Skip to content

Entergy

NYSE: ETR · USD

Entergy (ETR) Economic Moat Analysis—

Avantages concurrentiels, preuves datées et risques d’érosion.

Incertain avantage concurrentiel

Entergy’s operating utility system, regulated cost recovery and customer investment protections support its franchise. The passages do not establish exclusive service rights, the economics of competing networks or durable superior returns sufficient to confirm a company-wide moat. Pricing power is mixed: regulatory actions have contributed to realized earnings, but refunds, recovery losses and approval requirements constrain pricing discretion. Alternative procurement has already displaced some sales, although aggregate retail demand has grown.

Efficient scale

An established generation and delivery system serving approximately 3.1 million customers, supported by operating cost-recovery mechanisms, is a potential efficient-scale advantage. Network duplication barriers and territorial exclusivity are not established by the passages.

Durabilité
Existing operations and subsequent project cost-recovery approvals support continuity, but do not establish a durable advantage over alternative suppliers or an assured investment return.
Concurrents
Comparaison non établie
Risques d’érosion
Alternative procurement has already reduced some sales or growth opportunities. Regulatory refunds and historical write-offs demonstrate limits to recovery; future generation additions also face competitive solicitation requirements.
Ce qui invaliderait la thèse
The potential advantage would be undermined by sustained customer bypass accompanied by declining retail demand, repeated material investment disallowances, or competing supply demonstrating an economic ability to replace Entergy’s delivery franchise.
Preuves (4) · Contre-preuves (4)

Switching costs

Evest’s minimum bills, incremental-cost obligations, early-exit liabilities and collateral provide current contractual protection for customer-specific investment. These establish switching friction for this relationship, rather than a demonstrated company-wide switching-cost moat.

Durabilité
Protection depends on contract enforceability, counterparty performance and Entergy meeting reciprocal obligations. The supplied passages do not establish the contract duration or successful recovery following an actual exit.
Concurrents
Comparaison non établie
Risques d’érosion
Construction or service failures can trigger penalties and potential termination. Protection against unrecovered investment does not itself demonstrate retained demand or superior returns.
Ce qui invaliderait la thèse
This protection would be invalidated if an early exit left material incremental costs unrecovered despite the contractual obligations and collateral, or if Entergy’s performance failures removed the expected protection.
Preuves (4) · Contre-preuves (3)

Évolution depuis la dernière analyse

  • Retain the uncertain moat verdict: the current catalog supports operating and contractual protections but does not resolve territorial exclusivity, network duplication economics or durable competitive returns.
  • Retention now also incorporates exact 2026 comparative operating data: retail customer counts and aggregate retail sales increased, while industrial customer counts declined. This supports a mixed assessment without implying a measured retention rate.
  • Realized pricing now includes disclosed earnings contributions from regulatory actions and construction returns; proposed Arkansas rates remain excluded from realized increases.
  • Retain the prior numerical pricing and management grades after reassessing current catalog evidence. Governance and alignment are supported by actual arrangements and achievements, rather than proposed votes or assumed ownership.

Limites de l’analyse

  • All supplied sources are issuer filings or issuer earnings materials. Contractual disclosures and operating results support assessments, while management explanations and guidance-delivery claims remain issuer-reported.
  • No supplied passage identifies a named competing supplier in its competitive role. Competitor arrays therefore remain empty; customers, guarantors, advisers, regulators and companies mentioned in director biographies are not treated as competitors.
  • Exclusive service rights, competing-network economics, comparative delivered costs and sustained returns above capital costs are not established. Scale and regulated recovery alone do not confirm a moat.
  • Customer counts and sales provide indirect retention evidence; they do not disclose customer churn, renewal rates or the amount of demand lost to alternative procurement.
  • Project approvals and contractual protection do not establish completed project returns, on-budget delivery or successful collection following customer default.
  • Executive holdings and the complete long-term performance framework are not supplied. Director ownership compliance and granted awards support alignment without establishing exceptional durability.
  • Source dates are treated as filed dates, preserving dateKind. No later resolution is assumed for proceedings pending in the supplied passages.

