Skip to content

Duke Energy

NYSE: DUK · USD

Duke Energy (DUK) Economic Moat Analysis63

Competitive advantages, dated evidence and erosion risks.

Narrow economic moat

Duke Energy has a narrow moat supported by its established, vertically integrated utility infrastructure and demonstrated regulated cost recovery. Approved rate increases, storm-cost recovery and long-running nuclear utilization provide evidence beyond management's strategic claims. Pricing power is constrained by regulators and partly reflects commodity-cost recovery rather than discretionary increases. Capital requirements, regulatory disallowances and energy substitution limit confidence in wider durability.

Efficient scale

Duke's established generation, transmission and distribution system, combined with regulated revenue requirements, supports an incumbent infrastructure advantage. Actual rate increases and storm-cost recovery demonstrate economic benefits from this regulatory framework. The passages do not establish exclusive service rights or quantify the disadvantage facing a competing network.

Durability
Existing infrastructure, 27 consecutive years of nuclear capacity factors above 90%, and Robinson's license extension through 2050 support persistence. Continued economic value depends on prudent investment, regulatory recovery and customer demand; operating licenses do not guarantee shareholder returns.
Competitors
Comparison not established
Erosion risks
Regulators constrain prices and can impose charges or restrict recovery. Higher capital and financing costs, storm expenses, environmental obligations, distributed generation and gas substitution could weaken economics. Anticipated combination savings and future load growth remain prospective.
What would invalidate the thesis
The thesis would weaken materially if successive rate decisions denied recovery of substantial prudent investments, realized utility returns persistently failed to cover financing and capital costs, or sustained customer bypass and declining usage stranded infrastructure despite regulatory adjustments.
Evidence (9) · Counterevidence (5)

Changes since the previous analysis

  • No comparable previous version.

Evidence limitations

  • Assessment uses only supplied passages. Source dates are filing dates: February 26, 2026; March 20, 2026; and August 4, 2026. They are not retrieval dates.
  • Regulated operations and existing infrastructure support the narrow verdict, but the passages do not establish territorial exclusivity, network replacement economics or sustained returns above the cost of capital.
  • No company is explicitly established as a direct competitor in the supplied competitive discussion. NTE is identified in interconnection and antitrust litigation; compensation peers, director affiliations and transaction counterparties do not establish competitor coverage.
  • Operating achievements, contracts and financial results are issuer disclosures. Claims of cost competitiveness, disciplined allocation and future savings lack comparative verification; none supports an exceptional grade.
  • Customer growth and sales provide indirect retention evidence, without customer-level renewal, churn or switching data. Data-center contracted load does not establish realized utilization or disclosed minimum-payment protections.
  • Pricing and operating-result coverage is uneven across subsidiaries. Commodity recovery is distinguished from underlying pricing, and subsidiary cash flows are not treated as consolidated Duke Energy cash flows.
  • Outstanding executive awards are disclosed, but incentive targets, vesting outcomes and beneficial ownership are incompletely supplied. The March proxy's supermajority amendment is a proposal; no supplied voting outcome establishes adoption.
  • The later filing resolves the NTE case through a March 2026 settlement with an immaterial settlement amount. Earlier litigation status is superseded, and allegations are not treated as proven misconduct.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis

Calculated from annual filings. Missing data remains unavailable. Detailed financial charts remain in the other topics.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis
PeriodGross marginOperating marginROICFCF margin
2021—21.8%4.4%-5.8%
2022—21.0%4.6%-19.0%
2023—24.7%5.0%-9.5%
2024—26.4%5.3%0.2%
2025—27.2%5.5%-5.3%

Pricing power50

  • Pricing outcomes

    GU&I recorded $98 million of additional rate-case pricing revenue in 2025, and Carolinas recorded $59 million from higher pricing in first-half 2026. These are demonstrated regulated outcomes; larger fuel-revenue increases principally recover costs.

  • Customer demand

    Carolinas average customers increased 1.7% and total sales increased 0.6%, providing indirect evidence of recurring demand. Industrial sales declined, and neither these figures nor data-center agreements establish a retention rate.

  • Margin resilience

    GU&I operating income increased in 2025 despite higher costs, while Carolinas first-half 2026 operating income fell from $1.303 billion to $1.262 billion despite revenue growth. Recovery mechanisms provide partial protection rather than complete insulation.

  • Pricing freedom

    Retail rates require commission approval, and revenue requirements are periodically reset by regulators. Demonstrated pricing recovery does not establish unilateral freedom to set prices.

