Aug 12, 2026 earnings call — Berry integration and synergy delivery
Q4 adjusted EPS of $1.23 and full-year synergy capture of $285 million, 10% ahead of initial expectations.
Revenue $6.4B (est $6.1B) · EPS $1.23 (est $1.19)
Key quotes
"Second, synergy capture exceeded our expectations during the quarter as we realized $115 million of synergy, bringing total fiscal 2026 synergies to $285 million."
"Sequentially, volume increased approximately 200 basis points with growth across several market categories."
"We expect adjusted EPS to be in the range of $1.80 to $1.90 per share, which reflects continued improvement in our operating performance, partially offset by higher interest and tax expense."
Analyst Q&A 16
Middle East working capital recovery
Q (John Purtell · Macquarie): He asked how much of the $500 million tied to the Middle East will be recovered in the next 6 months versus 12 months, and about structural improvements in working capital collection.
A: Management said the company has a cumulative $500 million impact from the Middle East conflict and expects to get that back over the next 12 months. They said progress should come in the first 6 months, roughly in the $100 million, $200 million, $300 million range. They also listed targets across inventory, days sales outstanding and days payables to structurally improve working capital.
"We cumulatively have about a $500 million impact from the Middle East conflict." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Price vs cost in quarter
Q (Ghansham Panjabi · Baird): He asked how price and cost moved in the quarter and what is embedded in guidance for the back half of the year.
A: Management said in the fourth quarter they had about $280 million of price realization, which was largely the pass-through of inflation. They said the price/cost relationship was stable in the quarter and they expect to maintain that relationship through the transition period. Management also noted the organization handled rapid inflation well during the integration.
"In our fourth quarter, the quarter that we just completed here with our fiscal year, we had about $280 million of price realization, which was the pass-through of the vast majority of our inflation." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
What will drive organic growth in 2027
Q (Nathan Reilly · UBS): He asked what assumptions on market volume-led growth are in the outlook and whether the combined company will grow about 1% above market.
A: Management said they are optimistic about calendar '27 as the first fairly clean year after the Amcor and Berry combination. They said the company is focused on core areas — nutrition, health/beauty/wellness and specialties — which already make up more than 50% of the top line, and that the combination and growth enablers should let them outperform the market. They pointed to strong signs in protein and pet care, which are together about 15% to 20% of the company.
"We're playing in nutrition, we're playing in health, beauty and wellness, and we're playing in specialties." — Peter Konieczny (CEO)
Were Q4 volumes one-offs?
Q (Ramoun Lazar · Jefferies): He asked if the quarter's volume improvement was due to one-offs like buy-ahead or World Cup, and what end markets showed strength.
A: Management said they investigated and do not believe one-offs materially drove Q4 volumes. They said the volume improvement was broad-based across core and noncore, both segments and regions, with highlights in emerging markets, North America back to growth, foodservice, pet care and protein strength. They also said July trends were consistent with Q4, supporting continuation of the momentum.
"When we add it all up, we don't think that this adds up to anything that would be material to the volume performance in the fourth quarter." — Peter Konieczny (CEO)
Why price/mix was negative
Q (George Staphos · BofA): He asked why price/mix looked negative in the quarter despite passing through inflation, and where to see rigid EBIT.
A: Management said price/mix excluding raw material pass-through was minus 1%, consistent with recent patterns and driven by competitive dynamics and re-earning of business. They reiterated $280 million of pass-through offset inflation and noted overall margin performance was good. For segment EBIT on a comparable basis, they pointed to the lower-left portion of the segment slides as the best place to see sequential improvements.
"that minus 1% has kind of been consistent with what we've observed over the last year" — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Gain on asset sales?
Q (Mark Wilson · RBC): He asked if there was a gain on asset sales in the period and where it was booked.
A: Management said there was a modest gain on one asset sale. They said the gain is not included in adjusted EPS; it sits below the line in adjustments around transaction-related costs. They confirmed no gains or losses are inside the $4.02 EPS figure they provided.
"There was a modest gain on one of the sales of the assets." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
EBITDA path and CapEx level
Q (Gabe Hajde · Wells Fargo): He outlined an implied EBITDA range and asked if that fits company views, and whether CapEx is accelerating or timing related.
A: Management said the implied path reflects mid-single-digit EBITDA growth over the next 6 to 18 months, driven by continued synergies and modest volume growth. They said this expectation fits the range the analyst noted. On CapEx, they said they expect roughly 5% of sales, a steady level to support growth and not materially above historic levels.
"From an EBITDA perspective, 6 months, next 12 months, so over the 18, kind of that mid-single-digit EBITDA growth is implied, and it is then inside of the range that you just provided." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Free cash flow pathway
Q (Keith Chau · MST Marquee): He asked if $2.5 billion of free cash flow over the next 12 months is a reasonable target given working capital recovery and synergies.
A: Management said the pathway to 3x leverage involves three things, including continuation of mid-single-digit EBITDA growth. They agreed roughly $2.5 billion of free cash flow would combine natural cash generation (EBITDA minus CapEx, interest and taxes) plus the $500 million return from the Middle East. They said that path aligns with their assumptions toward end-2027 leverage goals.
