $1.15 per share for the third quarter, bringing our results for the first nine months of 2026 to $2.91 per share of net income and $3.56 per share of non-GAAP operating earnings. PSEG continues to achieve solid operational and financial results, enabling us to deliver reliable utility service and generate the carbon-free baseload generation our customers expect. Our financial results for the third quarter and year-to-date period align with our expectations for the full year, and we are reaffirming PSEG's guidance for 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings in the range of $4.28-$4.40 per share.

Continuing investments in PSE&G's energy efficiency programs and transmission were the main contributors of growth in utility margin and were offset by higher depreciation and interest costs, as well as the timing of taxes. In the PSEG Power and Other, the absence of last fall's Hope Creek refueling outage resulted in lower O&M, which, combined with an increase in realized market prices, higher nuclear generation, and gas operations, drove the improvement in PSEG Power's results.

Turning to our third quarter operations, PSE&G faced severe weather throughout the third quarter, which highlighted our best-in-class storm response, our commitment to service excellence, and the customer value of our investments in resilience, reliability, and the modernization of our electric and gas systems. A nor'easter hit our service territory in September, bringing severe wind gusts and heavy rain, and affected approximately 70,000 PSE&G electric customers.

Despite widespread tree damage and challenging conditions, nearly all affected customers were efficiently restored within 24 hours. Our gas operations also remained stable throughout this multi-day event, with no storm-related customer outages. I'm also pleased to report that PSEG Long Island is on track for its most reliable year on record since LIPA started the operating service management model, and customer satisfaction metrics are all continuing to move in the right direction.

Back in New Jersey, PSE&G filed its Clean Energy Future EE 2.5 proposal in late September in response to the BPU's recently adopted framework for a one-year extension of the EE2 triennium. Our filing highlights the success and efficacy of our EE programs, which generate over $1 billion in annual customer savings, having helped nearly 525,000 residential and business customers save energy and lower utility bills since the program began in October of 2020.

PSE&G's EE investments have also supported approximately 9,300 jobs statewide over the past six years, and we continue to expand the use of union labor in these EE roles. An update on some good news for customers is that PJM has prospectively reduced wholesale transmission rates for PSE&G customers. This was due to our collaboration with the state, which resulted in a FERC ruling earlier this year on transmission cost allocation, favorable to our customers, and we expect to file in early 2027 to credit the dollars back to those retail customers. Also on a state level, we note several constructive regulatory actions the BPU has taken over the past quarter that include: One, the BPU's approval of our gas filing to lower residential gas bills by 5%, effective October 1st, 2026.

Second was the approval of our GSMP II extension petition to recover investments made through May of 2026, which was also effective on October 1st. Third was the approval of our Clean Energy Future-Electric Vehicle recoveries for investments made through year-end 2025. Fourth was the approval of our Infrastructure Advancement Program, or IAP, request to recover the remaining investments through the year-end 2025. For these last two items, a reduction in another filing was used to offset the bill impacts of these recoveries. During our second quarter call, we mentioned that PSEG was planning to file for updated base rates by year-end 2026. Over the past several months, we have worked constructively with the Sherrill administration to help meet the goals of the two executive orders issued earlier this year.

In line with the spirit of those executive orders and the Governor's affordability agenda, we anticipate filing a proposal with the New Jersey BPU to address the regulatory lag of capital investments made since our last distribution rate case. We look forward to providing you with more details shortly. Also at the BPU, the ongoing study on modernizing New Jersey's electric utility business model has progressed to its second phase, and we are actively participating in the board stakeholder proceedings.

This initiative is focusing on cost discipline, financing modernization, targeted incentives and shared savings, and staged performance-based ratemaking. We believe these and other options mentioned in the phase one report, including multi-year rate plans, performance-based rates, performance incentive metrics, earnings sharing mechanisms, decoupling, and shared saving mechanisms offer constructive paths to strengthen the connection between customer value, cost accountability, and timely recovery of prudent investment. Now turning to PSEG Power.