Management56

  • Capital discipline

    Actual asset-sale proceeds, debt repayment and minority capital funding show financing execution, with 2025 FFO/debt reaching 14.8%. However, annual capital spending rose to $14.002 billion, financing remains substantial, and supplied evidence does not establish realized returns on the expanded investment program. Piedmont cash flows are subsidiary-specific.

  • Incentive alignment

    Outstanding CEO RSUs and performance shares establish actual equity-linked incentives, and adjusted EPS influences bonuses. Performance conditions, ownership relative to wealth and realized vesting outcomes are insufficiently disclosed to establish stronger alignment.

  • Execution

    Twenty-seven consecutive years of nuclear capacity factor above 90%, assets placed into service, storm-cost recovery, an issued license renewal and a completed disposal provide demonstrated execution. This assessment uses operating and transaction outcomes, not management's general claims of excellence; regulatory impairments temper the result.

  • Governance

    An independent chair and disclosed committee oversight provide concrete governance structure. Existing 80% voting requirements and repeated failed removal attempts constrain shareholder authority. The 2026 amendment remains a proposal in the supplied evidence; the settled NTE allegations do not establish misconduct.

Sources and methodology

Current publication · Updated 17/10/2026 · Version 4

AI interpretation based on checked source excerpts. Issuer assertions and evidence limitations remain explicit.

Policy quality-scores-2: six equally weighted categories. The overall score requires full coverage. Missing inputs are not zero. Qualitative grades are sourced interpretations, not probabilities. 6/6 · 18/10/2026

Moat63

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

structural advantage · 3/4 · Established integrated infrastructure and regulated revenue adjustments are supported by actual rate-case revenue and storm-cost recovery. Exclusive territories and comparative network economics are not established.

durability · 3/4 · Long-standing nuclear utilization and Robinson's issued operating extension through 2050 support durable asset usefulness. Regulatory recovery and future investment economics remain conditional.

customer dependency · 2/4 · Carolinas customer growth, continued sales and executed data-center service agreements indirectly support reliance on Duke's system. Switching friction is not quantified, and gas bypass remains possible.

erosion resilience · 2/4 · Rate increases and storm recovery demonstrate adaptation, but realized regulatory charges and expense pressure limit protection. Distributed generation and environmental costs are prospective risks rather than demonstrated erosion.

Pricing power50

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

realized pricing · 3/4 · GU&I recorded $98 million of additional rate-case pricing revenue in 2025, and Carolinas recorded $59 million from higher pricing in first-half 2026. These are demonstrated regulated outcomes; larger fuel-revenue increases principally recover costs.

retention · 2/4 · Carolinas average customers increased 1.7% and total sales increased 0.6%, providing indirect evidence of recurring demand. Industrial sales declined, and neither these figures nor data-center agreements establish a retention rate.

margin resilience · 2/4 · GU&I operating income increased in 2025 despite higher costs, while Carolinas first-half 2026 operating income fell from $1.303 billion to $1.262 billion despite revenue growth. Recovery mechanisms provide partial protection rather than complete insulation.

contractual freedom · 1/4 · Retail rates require commission approval, and revenue requirements are periodically reset by regulators. Demonstrated pricing recovery does not establish unilateral freedom to set prices.

Predictability68

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 (%)
75.00
Revenue growth volatility (pp)
5.87
Positive FCF years (%)
20.00
FCF margin volatility (pp)
6.34

Financial strength3

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
12.49
currentRatioGrade
0.00
Net debt / operating income (x)
10.39
Interest coverage (x)
2.37
Current ratio (x)
0.55

Capital allocation54

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 (%)
5.91
3-year average dilution (%)
0.30
3-year average SBC / revenue (%)
0.33
cashConversionGrade
0.00

Management56

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

capital discipline · 2/4 · Actual asset-sale proceeds, debt repayment and minority capital funding show financing execution, with 2025 FFO/debt reaching 14.8%. However, annual capital spending rose to $14.002 billion, financing remains substantial, and supplied evidence does not establish realized returns on the expanded investment program. Piedmont cash flows are subsidiary-specific.

incentive alignment · 2/4 · Outstanding CEO RSUs and performance shares establish actual equity-linked incentives, and adjusted EPS influences bonuses. Performance conditions, ownership relative to wealth and realized vesting outcomes are insufficiently disclosed to establish stronger alignment.

execution · 3/4 · Twenty-seven consecutive years of nuclear capacity factor above 90%, assets placed into service, storm-cost recovery, an issued license renewal and a completed disposal provide demonstrated execution. This assessment uses operating and transaction outcomes, not management's general claims of excellence; regulatory impairments temper the result.

governance · 2/4 · An independent chair and disclosed committee oversight provide concrete governance structure. Existing 80% voting requirements and repeated failed removal attempts constrain shareholder authority. The 2026 amendment remains a proposal in the supplied evidence; the settled NTE allegations do not establish misconduct.