Indicateurs financiers à confronter à la thèse

Ratios calculés à partir des publications annuelles. Une valeur manquante reste indisponible. Les graphiques détaillés sont accessibles dans les autres onglets.

Indicateurs financiers à confronter à la thèse
PériodeGross marginOperating marginROICFCF margin
2021—15.7%4.4%18.2%
2022—14.9%—-18.0%
2023—21.6%—-1.2%
2024—22.3%4.6%-2.9%
2025—24.7%5.6%-19.6%

Pouvoir de fixation des prix44

  • Pricing outcomes

    Regulatory actions and construction returns contributed to actual 2026 earnings, demonstrating functioning regulated recovery. Completed customer refunds and gas-cost under-recovery show mixed outcomes. Higher collections alone are not treated as proof of higher unit prices, and suspended proposed rates are not realized increases.

  • Customer demand

    Indirect operating evidence is mixed: retail customers increased to 3,071,011 from 3,039,406 and first-half retail sales grew 4.3%, while industrial customer counts fell 3.2%. Minimum bills and exit obligations support one large relationship, but alternative procurement has already displaced some sales. No retention rate is inferred.

  • Margin resilience

    Fuel recovery mechanisms, approved project recovery and customer-funded incremental costs buffer economics. Historical regulatory write-offs, fuel under-recovery and actual operating and financing cost pressures demonstrate incomplete protection. This assesses recovery mechanisms and outcomes rather than inferring a moat from margins.

  • Pricing freedom

    Rates and service terms require regulatory approval, and Arkansas’s proposed rates were suspended. Bespoke contracts provide minimum bills and exit protection, but carry reciprocal performance duties and potential termination penalties. These are meaningful constraints on pricing and terms.

Management63

  • Capital discipline

    Actual customer advances and contractual incremental-cost protection demonstrate financing discipline. Construction spending and equipment commitments have expanded, substantial debt and equity financing is realized, and historical write-offs show recovery losses. Financing supports investment but does not by itself prove poor allocation; completed returns and budget outcomes remain incomplete.

  • Incentive alignment

    Approved incentives combine EPS, cash-flow leverage, safety and customer measures; safety shortfalls reduced the safety payout factor. Actual equity grants and verified director ownership compliance provide additional alignment. Heavy EPS weighting, predetermined exclusions and incomplete executive holdings temper the assessment.

  • Execution

    Reported earnings improvement, Sterlington’s commercial operation and issuer-reported delivery within the upper half of original annual guidance for ten years demonstrate achievements. Safety results were below minimum on both injury measures despite meeting pole targets and exceeding vegetation targets. Future project approvals are not counted as completed delivery.

  • Governance

    All directors except the CEO are independent; independent directors meet without management, incumbent attendance was at least 99%, and disclosed shareholder rights include annual elections, majority voting and proxy access. These demonstrate strong arrangements and participation, while not proving exceptional oversight effectiveness.

Sources et méthode

Publication courante · Mis à jour 19/10/2026 · Version 7

Interprétation IA fondée sur des extraits vérifiés. Les déclarations de l’entreprise et les limites de couverture restent explicites.

Méthode quality-scores-2 : six catégories de même poids. Le score global exige une couverture complète. Les données manquantes ne valent pas zéro. Les évaluations qualitatives sont des interprétations sourcées, pas des probabilités. 4/6 · 22/10/2026

Moat—

Insufficient evidence for every rubric criterion; no category score is inferred.

structural advantage · — · Operating scale and cost recovery suggest a potential franchise advantage, but the passages do not establish exclusivity or barriers to economic replacement. The uncertain verdict requires an ungraded moat criterion.

durability · — · Project recovery approval and customer contracts provide protection, but do not establish the duration or persistence of a company-wide competitive advantage.

customer dependency · — · Evest has contractual exit friction and retail demand continues, but these do not establish company-wide dependency on Entergy when alternative procurement has already displaced sales.

erosion resilience · — · Retail growth coexists with realized competitive displacement and regulatory recovery losses. The catalog cannot establish resilience of an otherwise unconfirmed moat.

