Q1 2026 Earnings Call Transcript

Hello. First quarter 2026 earnings conference call. At this time, all lines are in a listen-only mode. Today’s conference call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Susan Gille, investor relations manager at Alliant Energy Corporation.

Good morning, and thank you for joining Alliant Energy Corporation’s first quarter 2026 financial results conference call. Joining me today are Lisa M. Barton, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Robert J. Durian, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

Following their prepared remarks, we will have time to take questions from the investment community. Last night, we issued a news release announcing our first quarter 2026 results and reaffirmed 2026 full-year earnings guidance. That release, along with our earnings presentation, will be referenced during today’s call and is available on the Investors section of our website at alliantenergy.com. Before we begin, please note that today’s remarks and responses will include forward-looking statements.

These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Those risks are described in last night’s earnings release and in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements. In addition, this presentation contains references to ongoing earnings per share, which is a non-GAAP financial measure.

Reconciliations to GAAP results are provided in the earnings release available on our website. At this point, I will turn the call over to Lisa.

Thank you, Sue. Good morning, everyone. I appreciate you joining us today. 2026 is off to an excellent start. First-quarter ongoing earnings delivered approximately 25% of the midpoint of our full-year guidance, despite very mild temperatures across our service territory.

We remain firmly on track to achieve our 2026 earnings targets while executing on our strategic priorities. At Alliant Energy Corporation, our focus is straightforward: unlocking the potential of our customers and communities, prioritizing affordability, and delivering long-term value for investors. As I have shared previously, we remain committed to driving economic development and prosperity across the states we serve. Today, I am pleased to share our progress on our 2 to 4 gigawatts of large load opportunities.

In April, we executed a new 370 megawatt electric service agreement with a hyperscale customer in Iowa, with a full load ramp expected by 2030. To support this growth, we have entered into an agreement with a high-quality counterparty to construct a simple-cycle natural gas facility. Our third-quarter update will include a refreshed Iowa resource plan reflecting any incremental load beyond the 3 gigawatts already in our plan, as well as the impact of updated MISO accreditation assumptions. We expect to finance these incremental investments with a balanced mix of equity and debt to maintain a resilient financial profile.

We now have five fully executed data center agreements representing approximately 3.4 gigawatts of contracted demand, with three of these projects under active construction. Importantly, we have secured the generation resources needed to reliably serve this load, which now represents more than a 60% increase in our current peak demand. Looking ahead, we continue to make strong progress on the 2 to 4 gigawatts of future large load opportunities we first announced six months ago. Our commitment has remained consistent: creating wins for existing customers and communities, a win for new customers, and a win for our investors.

We are strategically positioning our company and the states we serve for sustainable long-term growth while keeping customer costs as low as possible. Our approach ensures we remain a trusted partner to customers and communities by delivering reliable, affordable energy solutions that support their long-term ambitions. Evidence of this strategy in action was shown through last week when we joined the QTS leadership in Cedar Rapids to welcome U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and Iowa legislators to tour the site.

This $10 billion development, the largest economic investment in Iowa’s history, underscores our role in enabling innovation, job creation, and long-term economic diversification in the communities we serve. This is the Alliant Energy Corporation Advantage, a disciplined, solutions-oriented approach to growth. We guide data center customers to low-cost, transmission-ready sites in our service territories. And because our more recent electric service agreements are capacity-only, the investments required to serve this load are primarily energy storage and natural gas combustion turbines.

This approach creates strong alignment between capital investments and revenue growth while preserving flexibility to serve future energy needs as demand for capacity and energy continues to evolve. Economic growth drives job creation, expands the tax base, and strengthens communities. It also benefits customers by increasing load, which helps us maintain cost competitiveness for all customers. As electricity sales grow, we can spread fixed system costs over more kilowatt-hours.

In Iowa, our regulatory framework enables us to keep base electric rates stable through at least the end of the decade—that is at least four more years of no retail electric base rate reviews in Iowa—while earning our authorized return through retaining tax credits and energy margins from new generation investments. A foundational principle of utility regulation is cost responsibility. At Alliant Energy Corporation, our policy is clear: customers driving large incremental demand are responsible for funding the infrastructure required to serve them. Through individual customer rates, large users fund transmission interconnections, system upgrades, and incremental investments, protecting affordability for all customers.