At PSEG Nuclear, we supplied the regional grid with 8.2 terawatt hours of reliable carbon-free baseload energy during the third quarter, operating a capacity factor of 95.5%. Salem Unit 1 recently entered its fall refueling following a 491-day breaker-to-breaker run, matching Salem Unit 2's back-to-back breaker-to-breaker run posted earlier this year. PSEG Power continues to generate stable cash flows that help fund our regulated investments while pursuing high-value regional growth opportunities.

Turning briefly to our regional power market, PJM continues to have a significant resource adequacy problem and will require both existing and new generation to meet ever-increasing electric demand in the region. We are following the activity of FERC and PJM regarding PJM's Reliability Backstop Procurement and Interim Resource Adequacy Service filings, and considering how these developments interplay with our nuclear contracting efforts.

In September, FERC accepted certain aspects of the RBP, but rejected others, resulting in an anticipated delay of the RBP auction to March 2027 or later. The FERC orders did not disturb the bilateral matchmaking process to match new generation with new large load customers, which has presented opportunities for us. FERC's rejection of PJM's IRAS filing reinforces that the focus has shifted to the states to address retail curtailment and cost issues associated with large load customers, and we look forward to continuing to work with New Jersey as it implements these rules.

PSEG Power is continuing to develop terms with large load entities for contracting arrangements involving existing nuclear production, future nuclear upgrades, and other generation opportunities, similar to recently announced power purchase agreements in the PJM region and specifically in New Jersey, which we believe can produce tangible benefits for PSEG, supply certainty for large loads, and create economic development opportunities for our state and the regional economy.

In early October, PSEG Nuclear participated in the first meeting of the Governor's Nuclear Task Force, which outlined the initial work plans to establish the process for evaluating new nuclear development in the state. We continue to support and enable development at our site in Salem County. We are reaffirming both our full year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance and PSEG's five-year growth outlook of 6%-8% through 2030.

In summary, our teams continue to execute our business plan, we are delivering solid results and customer value, and we are making steady progress on the regulatory front. I will now turn the call over to Dan, who will review the financial results, and then I will rejoin the call for the Q&A session.

Thank you, Ralph, and good morning, everybody. PSEG recorded net income of $0.76 per share for the third quarter of 2026, compared to $1.24 per share in 2025, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $1.15 per share in the third quarter of 2026, compared to $1.13 per share in 2025. These quarterly results bring our year-to-date 2026 net income to $2.91 per share and non-GAAP operating earnings to $3.56 per share. We have provided you with information on slides seven and nine regarding the contribution to net income and non-GAAP operating earnings by business for the third quarter and nine months ended September 30, 2026.

Slides eight and 10 contain waterfall charts that take you through [audio distortion].

Depreciation and interest each rose by $0.01 per share due to ongoing capital investments, incremental debt, and the replacement of maturing debt at higher long-term interest rates. Taxes and other had a net unfavorable impact of $0.04 per share, driven mostly by the timing of taxes, which is recorded through an annual effective tax rate that nets to zero over a full year. Weather conditions during the third quarter, as measured by the temperature humidity index, were 3% cooler than normal, but 2% warmer than the third 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, it's the number of electric and gas customers that drives margin. Residential customer growth for electric was about 1%, and gas was flat over the past 12 months. The CIP also benefits customers, as higher revenues from last year's warmer-than-normal summer weather will continue to be refunded to electric customers. This past October 1st, PSE&G implemented a 5% decrease for residential gas customers, driven by higher revenues from a colder-than-normal winter in early 2026. On the capital front, PSE&G invested approximately $1.1 billion during the third quarter, and we are on track to execute our full year 2026 regulated capital investment plan of approximately $4.2 billion, focused on continued investments in infrastructure modernization, like the third phase of our Gas System Modernization Program, energy efficiency, electrification initiatives, and load growth.

We are also maintaining our five-year regulated capital investment plan of $22.5 billion-$25.5 billion through 2030. For our customers, the value of these investments means fewer interruptions, faster restoration times, and more tools to manage their energy use. During the third quarter, the BPU approved an annual revenue increase of $14 million for investments under our Infrastructure Advancement Program, and approved an annual increase of $8 million for investments under our Clean Energy Future-Electric Vehicle Program. Both roll-ins took effect on October 1st. Moving on now to PSEG Power and Other. For the third quarter, PSEG Power and Other reported a net loss of $130 million in 2026, compared to net income of $107 million in 2025. Non-GAAP operating earnings were $68 million in the third quarter of 2026, compared to $50 million in the third quarter of 2025.