Pouvoir de fixation des prix44

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

realized pricing · 2/4 · Regulatory actions and construction returns contributed to actual 2026 earnings, demonstrating functioning regulated recovery. Completed customer refunds and gas-cost under-recovery show mixed outcomes. Higher collections alone are not treated as proof of higher unit prices, and suspended proposed rates are not realized increases.

retention · 2/4 · Indirect operating evidence is mixed: retail customers increased to 3,071,011 from 3,039,406 and first-half retail sales grew 4.3%, while industrial customer counts fell 3.2%. Minimum bills and exit obligations support one large relationship, but alternative procurement has already displaced some sales. No retention rate is inferred.

margin resilience · 2/4 · Fuel recovery mechanisms, approved project recovery and customer-funded incremental costs buffer economics. Historical regulatory write-offs, fuel under-recovery and actual operating and financing cost pressures demonstrate incomplete protection. This assesses recovery mechanisms and outcomes rather than inferring a moat from margins.

contractual freedom · 1/4 · Rates and service terms require regulatory approval, and Arkansas’s proposed rates were suspended. Bespoke contracts provide minimum bills and exit protection, but carry reciprocal performance duties and potential termination penalties. These are meaningful constraints on pricing and terms.

Prévisibilité48

Five consecutive annual periods. Equal weights: nondeclining revenue frequency; revenue-growth volatility (5–40pp); positive FCF frequency; FCF-margin volatility (3–20pp). Stability indicator, not a growth forecast.

Nondeclining revenue years (%)
50.00
Revenue growth volatility (pp)
10.98
Positive FCF years (%)
20.00
FCF margin volatility (pp)
13.68

Solidité financière3

Equal-weight grades: debt/FCF (1–8x), net debt/earnings before interest and tax (0–5x), interest service (1–12x), current ratio (0.75–2x). Earnings use reported operating income, or reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense when operating income is unavailable. Interest service uses earnings/interest expense; if unavailable, it uses reported operating cash flow/cash interest paid, without relabeling cash paid as accrued expense. Nonpositive cash flow/earnings score 0 for their service component; reported zero interest with a positive numerator scores 100. Net cash scores 100 for net leverage. Missing disclosures remain unavailable. General nonfinancial-company rubric, not a credit rating; exceptional and nonoperating gains are not normalized out. IFRS finance-cost and cash-flow classifications retain their reported scope.

debtFcfGrade
0.00
netDebtEbitGrade
0.00
interestCoverageGrade
12.69
currentRatioGrade
0.00
Net debt / operating income (x)
9.06
Interest coverage (x)
2.40
Current ratio (x)
0.74

Allocation du capital—

Missing required inputs: sbcRevenue. Three-year equal-weight indicators: pretax return on average invested capital (0–25%; equity + debt − cash, each year and its prior year), share-count growth (0–5%, lower better), share-based cost/revenue (2–20%, lower better), consolidated FCF/net income (0–1x). Return uses reported operating income or, if unavailable, EBIT calculated from reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense; exceptional/nonoperating gains are not normalized out. Share-based cost uses the reported cash-flow add-back or, if absent, separately reported recognized compensation expense; the latter never becomes an FCF adjustment. Nonpositive net income scores 0 for cash conversion; absent income/FCF stays unavailable. Nonpositive invested capital has no defined return and remains unavailable. Does not establish acquisition quality or buyback timing.