In closing, I want to thank our employees. Their dedication and solutions-oriented execution are the foundation of our operational excellence and the driving force behind the progress we continue to make. I would also like to recognize the outstanding efforts of our field teams in restoring service following recent storm activity across our service territory. Despite the heavy storm activity, we achieved strong reliability and safety statistics through 2026, which is a testament to the quality of the work by the field organization.

I will now turn the call over to Robert for details on our financial results, financing plan, and regulatory activity.

Thank you, Lisa. Good morning, everyone. Yesterday, we announced solid first-quarter 2026 GAAP and ongoing earnings of $0.87 and $0.82, respectively. As shown on slide five, our ongoing earnings year-over-year change was primarily due to higher revenue requirements and AFUDC from capital investments at our Iowa and Wisconsin utilities.

These positive drivers were offset by higher operations and maintenance expenses related to new energy resources and planned maintenance at existing generating facilities, as well as higher depreciation and financing costs. Temperatures in 2026 reduced electric and gas margins by approximately $0.04 per share, compared to a reduction of $0.03 in the prior year. Excluding the impacts of temperatures, electric sales in the first quarter were essentially even year over year. First-quarter ongoing earnings exclude a $0.05 benefit from the remeasurement of deferred tax assets, reflecting updated state income tax apportionment assumptions driven by higher projected electric utility revenues from commercial and industrial customers, including data centers.

We are reaffirming our 2026 earnings guidance, with slide six reflecting several of our key 2026 assumptions. Our longer-term earnings outlook remains intact, and based on our current plan, we expect our compound annual earnings growth rate across 2027 through 2029 to be 7% plus. We will continue to assess our long-term earnings growth potential as we execute our data center expansion and update our capital expenditure plans later this year. Turning to financing, as shown on slide seven, during 2026 we had parent-level and Alliant Energy Finance maturities of $1.1 billion, and we retired these maturities with available cash and new debt issuances, including a $400 million term loan.

Our remaining 2026 debt financing plans include up to $800 million of long-term issuances, consisting of up to $300 million at WPL and up to $500 million at IPL. We are continuously working to capture low-cost capital for new infrastructure investments to help lower costs for our customers, and we had two positive developments at IPL in the first quarter. First, we increased the capacity of our sales-of-receivables program at IPL from $110 million to $180 million. Second, Standard & Poor’s upgraded IPL’s credit rating from BBB+ to A-.

As a reminder, our four-year capital plan is funded through a balanced mix of cash from operations, including proceeds from ongoing tax credit monetization, and new financings, including debt, hybrid instruments, and common equity. As shown on slide eight, of the approximately $2.4 billion of expected common equity needs over the next four years, we have already raised approximately $1.3 billion through forward equity agreements. These forward equity agreements take care of planned equity needs through 2027. This leaves approximately $1 billion of remaining equity to be raised through 2029, excluding equity expected to be raised under our Shareowner Direct Plan.

A new $1 billion at-the-market program was filed during the first quarter to enable issuance of this remaining equity. Our financing plan and proactive execution to date provide flexibility to support the efficient implementation of our strategy. Turning to our regulatory matters, our 2026 regulatory agenda remains closely aligned with our capital investment plans and individual rate applications for new large load customers, as we have no active rate reviews planned in 2026, reducing regulatory uncertainty. As shown on slide nine, we recently received two constructive regulatory decisions for new wind projects at our utilities.

In Iowa, the Iowa Utilities Commission approved the settlement for advanced ratemaking principles for up to 1 gigawatt of new wind generation at a current blended ROE of 9.8%, which will be updated each year through IPL’s base-rate stabilization period in Iowa. And in Wisconsin, we received approval from the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin for the 153 megawatt Ventre North wind project. We expect these wind investments will allow our utility customers to avoid significant fuel costs and generate tax credits while supporting investment in cost-effective, responsible energy resources. Looking ahead, we currently have one active Iowa docket for a 720 megawatt natural gas combustion turbine project, which was filed earlier this week, and five active Wisconsin dockets, including the individual customer rate filing for the Meta data center at Beaver Dam and construction authority filings for LNG storage, additional wind, and increased capacity at Riverside.