Referring to the waterfall on slide eight, for the third quarter of 2026 versus 2025, net energy margin rose by $0.04 per share, driven by higher generation and capacity prices and gas operations, partly offset by the absence of PSEG Long Island's fuel and energy management fees. O&M declined by $0.02 per share from the year-earlier quarter, benefiting from the absence of last fall's refueling and fuel cycle extension work at our 100% owned Hope Creek nuclear unit. Depreciation and interest expense were both flat, and taxes and other items had a net unfavorable impact of $0.02 per share in the third quarter compared to 2025. On the operating side, the nuclear fleet produced approximately 8.2 terawatt-hours during the third quarter and reached 23.9 terawatt-hours for the nine months ended September 30th.

Capacity factors for the nuclear fleet were 95.5% and 94.3% for the same quarter and nine-month periods, respectively. We previously noted that PSEG Power cleared approximately 3,600 MW of existing capacity in PJM's July 2026 Base Residual Auction at $325 per megawatt-day for the energy year beginning June 2028 through May of 2029. As you know, the existing price collar of $175-$325 per megawatt-day will continue in effect for this December's capacity auction, covering the 2029-2030 energy year. As we have stated in the past, our realized energy price for our five-unit nuclear fleet is historically aligned with the PECO zone and has traded at about a 20% discount to the more liquid PJM Western Hub. Recently, the basis differential between these two hubs has widened to about a 30% discount, but our [audio distortion].

[audio distortion] in 2028 and beyond. On the nuclear PTC front, similar to 2026, we expect that our current portfolio position for 2027 will result in the realized value of our nuclear generation output being above the level at which we would receive the nuclear production tax credit, which, as you know, is adjusted annually for inflation. Touching on some recent financing activity, PSEG had strong available liquidity totaling $3.9 billion as of the end of September. This includes over $830 million of cash on hand, primarily related to net PSE&G financing activity during the quarter.

On the financing front this past August, PSE&G issued $1 billion of secured medium-term notes comprised of $650 million of 10-year notes at a rate of 5.4% and $350 million of 30-year notes at 6.05%. A portion of the proceeds was used to redeem $425 million of 2.25% secured MTNs at maturity in September, with the balance used to provide cash on hand to support our capital spending plan. Also in September, PSEG Power issued $400 million of five-year senior notes at a rate of 5.55%. PSEG's level of variable rate debt represented approximately 3% of our total debt as of the end of September. Our variable rate debt consisted of the unhedged portion, about $250 million of the $500 million 364-day term loan at PSEG Power, maturing in December 2026, and commercial paper.

Looking ahead, our solid balance sheet supports the execution of PSEG's predominantly regulated five-year capital spending plan 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 third quarter and year-to-date period, enabling us to maintain PSEG's full year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of $4.28-$4.40 per share. Earnings through 2030, based on our confidence in executing our five-year regulated capital investment plan that also supports a 6%-7.5% rate base CAGR over the same period. We continue to pursue nuclear revenue opportunities and believe recently announced agreements combining capacity uprates with existing generating output provide wins for all parties, including the economic development interests of our region.

Other opportunities such as competitive transmission projects and incremental utility infrastructure projects, including system investments to connect solar and battery storage resources to the grid to meet new demand, also provide upside to our current growth outlook through 2030. Finally, we expect to introduce PSEG's 2027 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance, roll forward our capital investment plan, update our rate base and long-term earnings CAGRs, and discuss this outlook all during our 2026 year-end call in February of 2027. That concludes our formal remarks, and we are now ready to begin the question-and-answer session.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question-and-answer session for members of the financial community. If you have a question, please press the star and the number one on your telephone keypad. If your question has been answered and you wish to withdraw your polling request, you may do so by pressing the star and the number two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before entering your request. One moment, please, for the first question. The first question comes from the line of Shar Pourreza with Wells Fargo. You may proceed with your question.

