Oct 22, 2026 earnings call — Wildfire policy and strategic review
PG&E reaffirmed 2026 Core EPS guidance of $1.64 to $1.66.
Revenue $6.2B (est $6.8B) · EPS $0.41 (est $0.41)
Key quotes
"First, on wildfire policy, comprehensive reform has not yet been enacted and action is needed to address the tail risk that exists under the current framework."
"As we announced on September 2nd, we are assessing the full range of options for how PG and E is organized and financed."
"At the end of September, we filed our 10-year electric undergrounding plan, or EUP, Proposing 5 thousand additional miles of undergrounding between 2028 and 2037."
Analyst Q&A 9
wildfire liability legislation timing
Q (Steve Fleishman · Wolfe): The analyst asked what signals the legislature is giving about addressing wildfire liability this year and whether the senate will hold hearings. He also asked if the CPUC report due November 1st will say anything important.
A: Management said recent hearings have been effective and noted two hearings next week as they press the case that the status quo is unacceptable. They said they are working on alternatives while hoping policy reform happens. They expect the CPUC report on November 1st to be substantive and further show the status quo is unacceptable.
"And you know, as long as nothing happens, no legislation is passed, our customers continue to pay." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
how strategic review will be judged
Q (Marcella · Wells Fargo): The analyst asked what criteria the company will use in the strategic review, especially how they will weigh unlocking value against regulatory risk or reliance on processes out of their control. She also asked about discussions with gubernatorial candidates and other lawmakers on wildfire liability as a day-one priority.
A: Management said the priority is to unlock value and to target investment-grade businesses, with feasibility and ability to execute as a key test. They said policy reform is the preferred path but they will consider transactions that lower borrowing costs for customers. They also said a leading gubernatorial candidate, Javier Becerra, has publicly expressed support for reform.
"We want to target investment grade business or businesses." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
insurer talks and review timing
Q (Nicholas Campanella · Barclays): The analyst asked how talks with the insurance industry have evolved since the last session and whether an agreement with insurers could increase the chance of legislative action. He also asked if the company could pursue structural actions before next summer or if the review means waiting.
A: Management said conversations with insurers have been productive and next week’s hearing is expected to discuss subrogation; a wide coalition of stakeholders is engaged and discussions are constructive. They said they will update each quarter and expect a more definitive determination by next summer, but will act with urgency and communicate sooner if opportunities arise.
"I would suggest that, conversations have been productive." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
investment grade path and metrics
Q (Ross Fowler · BofA): The analyst asked how realistic it is to reach investment grade, whether the company can do that on its own or needs legislative/regulatory outcomes, and whether mid-teens FFO to debt (around 14%) is the right target. He also asked why management is confident no equity will be needed through 2030 and whether accelerated wildfire fund amortization affects financing plans.
A: Management said it is realistic for the business to be investment grade and that some actions can be done internally, like capital allocation and ring fencing, but structural moves would require regulator approval and must benefit customers. They said the target is mid-teens FFO to debt and reiterated they funded equity for their $73 billion plan and do not expect to need new equity through 2030. Management said the accelerated amortization is an accounting charge and has no bearing on their finance plan.
"We want to continue to target that mid teens FFO to debt." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
data center projects and dividend policy
Q (Carly Davenport · Goldman Sachs): The analyst asked how the data center pipeline should be viewed after the 2027 capital reduction and whether data center projects could be delayed. She also asked if the slide presentation change on the dividend signals a shift away from the prior 20% payout guidance.
A: Management said the 1.8 GW of data center projects previously signaled to be online by 2030 remain in the plan and the 2027 capital reset cut $2 billion while they still plan to spend $11.4 billion next year. They said they support the data center pipeline but need liability reform for sustainable growth. On the dividend, management said nothing new is being signaled, everything is on the table in the review, and the Board will set the dividend in December with 2027 expected to be in line with the prior trajectory toward 20% by 2028.
"We have we see that our 1.8 GW of projects that we have previously signaled would be online by 2030 remain in that plan." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
timeline flexibility and urgency
Q (Anthony Crowdell · Mizuho): The analyst asked whether the strategic review timeline to finish by next summer is flexible based on external events such as rating actions or another wildfire season, and what would make the review more urgent. He also asked how to get legislative action without another catastrophic event.
A: Management said they will respond to current conditions but are focused on a long-term sustainable business and financing model that delivers value. They said the strategic review was initiated before recent events and they will act with urgency. They noted the 2025 catastrophic event started this legislative package and said remaining sub-investment grade status is costly for customers, citing increased interest costs as a driver for urgency.
"We will we will just we will obviously respond to current conditions, but more importantly, have an eye on the horizon for what is our long term value proposition and actually unlock that value." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
impact of no legislation and undergrounding priority
Q (David Arcaro · Morgan Stanley): The analyst asked if no special session or no legislation this year would accelerate actions in the strategic review. He also asked how undergrounding fits into capital prioritization and whether it anchors long-term capex plans.
A: Management said inaction is a driver for the strategic review and the company began internal work a year ago so they already have momentum and are working urgently. They said undergrounding is very important for the most risky miles, outlined a 5,000-mile plan spread over 10 years at just over a billion dollars a year, and said it is a safety investment that does not drive earnings growth. They also said commission approval is required and they are concerned about proposed benefit-cost changes.
"We think undergrounding is incredibly important, not for every mile. But for the most risky miles." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
benefit-cost rule effect on miles and filing timing
Q (Richard Sunderland · Truist): The analyst asked how many miles would be cut from the undergrounding filing if the proposed benefit-cost ratio applies and how that would affect the quantified benefits in the filing. He also asked whether the CPUC report or commission signals could inform the strategic review or justify taking regulatory steps before legislative action.
A: Management said they are still working through the exact number of miles that would be affected and are concerned the proposed benefit-cost ratio does not match the standard used for other investments. They said they are considering customer-beneficial outcomes and would keep options on the table; they reiterated that policy reform is the fastest way to unlock value.
"I think the thing that we are concerned about is it does not match the standard that we use for all other investments benefit cost ratios that we make." — Patricia Kessler Poppe (CEO)
parent debt target and timing change
Q (Aidan Kelly · JPM): The analyst asked whether the previous holdco debt target (below 10% of total debt) remains intact or is flexible, and why the strategic review timeline was clarified to target next summer rather than the earlier 12–18 month window mentioned previously.
A: Management said everything is on the table and they are considering the debt profile, capital growth, and capital return, so they are not indicating a specific parent-debt target now. They said the earlier 12–18 month comment described typical timelines and was not intended to signal their schedule; they clarified they will push to give a definitive direction by next summer.
"And so we are considering both our debt profile, our capital growth, and our capital return." — Carolyn J. Burke (CFO)