We expect decisions on these matters over the next 12 months. We expect to make additional filings throughout the year to support planned customer investments. In addition, we anticipate filing individual customer rate applications with the Iowa Utilities Commission related to the second QTS data center and the recent 370 megawatt data center electric supply agreement. I will now turn the call over to Lisa to provide closing remarks.

Thank you, Robert. Alliant Energy Corporation’s consistent financial performance reflects our strategy to unlock the potential of customers and communities. This is what sets us apart and defines the Alliant Energy Corporation Advantage: being solutions-oriented, supporting growth, driving affordability for all customers, and delivering lasting value to our shareholders. Thank you for your continued trust.

We look forward to connecting with many of you at upcoming investor conferences. I will now turn the call back to the operator to open the line for questions.

Thank you, Ms. Barton. At this time, the company will open the call to questions from members of the investment community. If you would like to withdraw your question, simply press 1 again. Your first question comes from Shahriar Pourreza with Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Hey, guys. Good morning.

Morning, Shahriar.

Morning, Lisa. Just on the 370 megawatt ESA that was signed. Obviously, you are calling out it provides upside to the current plan. These opportunities are starting to accrete.

You have this 2 to 4 gigawatts out there that is very mature. Sounds like we will get more disclosures. Are we thinking EPS disclosures, some sense around the opportunities? And, Lisa, do we ever get to a point where we could see a more definable EPS guidance range, given that you are already at the higher end of that 7% and visibility is improving for you?

Great question, Shahriar. Similar to what we have said in the past, every time we have an ESA, we will be announcing that on a quarterly basis. On our third-quarter earnings call and at EEI, we will provide a full update of our resource plan, which will include providing the generation necessary to support the 370 megawatts and an update on our EPS and growth trajectory. Looking forward to that call.

Got it. Okay, perfect. And then, obviously, there has been a lot of noise in Wisconsin between local pushback and moratoriums on new data center developments. Can you talk a little bit about where your conversations are directed with potential hyperscalers?

Are they still looking at Wisconsin, or are they more focused on Iowa? I know you called out you had a lot of rural land that is zoned industrial in Iowa, so that is attractive for a data center. Just want to get a temperature gauge on where the conversations are going between the two states. Thanks.

Sure. Iowa has more land mass. If you think about our service territory, it is about twice the physical service territory of Wisconsin and has very strong transmission interconnections. We still have very strong transmission interconnections and opportunities in Wisconsin as well.

But, as mentioned in the past, Iowa has about 75% of the communities that we touch there versus 40% in Wisconsin. We are very much looking forward to and awaiting a decision by the Wisconsin Public Utilities Commission with respect to our Beaver Dam facility. There is rhetoric out there that is still over from PJM, and we are actively addressing and countering that. As we mentioned in our remarks, we have our customer pledge, making sure that everybody knows that they are not paying for the costs of supporting data centers.

Stay tuned on all of that, but conversations do continue in Wisconsin.

Got it. Perfect. I appreciate it, Lisa. Congrats on the execution. Thanks, guys.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Nicholas Joseph Campanella with Barclays. Your line is open.

Hey. Good morning. Thanks for the update. So it sounds like you are going to do a 370 megawatt simple cycle for this build for the ESA that you just signed. What is the right dollar-per-kilowatt cost that you are seeing for those types of investments right now?

As we mentioned, we have entered into an agreement with a high-quality counterparty to build it. We will update on the size of that. The unit will be sized according to our resource plan, and, similar to what we have done in the past in Iowa, we are using a low, medium, and high load growth trajectory. We continue to have discussions with hyperscalers and will be refreshing all of that at EEI.

We cannot disclose the cost due to confidentiality agreements, but you can expect those to be in line with what you are seeing in the marketplace today.

Okay. And it seems like you are definitely having success in working with the current customer base, and you have visibility on the 2 to 4 gigawatts. You signed another 370 today. You mentioned that each time you have an ESA, you will announce those on a quarterly basis.

So is this kind of the run rate that we should expect into the second quarter? And maybe talk a little about the 2 to 4 gigawatts—how many customers are in there? Could we see a 1 gigawatt deal next, or will we continue to see 200 to 500 megawatt deals?

There is no one specific answer. These represent conversations with all different-sized entities. What I can say about the 2 to 4 is we hold ourselves to a very high standard. These are mature opportunities where we have a higher level of confidence.