Excellent. Excellent. Ralph, on the hedge strategy for power as we're thinking about kind of the risks emerging, it sounds like the impact is more modest than people gave it credit for. I guess, are you assuming it normalizes in a couple years? What instruments are you using? Is it FTRs? And just any way to quantify what proportion of the forward sold power could be impacted from basis changes, maybe on an annual basis? Thanks.

Well, I'm going to let Dan give you a little more details. Let me just give you a high level on the whole thing, and there was a ton in your question there. We haven't been given a lot on the hedge details. But just think about it this way, Shar. The entire PJM grid has, the prices have gone up, right? I think we have been saying for many years to take a look at the price at the PECO hub. The PECO hub has gone up. It hasn't gone up as quickly as the west hub has gone up. So, where we hedge has gone up, maybe not as much as some folks have been thinking for our power business, but that is where we hedge, and that is what we've been articulating for quite some time.

The basis differential between the two shows up if you're not covered in both places, and I'll let Dan take a little more detail for you from there.

Yeah, Shar, especially as you look at this year and into next year, we're at a very balanced hedge position, given the ability to move things to PECO. I think that, another thing to put things in context, if you think about what we had said for a long time was that we were hedging on a fairly strict ratable approach. When the PTC came in, we described that as a put option that we had, and it essentially had us thinking more about the overall position and stepping a little bit away from the pure ratable approach. I think that that same thinking goes into where we are now and how we have approached it. We're taking a look at what the market is, as we're moving into our hedges. With respect to products, I think, which is another part of your question-

you've got the ability to put on direct hedges, where we are at that PECO zone, as well as FTRs, but also some swaps and some options. There's a host of products that we utilize to try to manage the overall position, and ultimately, we will get paid at that PECO hub.

Got it. Okay, that's perfect. Then just lastly, on the recent PJM deals, I mean, obviously it seems like the scarcity value for nuclear electrons is getting higher, even though the last deal didn't come with clean energy attributes. Maybe just elaborating on your prepareds, just updated thoughts on Pennsylvania or New Jersey contract potential, and is it even possible to do a deal in New Jersey with the optics there? Thanks.

Yeah, I think you've seen a deal recently that talked about New Jersey, to some degree.

I think the last Constellation deal talked about some of the upgrades that are going on at our Salem plant that we've been enabling. I think you saw the governor applauded that as a way to bring the tech companies to the table to pick up their fair share of some of the costs that are being incurred in the grid and in the energy market as a whole. I think there's possibility to do things, certainly with that incremental power that you're seeing at that location. I think the question about how much we're going to see data centers showing up here in New Jersey remains an open item. We've talked about that for quite some time.

Even, I think this election season, we have some municipalities that are voting on it, at that level, because the governor has said she's leaving many of the decisions up to the local municipalities to decide as far as whether or not they want to embrace the data center industry or not. I think her plan is a good one and is kind of putting that at the place where folks have to make that decision and deal with the data centers directly. I think there's a possibility, but I'm not. I know, Dan, you want to give a little more color on progress or in that area.

I think, Shar, just the way to think about it is that there remains some strong interest. I think these things don't happen overnight, but you have started to see some incremental deals get done. I think Ralph's take on it from a New Jersey perspective is spot on. I think there was an appreciation and an acknowledgment for what that was. Conversations continue and advance, and I think we feel pretty good about where they are, but don't have anything to announce right now.

Got it. No, perfect. Super helpful color, guys. See you in about a week. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Richard Sunderland with Truist Securities. You may proceed with your question.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for the time today.

Ralph, I wanted to pick up some of the language around your upcoming PSE&G filing. Is that sort of a shift away from a full rate case, as you spoke to on 2Q? Is this focused on rate changes or more of accounting efforts around how that lag has built into the business since the last rate change? Just any sort of bigger picture on that would be helpful.

Yeah, Rich, I would try to keep it at a very high level now because we, and I appreciate the question, as we articulated it on the call. Look, we're looking for a solution that supports the Governor's initiative. We have for the last, we talk about it ad nauseam on these calls and in other interactions about how we're aligned with the state's policy, and that goes back, you know, two, three, four administrations here. We've always been successful in doing that. We think that there might be an opportunity here in a filing to do just that, stay aligned, and still address the regulatory lag that exists. We expect that we'll be making a filing. That's what I said in the prepared remarks. As soon as we make that filing, we will communicate the details of that to you.