Evidence

Our vertically integrated business model allows us to respond effectively in a rapidly evolving industry and leverage the scale of one of the nation’s largest transmission and distribution systems.

Proxy summary: vertically integrated business and transmission/distribution scale · Filed 20/03/2026

Duke Energy primarily operates in environments that are rate-regulated.

MD&A: predominantly rate-regulated operating environments · Filed 26/02/2026

In such environments, revenue requirements are adjusted periodically by regulators based on factors including levels of costs, sales volumes and costs of capital.

MD&A: regulatory adjustment of revenue requirements · Filed 26/02/2026

Operating Revenues. The variance was driven primarily by: •a $429 million increase in cost of natural gas revenues primarily due to higher commodity prices; •a $98 million increase due to higher pricing from the 2024 Piedmont North Carolina rate case; •a $21 million increase in Midwest rider revenue; and •a $13 million increase due to improved weather in the Midwest.

GU&I results: realized rate-case pricing and commodity revenue drivers · Filed 26/02/2026

The variance was driven primarily by: •a $223 million increase in fuel revenues due to higher fuel rates and volumes; •a $76 million increase in weather-normal retail sales volumes; •a $59 million increase due to higher pricing, including the nuclear PTC decrement rider, from the impacts of new rates implemented for the North Carolina MYRP and the 2025 South Carolina rate case; •a $37 million increase in rider revenue primarily due to North Carolina storm securitization; and •a $27 million increase in retail sales due to improved weather compared to the prior year.

Duke Energy Carolinas results: realized pricing, fuel revenue and sales drivers · Filed 04/08/2026

​ • We worked with regulators and other stakeholders to recover and securitize nearly $3 billion worth of storm costs, approximately one year after major 2024 hurricanes, ​ • 2025 marked the 99th consecutive year we continued our dividend commitment to our shareholders.

Proxy summary: recovery and securitization of storm costs · Filed 20/03/2026

​ • This was the 27th consecutive year of nuclear capacity factor exceeding 90%.

Proxy summary: consecutive years of nuclear capacity factor above 90% · Filed 20/03/2026

In April 2026, the NRC issued a subsequent license renewal for Robinson, extending operations through 2050.

MD&A: issued Robinson license renewal through 2050 · Filed 04/08/2026

RATE-RELATED INFORMATION The NCUC, PSCSC, FPSC, IURC, PUCO, TPUC and KPSC approve rates for retail electric and natural gas services within their states.

Regulatory matters: state commissions approve retail rates · Filed 26/02/2026

Operating Expenses. The variance was driven primarily by: •a $189 million increase in fuel used in electric generation and purchased power primarily due to higher purchased power costs, including JDA, and natural gas prices, partially offset by lower fuel cost recovery and the prior year retirement of renewable energy credits; •a $143 million increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to higher depreciable base, the prior year retirement of renewable energy credits, and the impact of new rates implemented for the North Carolina MYRP; •a $94 million increase in operation, maintenance and other primarily due to increased costs related to a legal settlement and higher storm costs in the current year associated with Winter Storm Fern; and •a $28 million increase in impairment of assets and other charges primarily due to regulatory settlements related to the 2025 North Carolina rate case.

Duke Energy Carolinas results: increased expenses and regulatory-settlement impairments · Filed 04/08/2026

These factors in turn could decrease the demand for natural gas, impair GU&I's ability to attract new customers and cause existing customers to switch to other forms of energy or to bypass GU&I's systems in favor of alternative competitive sources.

Gas competition: potential switching and system bypass · Filed 26/02/2026

Customer growth and customer usage are affected by several factors outside the control of the Duke Energy Registrants, such as mandated EE measures, demand-side management goals, advancements in technology that may impact the energy usage by large commercial customers, such as data centers, distributed generation resources and economic and demographic conditions, such as inflation, tariffs, and interest rate volatility, population changes, job and income growth, housing starts, new business formation and the overall level of economic activity.

Risk factors: efficiency, distributed generation and demand drivers · Filed 26/02/2026

As the closure and CCR management work progresses and final closure plans and corrective action measures are developed and approved at each site, the scope and complexity of work and the amount of CCR material could be greater than estimates and could, therefore, materially increase compliance expenditures and rate impacts.

Risk factors: potential coal-ash compliance cost escalation · Filed 26/02/2026

Additionally, rapidly rising interest rates could impact the ability to cost- effectively finance the capital plan or increase rates to customers and could have an impact on our ability to execute on our energy modernization.