3-year pre-tax operating return (%)
6.66
3-year average dilution (%)
2.64
cashConversionGrade
0.00

Qualité du management63

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

capital discipline · 2/4 · Actual customer advances and contractual incremental-cost protection demonstrate financing discipline. Construction spending and equipment commitments have expanded, substantial debt and equity financing is realized, and historical write-offs show recovery losses. Financing supports investment but does not by itself prove poor allocation; completed returns and budget outcomes remain incomplete.

incentive alignment · 3/4 · Approved incentives combine EPS, cash-flow leverage, safety and customer measures; safety shortfalls reduced the safety payout factor. Actual equity grants and verified director ownership compliance provide additional alignment. Heavy EPS weighting, predetermined exclusions and incomplete executive holdings temper the assessment.

execution · 2/4 · Reported earnings improvement, Sterlington’s commercial operation and issuer-reported delivery within the upper half of original annual guidance for ten years demonstrate achievements. Safety results were below minimum on both injury measures despite meeting pole targets and exceeding vegetation targets. Future project approvals are not counted as completed delivery.

governance · 3/4 · All directors except the CEO are independent; independent directors meet without management, incumbent attendance was at least 99%, and disclosed shareholder rights include annual elections, majority voting and proxy access. These demonstrate strong arrangements and participation, while not proving exceptional oversight effectiveness.

Preuves

Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 25,000 MW of electric generating capacity.

Item 1, Entergy’s Business: operating generation capacity · Dépôt 19/02/2026

Entergy delivers electricity to approximately 3.1 million Utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.

Item 1, Entergy’s Business: utility customers · Dépôt 19/02/2026

The Registrant Subsidiaries each have rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs incurred under these purchase obligations.

Capital obligations: fuel and purchased power recovery mechanisms · Dépôt 19/02/2026

In March 2026 the APSC approved the Arkansas Cypress Solar facility and Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the costs of the facility through the Generating Arkansas Jobs Act rider.

Arkansas Cypress Solar: approved project cost recovery · Dépôt 31/07/2026

In addition, changes to regulatory policies, such as those that allow customers to directly access the market to procure wholesale energy or those that incentivize development and utilization of new, developing, or alternative sources of generation, could, and in some instances, have already reduced sales, and other non-traditional procurements, such as virtual purchase power agreements or “behind the meter” generation solutions, could, and in some instances have already limited growth opportunities or reduced sales at the Utility operating companies.

Risk Factors: realized displacement from alternative procurement · Dépôt 19/02/2026

Entergy Arkansas refunded $92.3 million of the total through one-time bill credits under the Grand Gulf credit rider during the August 2024 billing cycle.

Rate and Regulatory Matters: Arkansas customer bill credits · Dépôt 19/02/2026

1,758 1,056 2,357 Less adjustments: Utility 4Q24 E-LA adjustment to a regulatory liability primarily related to securitization resulting from Louisiana state income tax rate change — 9 — 2Q24 E-LA agreement in principle to resolve its FRP extension filing and other retail matters — (151) — 1Q24 E-AR write-off of a regulatory asset related to the opportunity sales proceeding — (132) — 1Q24 E-NO increase in customer sharing of income tax benefits as a result of the 2016–2018 IRS audit resolution — (79) — 4Q23 customer sharing of tax benefits as a result of the 2016–2018 IRS audit resolution — — (98) 3Q23 E-AR write-off of assets related to the ANO stator incident — — (78) 1Q23 impacts from E-LA storm cost approvals and securitizations, including customer sharing (excluding income tax items below) — — (87) Income tax effect on Utility adjustments above — 92 73 4Q24 income tax expense resulting from Louisiana state income tax rate change — (29) — 4Q23 E-LA reversal of regulatory liability associated with Hurricane Isaac securitization, initially recorded in 2017 as a result of the TCJA — — 106 4Q23 2016–2018 IRS audit resolution — — 568 1Q23 E-LA income tax benefit resulting from securitization — — 129 Total Utility — (289) 611 Parent & Other 2024 pension lift out — (320) — 4Q24 DOE spent nuclear fuel litigation settlements — 25 40 Income tax effect on Parent & Other adjustments above — 62 (9) 4Q23 2016–2018 IRS audit resolution — — 275 Total Parent & Other — (233) 307 Total adjustments — (522) 919 ETR adjusted earnings 1,758 1,577 1,438 Diluted average number of common shares outstanding (in millions) (a) 450 432 425 Calculations may differ due to rounding (a) Diluted number of common shares outstanding and per-share information reflects the post-Stock Split share count.