"One is, to Gabe's question, continuation of mid-single-digit EBITDA growth." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Sept quarter EBIT drivers
Q (Matthew Roberts · Raymond James): He asked whether EBIT should be up in the September quarter and what puts and takes affect the line into the second half.
A: Management pointed to the $0.13 to $0.21 EPS bridge and said at the midpoint that implies roughly $80 million after-tax or about $100 million of EBIT improvement. They said capture of $110 million of EBIT synergies and some reduced depreciation support EBIT, while higher interest and taxes offset some of the benefit. Overall they expect EBIT and EBITDA to improve year-over-year.
"That $0.13 to $0.21 bridge there that you see, think of that at the midpoint, there's roughly $80 million of after-tax earnings or roughly $100 million of EBIT." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Incentive compensation accruals
Q (Brook Campbell-Crawford · Barrenjoey): He asked whether incentive compensation in the June quarter created a benefit that might unwind and how to think about the accrual dynamic.
A: Management said there are modest year-over-year increases in incentive compensation as they accrue at target. They noted last year they accrued at roughly 50% of target because growth and cash flow missed prior expectations. This accrual movement is part of the compensation component in the transition period bridge.
"As we mentioned in the footnote, we have some modest year-over-year increases in incentive compensation." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Distance to $3B cash flow model
Q (Jakob Cakarnis · Jarden Australia): He asked how far management thinks they are from the value creation model of $3 billion annual cash flow, $1 billion reinvestment and $1 billion balance sheet use.
A: Management said they are well on their way and that the model still holds. They said 2027 should show the bulk of synergies and most integration activities will be done by the end of 2027, which will improve earnings and cash flow. They reiterated commitment to the dividend and an investment-grade balance sheet while using cash to reduce leverage.
"Let's not forget that '27 is going to be the year, for example, on synergies where we are going to pretty much see the bulk of it." — Peter Konieczny (CEO)
Volume assumption and healthcare softness
Q (Michael Roxland · Truist): He asked how much volume growth is embedded in the transition-period outlook (basis points) and why health care volumes remain soft.
A: Management said the transition-period volume assumption embedded in the $1.80 to $1.90 guide is flat to very modestly up. They explained health care softness is largely a mix shift: lower-margin medical subcategories lost volume while higher-margin pharma categories (nasal, ophthalmic, inhalation) grew, which is acceptable because it expands profits. They also noted wins in GLP-1, generics in India and ramp of new coating technology will support future medical growth.
"The assumption embedded in the $1.80 to $1.90 for the first -- for the transition period, volume assumption is flat to very modestly up." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Cost items and guide conservatism
Q (Anthony Pettinari · Citi): He asked about assumptions for resin, fuel, freight and other costs into the second half, and how conservative the guide is and what could move results to the high or low end.
A: Management said they do not give specific outlooks on resin or logistics but assume pricing will offset inflation. They said their transition-period EPS band mainly depends on volume (flat or modestly up) because they have good earning power on small volume moves. PK added supply-chain normalization will affect resin costs and they will adjust pricing up or down as needed for customers.
"But our assumption remains that our pricing will offset that inflation." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
Components of $100M EBIT bridge
Q (Ketan Mamtora · BMO): He asked what the puts and takes are behind the ~$100 million EBIT component of the 6-month bridge, since synergies alone might exceed it.
A: Management said the primary positive is net synergies. They added there are moving parts: a modest decrease in depreciation and a modest increase in incentive compensation. They pointed to a reduction in depreciation during the 6-month period as one of the quantifiable offsets in the supplemental guide.
"And as we mentioned, we've got a couple of moving parts." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)
$140M revenue wins detail and timing
Q (Hillary Cacanando · Deutsche Bank): She asked whether the $140 million of annualized wins are cross-sells or new customers, and how long before those awards convert into revenue and earnings.
A: Management said the wins come from a mix of levers: product combinations between the two companies, leveraging global reach and cross-referencing customers — basically all of the above. They said about $140 million is currently earmarked as annualized wins and those typically take about 12 to 15 months to ramp to full revenue, with bottom-line contribution following after that.
"At this point, we would earmark about $140 million of annualized wins." — Peter Konieczny (CEO)
Restructuring costs and working capital link
Q (Jeffrey Zekauskas · JPMorgan): He asked how much restructuring costs will decline next year, whether that benefit is included in the $500 million working capital recovery, and whether raw material cost moves affect the recovery timing.
A: Management said total Berry transaction restructuring costs were $290 million, split $160 million integration-related and $130 million transaction-related. They expect restructuring costs to come down materially in the transition period and to more like $50 million for integration-related costs going forward. They said the restructuring benefit is not included in the working capital improvement assumption; instead it is a cash-flow tailwind toward leverage targets, and their recovery assumption for the $500 million expects reasonable stability in raw material costs.
"$290 million of total Berry transaction restructuring costs, $160 million of that was more integration-oriented, $130 million was transaction-oriented." — Stephen Scherger (CFO)