Risk factors: interest rates, capital financing and customer-rate constraints · Filed 26/02/2026

Increase (Decrease) over prior year 2026 Residential sales 1.2 % Commercial sales 0.8 % Industrial sales (1.4) % Wholesale power sales 0.6 % Joint dispatch sales 6.9 % Total sales 0.6 % Average number of customers 1.7 % Six Months Ended June 30, 2026, as compared to June 30, 2025 Operating Revenues.

Duke Energy Carolinas results: sales and average customer growth · Filed 04/08/2026

106 MD&A DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS Results of Operations Six Months Ended June 30, (in millions) 2026 2025 Variance Operating Revenues $ 5,182 $ 4,755 $ 427 Operating Expenses Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power 1,563 1,374 189 Operation, maintenance and other 1,078 984 94 Depreciation and amortization 1,057 914 143 Property and other taxes 197 187 10 Impairment of assets and other charges 27 (1) 28 Total operating expenses 3,922 3,458 464 Gains (Losses) on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net 2 6 (4) Operating Income 1,262 1,303 (41) Other Income and Expenses, net 133 122 11 Interest Expense 449 400 49 Income Before Income Taxes 946 1,025 (79) Income Tax Expense 44 87 (43) Net Income $ 902 $ 938 $ (36) The following table shows the percent changes in GWh sales and average number of customers.

Duke Energy Carolinas: six-month operating results · Filed 04/08/2026

Gas Utilities and Infrastructure Years Ended December 31, (in millions) 2025 2024 Variance Operating Revenues $ 3,003 $ 2,390 $ 613 Operating Expenses Cost of natural gas 983 565 418 Operation, maintenance and other 518 478 40 Depreciation and amortization 435 400 35 Property and other taxes 164 149 15 Total operating expenses 2,100 1,592 508 Operating Income 903 798 105 Other income and expenses, net 68 10 58 Interest Expense 267 256 11 Income Before Income Taxes 704 552 152 Income Tax Expense 146 99 47 Less: Net Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest (1) (1) — Segment Income $ 559 $ 454 $ 105 Piedmont Local Distribution Company (LDC) throughput (Dth) 614,062,646 616,724,667 (2,662,021) Duke Energy Midwest LDC throughput (MCF) 90,651,428 77,923,033 12,728,395 Year Ended December 31, 2025, as compared to 2024 GU&I’s results were impacted primarily by higher revenues from the 2024 Piedmont North Carolina rate case and lower impairments on certain renewable natural gas investments in the current year, partially offset by higher operation and maintenance and depreciation expenses.

GU&I: 2025 operating results and throughput · Filed 26/02/2026

Years Ended December 31, (in millions) 2025 2024 Variance Capital, investment and acquisition expenditures, net of return of investment capital $ (14,002) $ (12,263) $ (1,739) Debt and equity securities, net 117 100 17 Proceeds from the sales of Commercial Renewables Disposal Groups and other assets, net of cash divested 626 49 577 Other investing items (1,079) (1,009) (70) Net cash used in investing activities $ (14,338) $ (13,123) $ (1,215) The variance is driven by higher capital expenditures within the EU&I segment, partially offset by proceeds received in the current year from the sale of the Commercial Renewables Disposal Groups.

Liquidity: actual capital spending and asset-sale proceeds · Filed 26/02/2026

Years Ended December 31, (in millions) 2025 2024 Variance Issuances of long-term debt, net $ 6,239 $ 5,599 $ 640 Issuances of common stock 16 405 (389) Redemption of preferred stock — (1,000) 1,000 Notes payable and commercial paper (1,119) (927) (192) Dividends paid (3,300) (3,213) (87) Contributions from noncontrolling interests — 47 (47) Other financing items 114 (52) 166 Net cash provided by financing activities $ 1,950 $ 859 $ 1,091 The variance was driven primarily by: •a $1,000 million increase due to the prior year redemption of Series B preferred stock; •a $640 million increase driven by timing of issuances of long-term debt, net of redemptions.