Appendix A: historical regulatory write-offs, earnings and diluted shares · Dépôt 27/03/2026

Additionally, in its January 2026 order, the APSC found that Entergy Arkansas should conduct all-source competitive solicitations for future generation additions, with limited exceptions where Entergy Arkansas believes that a specific solicitation should be restricted to a certain resource and provides a detailed explanation to the APSC supporting this belief, which the APSC later determined in its March 2026 order is a narrow exception.

Jefferson Power Station: future competitive solicitation requirements · Dépôt 31/07/2026

The protections include terms requiring the customer to pay Entergy Louisiana’s incremental costs to serve the customer, including through contributions in aid of construction, other advanced payments and minimum monthly bills.

Evest customer agreements: incremental costs and minimum monthly bills · Dépôt 31/07/2026

The agreements also include specified financial obligations in the event that Evest terminates the contracts early, restructures the project, or in the event of default.

Evest customer agreements: early termination and default obligations · Dépôt 31/07/2026

These specified financial obligations would be based on Entergy Louisiana’s unrecovered incremental costs to serve Evest at the time of such an event.

Evest customer agreements: unrecovered incremental cost basis · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Evest’s obligations under the electric service agreement and related contracts are secured by various forms of collateral, including a guaranty from Meta Platforms, Inc.

Evest customer agreements: collateral and guaranty · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Finally, the electric service agreement also includes provisions relating to Entergy Louisiana’s performance obligations, including the timely construction of the facilities supporting service to Evest, audit rights for the construction costs supported by Evest, and service standards during the term of the electric service agreement.

Evest customer agreements: construction and service performance obligations · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Entergy Louisiana’s failure to meet one or more of these performance obligations could result in specified financial and/or non-financial penalties.

Evest customer agreements: potential performance penalties · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Such penalties would vary based on the nature and severity of the failure, including the potential termination of the electric service agreement.

Evest customer agreements: potential termination · Dépôt 31/07/2026

•the net effect of regulatory actions across several operating companies;

Second-quarter 2026 Utility results: regulatory actions contributing to earnings · Dépôt 29/07/2026

•return on construction work in progress for certain utility plant investments; •higher retail sales volume; and •higher other income (deductions).

Second-quarter 2026 Utility results: construction returns and retail sales · Dépôt 29/07/2026

The primary reason for the rate increase was an under-recovered balance as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2025.

Energy Cost Recovery Rider: under-recovery from higher gas prices · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Utility Regulatory Risks •The terms and conditions of service, including electric rates, of the Registrant Subsidiaries are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in lengthy litigation and uncertainty as to ultimate results.

Utility Regulatory Risks: approval of rates and service terms · Dépôt 19/02/2026

In March 2026 the APSC issued an order suspending the proposed rates and tariffs filed by Entergy Arkansas.

Arkansas 2026 base rate case: proposed rates suspended · Dépôt 31/07/2026

(n) GWh sold Residential 8,736 8,899 (1.8) 2.8 16,792 17,683 (5.0) (0.2) Commercial 7,208 7,265 (0.8) 0.3 13,437 13,507 (0.5) (0.1) Governmental 617 617 - 1.6 1,172 1,176 (0.3) 0.3 Industrial 17,164 15,620 9.9 9.9 33,060 29,452 12.3 12.3 Total retail 33,725 32,401 4.1 5.7 64,461 61,818 4.3 5.9 Wholesale 3,338 4,133 (19.2) 6,127 5,767 6.2 Total 37,063 36,534 1.4 70,588 67,585 4.4 Number of electric retail customers Residential 2,637,865 2,608,472 1.1 Commercial 374,149 371,699 0.7 Governmental 19,105 18,008 6.1 Industrial 39,892 41,227 (3.2) Total 3,071,011 3,039,406 Earnings per share Entergy Corporation Funds from operations Formula rate plan U.S.