It's all about staying aligned and enabling the Governor's policy.

Okay. Okay, understood. I guess, you know, maybe let's turn this to the bigger picture and, you know, the BPU phase II efforts. Anything out of there that's informing how you're viewing, you know, the potential around this filing, or anything you can speak to around just kind of the overall backdrop in the state and how that's informing your strategy around this filing and presumably others thereafter?

Yeah, I think, look, the timing of all of those recommendations that will come out of, I think it's E3 is the consultant that's been working on that with the BPU, that will come out and be made. I think, you know, if we were to make a filing, that could be aligning, continuing the alignment from our standpoint with level setting our rates as the state rolls out new regulatory policies. I think if you take a hard look at what's there and what E3 has been talking about, these are things that the Governor has said in the past and things that the company has said and companies have said in the past here in New Jersey. So, we continue to look forward to that. We continue to participate in those proceedings.

But I don't I think our filing that we're doing here is all about staying aligned with the Governor's goals to keep rates flat for as long as possible, and we'll see what we can do to be aligned there.

Understood. Sounds like a lot more to come. I'll leave it there. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Matt Pettit with Barclays. You may proceed with your question.

Hey, it's Nick Campanella on for Matt. Hope you can hear me okay.

Yeah, thank you for all the disclosures. I really appreciate it. Maybe we should follow up there on the basis. You know, you said that you're going to be above PTC level in 2027 still, despite the widening basis. Maybe just to confirm that, and then how do you see that case playing out for 2028?

Yes. So, we have said that, and that is the case, to confirm, you know, your question is confirmatory to what we said. I think, you know, look, we can look to the forwards for where markets are right now. I think we've got, you know, over a year before we start to get into 2028. I'm not going to predict where markets are going to go. I think what we look for more fundamentally is what the supply-demand balance is. I think continuing to watch what's coming online, both from a generation and a demand standpoint, is ultimately what's going to drive that. But I think what we've seen is increasing announcements about demand more so than what generation is coming on, and generation continues to be a little bit of a struggle to see stuff coming on quickly other than maybe some solar and storage.

I think you're probably going to continue to see some upward pressure, but that'll manifest itself in the forwards as we go forward.

Great. Then, a lot of moving pieces as we kind of get ready for your next full fourth quarter update. You know, when we kind of take into account, it seems like you can absorb the basis, and you're also maybe getting kind of a true-up in lag at the utility, but I guess we'll see what the filing looks like. Just how do you kind of frame the 6%-8%, 2027, and beyond? Can you be outside of the range in any given year, or do you still see yourself kind of growing inside of that range? Any comments there would be helpful.

Yeah, Nick, I cannot emphasize enough the reaffirmation that we made of our 6%-8% growth rate, and take a lot of time and a lot of pride in going through that. We stand by it, and that's where we think we're going to be. That's why we came out and reaffirmed.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Nick Amicucci with Evercore ISI. You may proceed with your question.

Yeah. I've been called a lot worse, don't worry. I just wanted to, following up on Nick's previous question too. Just as we think about, you know, the roll forward and as we think about the next capital update, I guess, what are the near-term items that we could see creep into that if we think about, like, competitive transmission wins, potentially the nuclear contracting? Obviously, that's, you know, that's pretty fluid. Or we think about, is it going to be more solar and storage type deals?

Yeah. Nick, I don't think things have changed all that much for us from a projection standpoint of what we've been talking about for the last few quarters. I think we have that opportunity as the policies continue to ripen here in New Jersey for us to do more on the solar and support for solar and batteries through our enabling of the grid readiness. There's some real focus on VPP, the virtual power plants here in New Jersey. It'd be a small opportunities set for the utilities, but we're all going to participate in that. Some of it'll be IT activities and so on to enable it. I think you will see some additional transmission continuing to being built in the PJM region. Everyone talks about this basis differential between the West and many of the other hubs here at PJM.