We make sure they have land control, that they are in active discussions with our team, and that transmission studies are either ongoing or complete. We ensure we have a firm understanding of the load ramp and the timing of transmission upgrades and generation. They can come in small, medium, and large sizes.

One follow-up on the 370. As it ramps into 2030, could it be increased and could that customer do more? And does that represent part of the 2 to 4, or is the 370 largely locked and loaded today?

We are not going to talk specifically about the 370. As you know, we have confidentiality agreements in place for all of this. I would just point you back to the fact that we have these mature opportunities with a higher level of confidence. The 2 to 4 is made up of new entities as well as entities that might want to further expand.

Okay. Thanks for the update. I really appreciate it.

You are welcome. Your next question comes from Paul Zimbardo with Jefferies. Your line is open.

Hi. Good morning, team. Just a follow-up on my friend Nick’s question. For the 370 megawatts, is there land and zoning capability for that customer to expand if they so choose in the future, or is that a more constrained site?

Any of that information is really theirs to share rather than ours. What I can say is we are talking about Iowa. As we have mentioned in the past, we have great access to transmission. Other than Cedar Rapids, we are not in really large population areas, so you can make your assumptions as you wish.

Okay. And more generically, for a demand of that size, with the reserve margin and accreditation, how much resource in terms of megawatts would you need to support that?

That is why we are thrilled to have the flexible resource planning process we have in both states, which we see as a strategic advantage to Alliant Energy Corporation. Later this year, we will file a resource plan that will take into account reserve margins, any capacity needed with respect to changes in the MISO accreditation process, and any generation needed to support additional ESAs that we may announce between now and the end of the year. It puts us in a good position to be flexible and grow at the pace of our customers. We need to make sure we have a win for new customers, a win for existing customers, and a win for investors, and that is foundational to our ability to grow at their pace.

That makes a lot of sense. One unrelated: is there any update on the timeline for the FERC policy for self-funded network interconnection upgrades? I assume the opportunity set for you will be larger, assuming it goes in one direction, given how much new generation is in the queue. Curious on the timeline if you have one. Thank you.

We are anxiously waiting, as are you, but no, no firm insight on that.

Thank you very much, team.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from William Appicelli with UBS. Your line is open. Morning, Bill.

Hi. Good morning. You have mentioned a couple of times the MISO accreditation assumption impact. I know they are shifting to this direct loss-of-load framework over time.

Does that differ from what your baseline assumes? I would assume the net capacity value of the installed base would be somewhat less and require more generation. Can you speak to the potential implications of the accreditation assumptions?

We take this into account in all of our modeling. We are in a dynamic time with a lot of growth. Our modeling assumptions include load assumptions, reliability needs, needs to serve other customers, environmental changes, and so forth. MISO is still working on some of that, and we will have a cleaner line of sight as we get closer to Q3.

And on the resource mix you see—trying to get in front of what you will update in Q3—is it a full boat of capacity fixes in terms of storage and peakers, or will it include baseload potentially as well, or is it more around shaving the peaks and having the capacity resources to satisfy MISO requirements?

It is primarily batteries and peakers. Recall that we have focused on simple cycles that allow us to invest later in these facilities should we need the energy resources. Iowa in particular is very rich in wind resources that provide a lot of energy. Batteries and simple cycles allow us to capture speed to market.

We are fortunate to be in a region with so many wind resources. That is very location specific—not everybody can do that.

Lastly, the CT you referenced today—what is the size of that? Is that roughly the size of the load, or would there be some reserve margin?

Yes. We have entered into a contract for up to 1.1 gigawatts.

Oh, okay. So the CT you are talking about today is 1.1 gigawatts—up to.

Mhmm.

Up to. Yep.

Okay. Alright. Helpful. Thank you.

Your next question comes from Paul Fremont with Ladenburg. Your line is open.

Great. Congratulations on a great quarter. In terms of the 2 to 4 gigawatts, can you give us a sense of how many potential developers are represented in that 2 to 4?

All we can say is that they are very high-quality counterparties. The threshold when we talk about the 2 to 4 is that we have active negotiations in place, transmission studies completed or ongoing, and land control. Think of it as a combination of hyperscalers as well as developers.

Great. Is all of the 2 to 4 in Iowa?

No. It is not.

Can you give us any type of a distributional breakout of Wisconsin versus Iowa?

It is really fluid, Paul. We cannot. It is always a moving target.