Appendix C: retail sales and customer counts, 2026 versus 2025 · Dépôt 29/07/2026

Operating Activities Net cash flow provided by operating activities increased $924 million for the six months ended June 30, 2026 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2025 primarily due to an increase of $700 million in receipts of advance payments related to customer agreements, including $599 million in customer advances and $101 million in tax gross-up on customer advances for construction, higher collections from Utility customers, and the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs.

Liquidity and Capital Resources: operating cash-flow increase and customer advances · Dépôt 31/07/2026

•an increase of $804 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to higher spending by Entergy Arkansas on the Jefferson Power Station project, the Cypress Solar project, and the Ironwood Power Station project, by Entergy Louisiana on the Richland Parish Power Station Units 1-4 project, the Pointe Coupee Units 1-3 project, the Waterford 6 Power Station project, the Waterford 5 Power Station project, and the Westlake Power Station project, and by Entergy Mississippi on the Traceview Advanced Power Station project; partially offset by lower spending by Entergy Texas on the Legend Power Station project as a result of the sale of assets related to the in-process project in December 2025 and lower spending on the Orange County Advanced Power Station project in 2026.

Liquidity and Capital Resources: increased generation construction spending · Dépôt 31/07/2026

The agreement was amended in second quarter 2026, updating the minimum order commitment of PIE to 27 sets, with no change to the original commitment of a minimum order of two CTs.

Vendor exclusivity agreement: amended minimum equipment commitment · Dépôt 31/07/2026

Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization 1,326,139 1,255,204 70,935 Deferred income taxes, tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued 220,890 231,274 (10,384) Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges 18,059 — 18,059 Changes in working capital: Receivables (225,491) (275,045) 49,554 Fuel inventory (5,679) (4,852) (827) Accounts payable 134,118 (53,439) 187,557 Taxes accrued 12,201 11,230 971 Interest accrued 45,508 22,867 22,641 Deferred fuel costs (131,572) (263,205) 131,633 Customer advances - current 740,977 303,791 437,186 Other working capital accounts (118,766) (58,819) (59,947) Changes in provisions for estimated losses Changes in securitization account 215 3,309 (3,094) Payments to storm reserve escrow accounts (5,551) (6,808) 1,257 Receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts — 43,789 (43,789) Increase (decrease) in other investments 65,548 (1,659) 67,207 Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs — 3,546 (3,546) Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales 1,548,167 713,102 835,065 Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds (1,586,838) (780,211) (806,627) Net cash flow used in investing activities (5,092,946) (3,740,829) (1,352,117) FINANCING ACTIVITIES Proceeds from the issuance of: Long-term debt 4,625,848 3,517,949 1,107,899 Treasury stock 11,534 24,539 (13,005) Common stock 1,017,171 804,631 212,540 Retirement of long-term debt (1,864,866) (1,599,728) (265,138) Changes in commercial paper - net 911,722 (451,686) 1,363,408 Customer advances received for construction 885,867 732,454 153,413 Customer advances used for construction (436,221) (245,481) (190,740) Other (259,675) 2,164 (261,839) Dividends paid: Common stock (585,899) (516,716) (69,183) Preferred stock (9,159) (9,159) — Net cash flow provided by financing activities 4,296,322 2,258,967 2,037,355 Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 1,925,129 315,928 1,609,201 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 1,928,916 859,703 1,069,213 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 3,854,045 $ 1,175,631 $ 2,678,414 SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:

Year-to-date June 2026 cash-flow statement: investing and financing cash flows · Dépôt 29/07/2026

2025 Annual Incentive Program Performance Measures and Methodology The measures that the Talent and Compensation Committee approved to determine the EAM for 2025 were: ETR Adjusted EPS; Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio; Safety; Customer NPS; and Talent, Culture, and Commerce, with ETR Adjusted EPS being the most heavily weighted at 60% and the remaining measures each weighted at 10%.