It's not just PECO that that differential exists in. I think that that's going to create opportunities as well through different ways that PJM comes up with its plans, whether it's market-driven solutions or what they normally do in the RTEP process. I think you're going to see more of that. I don't want to front-run what that is. We'll see what PJM comes out with, and we have been a participant and a successful participant in some of those proceedings in the past, and that's that Maryland project that we have ongoing. It's more of the same for us, but continued clarity in our line of sight.

Great. That makes sense. Perfect. Thanks, Ralph. If I could just follow up with somewhat of a cleanup item. I just want to make sure I understand it. The Salem uprates under development. Is there any of that earnings contribution within the current outlook, or is that something that's going to be longer dated?

Yeah, that's within our five-year plan, Nick. That will be on by the time we get to the end of our five-year period.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Carly Davenport with Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open.

Morning. Thanks so much for taking the questions. Maybe just wanted to get your views on PJM's latest response to the FERC on the RBP last week. You've mentioned you've submitted some projects into the RBP process, so just curious if you could expand a little bit on how you're thinking about that process versus perhaps pursuing opportunities just in the bilateral market.

Well, I think it's really both, Carly. I still think that the effort that's been put forth has been helpful to try to make something happen. I think it has been a little bit bumpy with the back and forth with FERC, and I think that's understandable. But I think what it probably has done more than anything else is just broaden the opportunity set to try to get some generation built for all this load that we're seeing projected to come online as we step through the next number of years. They've gone back and forth with FERC, and I think there's been a little bit of frustration from timing and from where things have landed that it's a little bit of a do loop. But net-net, I still applaud the concept to try to get some generation built because we're going to need it.

I think it has, if nothing else, it has expanded the potential for some bilateral deals as well.

Got it. Okay, great. That's helpful. Thank you. Then you highlighted some of the financing activity during the quarter. I guess just with the move in interest rates and the capital plan needs, how should we be thinking about the impacts to perhaps 2027 guidance or any earning sensitivities with the move that we've recently seen in rates?

I think Dan and his team continue to do a great job in managing that. We're through most of the 2026 financing that we needed, and I think we're in fine shape as we move into 2027. I think if you look forward at 2027, our activity will not be at the same level it was at in 2026.

We do look for opportunities to hedge into next year, Carly. I think that we're all facing a little bit of an increasing interest rate environment. We've got the regulatory construct that helps with some of that, especially given the magnitude of our transmission business. We're through our 2026 plan, and we'll move into the 2027 plan in that environment, but with a little bit of an eye towards what's going on in 2027 that we're looking to right now in 2026.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. You may proceed with your question.

Good, good. I was wondering how you're thinking about solar and storage investments from a regulated utility perspective, utility-owned investments in that area.

Yeah, David, we would love to. We have in the past. Just to refresh everyone's memory, we had our Solar 4 All program that we had here in New Jersey for quite some time that was focused mainly on some of the landfill opportunities that existed, and we executed on that, and those plants are still in and running. You all know about some of the work that we did putting some solar on poles here. We've done that in the past. On the battery front, we were the first utility to put in a filing over five years ago now on that front. We continue to look for those opportunities. I think the policy is not yet certain here in New Jersey as to whether or not it'll move in a regulated direction or stay solely competitive.

We are monitoring it, and we are going to participate. We have the knowledge and the skills here to do that, but we do not want to front-run the policy of the state. We want to align with that state policy. As that becomes clearer, we will participate, but we will do so in a way that is wanted by the state of New Jersey.

Yep. Got it. Understood. That is helpful. I was just wondering, you mentioned, just thinking through how to address regulatory lag. I was wondering what types of proposals might you be supportive of or considering as you think about going forward now, if it is something besides trackers, how you manage or propose new structures around regulatory lag?

Yeah, David, look, again, I do not want to front-run some of the discussions that we are having. It is all constructive, and again, it is all aligned with trying to keep rates flat. But stay tuned, and we will communicate as quickly as we possibly can.

Okay, got it. Thanks so much. I will leave it there. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Sullivan with Wolfe Research. Please proceed with your question.

Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG) Q3 2026 Earnings Call Transcript

Company Participants