Great. You have given us aggregate rate base. Is it fair to think about year-end 2025 rate base as being $6 billion Wisconsin and $11 billion Iowa?

We provided that information in slides we have disclosed publicly, Paul. You should be able to see that information.

Okay. You also provide an aggregate 12% growth rate in rate base, but the level of investment is heavily skewed to Iowa. Is it possible to get a sense of how fast rate base is growing in Iowa standalone and Wisconsin standalone?

We provided additional information in supplemental materials we shared publicly that has the details. We will have Susan follow up with you to point you in the right direction there. Great. And then last question for me: the 5% to 7% EPS growth—what should we use as the base for that?

7% plus. We update it every year once we complete the year, so you can use the 2025 final number that we accomplished, and then we will keep updating that each year after we complete the year.

So it is 2025 actual?

Thanks. The next question comes from Andrew Marc Weisel with Scotiabank.

Hi, good morning. Different question on the new CT. Are you able to share the in-service date? Would it be online by 2030 to match the new ESA?

2031.

Great, thank you. While 1.1 gigawatts for a new CT seems quite large, you also reminded us that you have the 720 megawatt CT going through the approval process. Help us understand the thinking behind pursuing simple cycles as opposed to bigger baseload CCGTs with higher run times, especially given fast demand growth and the 2 to 4 gigawatts potentially coming next. Is it a question of speed or cost?

And longer term for these assets, could they be converted to CCGTs if demand justifies it? Would the hyperscalers pay for those upgrades?

Great question. We are focused on customer affordability and flexibility, and on moving at the pace of our customers. Data center customers are very interested in speed to market. Because we operate in a wind-rich area—in Iowa there is about 6 gigawatts of load today between MidAmerican and Alliant and about 15 gigawatts of wind—energy largely comes from wind, which we can take advantage of.

That is why batteries and simple cycles work well for us. If the energy market changes and these data centers are interested in having that provided by us, we can add the steam turbine to convert simple cycles into combined cycles. On the 1.1 gigawatts, we have entered into a contract for up to 1.1, which allows us to be very flexible. You will see details at EEI and on our third-quarter earnings call when we reflect everything in our resource plan.

Our flexible resource planning process allows us to consider many moving parts. We have a slice-of-system approach—we are not building one plant for a data center—so we are thinking about all of the needs we have from an investment standpoint.

That is very helpful. So if the 2 to 4 gigawatts were to come to fruition, should we expect more CTs per capacity, more likely than CCGTs?

Yes. CTs, batteries—we have always had an all-of-the-above approach with respect to generation. That is part of the resource planning process. We are tying it with low, medium, and high load growth opportunities, which allows us to be very flexible in our process.

All of the above except CCGT. Sorry—kidding, could not help myself. Thank you very much. Appreciate the help there.

Again, if you have a question, it is star one on your telephone keypad. Your next question comes from Steve Dembrisi with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. When I look at slide four and it talks about the 2 to 4 gigawatts of upside load and the 370 megawatts that you just added in, can you talk about what that does in Iowa for your ability to potentially stay out longer than the five years you have agreed to? Even in the base plan before adding the 370 megawatts, we think you were able to keep rates flat and potentially provide benefits to customers.

How does that shape up as you add more load and we go into the middle of the next decade?

Great question, Steve. The planning is very dynamic right now given the volume of data center interest and the changes we have seen. Think of it as incrementally beneficial. When we contract these data center loads and the new generation needed to support them, we are focused on ensuring that we capture some level of margin such that we will be able to share back with the rest of the customers—the differential between the revenue stream from those data centers and the costs related to the generation.

Think of it as incrementally better, but we are not in a position right now to give you a definitive timeframe as far as what that might do to the current stay-out.

The one thing I would add is that the load ramp is critical to our ability to navigate that, which is why we focus on positioning ourselves to move as quickly as our customers.

That makes sense. And on the CTs, you talked about 2031 and speed to construction. If a CCGT takes four years to build, what is a typical build time for a CT?

It is about three to four years.

Correct.

Thanks very much. Appreciate it. That is all I had.

There are no further questions at this time.

With no more questions, this concludes our call. A replay will be available on our investor website. We thank you for your continued support of Alliant Energy Corporation, and feel free to contact me with any follow-up questions. This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for joining. You may now disconnect.