2025 annual incentive program: approved measures and weights · Dépôt 19/02/2026

The committees assessed management’s performance at below minimum (0%) on each of the SIF and TRIR sub-metrics, 100% of target on the priority replacement pole sub-metric, and 200% of target on the vegetation trimming backlog sub-metric, resulting in an overall payout factor of 50% for the Safety measure.

2025 incentive results: safety shortfalls and maintenance achievements · Dépôt 27/03/2026

The following table includes financial information for stock options for the three and six months ended June 30, 2026 and 2025: Three Months Ended Six Months Ended 2026 2025 2026 2025 (In Millions) Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income $1.0 $1.0 $2.0 $2.1 Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income $0.2 $0.2 $0.4 $0.5 Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and supplies $0.5 $0.5 $1.0 $1.0 Other Equity Awards In January 2026 the Board approved and Entergy granted long-term incentive awards in the form of 461,708 restricted stock awards, 20,954 restricted stock units, and 195,692 performance units under the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan.

Stock-based Compensation: January 2026 awards approved and granted · Dépôt 31/07/2026

A review of non-employee director stock ownership was conducted at the December 2025 Corporate Governance Committee meeting, and the committee determined that all of our non-employee directors who had been members of the Board for at least five years satisfied the ownership requirement.

Director Stock Ownership Requirement: verified compliance · Dépôt 27/03/2026

ETR Adjusted EPS, one of the performance measures used in our 2025 annual incentive program, is the earnings measure by which we provide external guidance, adjusted to eliminate the effect of: (i) major storms, including the impact on total debt of pending securitizations; (ii) resolutions during the year of certain unresolved regulatory litigation matters; (iii) unrealized gains or losses on equity securities; (iv) effects of income tax law changes; and (v) any adjustments to contributions to pension investments or trusts related to post-retirement benefits that are elective and deviate from original plan assumptions (collectively, the Pre-Determined Exclusions).

Appendix A: predetermined exclusions from incentive EPS · Dépôt 27/03/2026

The facility achieved commercial operation in January 2026; •In May 2023, Entergy Mississippi selected the 80 MW Delta Solar facility, to be located in Bolivar County, Mississippi, out of the 2022 Entergy Mississippi fall renewable RFP.

Utility resource projects: Sterlington commercial operation · Dépôt 19/02/2026

Our adjusted earnings per share was in the top half of our guidance range set at the beginning of the year, as it has been consistently for the past ten years.

2025 Business Performance Highlights: issuer-reported guidance delivery · Dépôt 27/03/2026

Effective Board Structure and Composition Strong Independent Board Leadership All directors, other than our CEO, are independent.

Corporate Governance: director independence · Dépôt 27/03/2026

Executive Sessions of Independent Directors Independent directors meet in executive session without management present at each regular Board meeting.

Corporate Governance: independent executive sessions · Dépôt 27/03/2026

Each of the incumbent directors attended at least 99% of the total meetings of our Board and the committees on which he or she served during 2025.

Board meeting information: incumbent director attendance · Dépôt 27/03/2026

•Director orientation and support for continuing education Shareholder Rights •Proxy access right •Majority voting for directors with resignation policy for directors in uncontested elections •Annual election of directors •No supermajority voting requirements

Corporate Governance: shareholder rights · Dépôt 27/03/2026

These drivers were partially offset by higher interest expense, higher O&M, and higher depreciation and amortization.

Second-quarter 2026 results: interest, operating and depreciation cost offsets · Dépôt 29/07/2026

Credits to retail customers were completed in second quarter 2025, and the Grand Gulf credit rider was subsequently withdrawn.

Rate and Regulatory Matters: customer credits completed in 2025 · Dépôt 19/02/2026

Historique des publications

Historique des publications
VersionMis à jourAvantage concurrentiel
722/10/2026uncertain
619/10/2026uncertain
519/10/2026uncertain
418/10/2026uncertain
318/10/2026uncertain
218/10/2026uncertain
118/10/2026Indisponible

Sources

Méthode et limites de l’analyse · Comprendre ce concept