Liquidity: 2025 debt, equity and dividend financing cash flows · Filed 26/02/2026

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited) Six Months Ended June 30, (in millions) 2026 2025 CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Net income (loss) $ 773 $ 281 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation and amortization 145 143 Equity component of AFUDC (9) (8) Gain on sale of Piedmont's Tennessee business (652) — Deferred income taxes (208) 18 Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated affiliates (2) (3) (Increase) decrease in Receivables 259 169 Receivables from affiliated companies (12) 5 Inventory 46 27 Other current assets (20) (33) Increase (decrease) in Accounts payable (137) (55) Accounts payable to affiliated companies (31) 22 Taxes accrued (39) (42) Other current liabilities 20 (61) Other assets 35 (7) Other liabilities (14) (3) Net cash provided by operating activities 154 453 CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Capital expenditures (460) (380) Proceeds from the sale of Piedmont's Tennessee business 2,501 — Other (17) (15) Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities 2,024 (395) CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES Payments for the redemption of long-term debt (450) — Notes payable to affiliated companies (328) (57) Dividends to parent (1,400) — Other (1) (1) Net cash used in financing activities (2,179) (58) Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (1) — Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 1 2 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ — $ 2 Supplemental Disclosures: Significant non-cash transactions: Accrued capital expenditures $ 164 $ 127 See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements 41 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC.

Piedmont cash flows: completed Tennessee sale, operating cash flow and debt repayment · Filed 04/08/2026

Six Months Ended June 30, (in millions) 2026 2025 Variance Issuance of long-term debt, net $ 1,633 $ 3,033 $ (1,400) Issuance of common stock — 14 (14) Notes payable, commercial paper and other short-term borrowings (365) (190) (175) Dividends paid (1,693) (1,610) (83) Contributions from NCI 2,827 — 2,827 Other financing items 22 (2) 24 Net cash provided by financing activities $ 2,424 $ 1,245 $ 1,179 The variance is primarily due to: •a $2.8 billion increase in proceeds received from the initial closing of Brookfield Super-Core Infrastructure Partners' minority interest investment in Florida Progress.

Duke Energy financing: minority investment proceeds, debt and common equity issuance · Filed 04/08/2026

​ • We raised our long-term FFO/Debt target to 15% and achieved 14.8% in 2025.

Proxy summary: achieved 2025 FFO/debt and increased target · Filed 20/03/2026

• We placed more than 300 megawatts of solar and 175 megawatts of storage into service across the Carolinas and Florida to continue to diversify generation mix.

Proxy summary: solar and storage placed into service · Filed 20/03/2026

Sideris ​ ​ RSUs ​ ​ ​ ​ 36,555 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 4,284,612 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Performance Shares (2024 – 2026) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 64,962 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 7,614,196 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Performance Shares (2025 – 2027) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 58,679 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 6,877,766 ​ ​ ​ Lynn J.

Executive compensation: Sideris outstanding RSUs and unearned performance shares · Filed 20/03/2026

Adjusted EPS is also used as a basis to determine employee incentive bonuses.

Non-GAAP measures: adjusted EPS used to determine incentive bonuses · Filed 20/03/2026

Mr. Craver has served as Independent Chair of the Board since April 2025 and previously served as Lead Independent Director from May 2022 to April 2025.

Board information: independent chair serving since April 2025 · Filed 20/03/2026

​ • The Corporate Governance Committee assists the Board in its annual determination of director independence and review of any related person transactions, as well as the Board’s annual assessment of the Board and each of its committees.

Corporate Governance Committee: independence, related transactions and annual assessments · Filed 20/03/2026

Required Supplemental Graphs Showing Relationship between: ​ 80 DUKE ENERGY 2026 PROXY STATEMENT ​ ​ BUILDING A SMARTER ENERGY FUTURE® ​ TABLE OF CONTENTS​ EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ​ BUILDING A SMARTER ENERGY FUTURE® ​ ​ DUKE ENERGY 2026 PROXY STATEMENT 81 ​ TABLE OF CONTENTS​ PROPOSAL 4: AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION TO ELIMINATE SUPERMAJORITY REQUIREMENTS ​ The Board has unanimously approved, and recommends that shareholders approve, an amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation, substantially in the form attached to this proxy statement as Appendix A, to eliminate the current requirement in the Certificate of Incorporation for an affirmative vote of the combined voting power of 80% of the outstanding shares of all classes of Duke Energy entitled to vote in the election of directors to approve certain actions.

Proposal 4: existing supermajority requirements and proposed elimination · Filed 20/03/2026

Despite the Board’s support for this amendment, the proposal failed each time, receiving the support of only approximately 64%, 63%, 62%, and 59% of the outstanding shares, respectively.

Proposal 4 background: prior unsuccessful amendment votes · Filed 20/03/2026

In March 2026, the parties executed a settlement agreement resolving the entire case and a Stipulation of Dismissal was filed with the court.

Commitments and contingencies: March 2026 settlement resolving NTE case · Filed 04/08/2026

The amount of the settlement was not material in 2026.

Commitments and contingencies: NTE settlement amount not material · Filed 04/08/2026

To serve this demand responsibly, we executed electric service agreements for multiple hyperscale data centers representing cumulative contracted load of over 4.5 gigawatts, ensuring these customers contribute appropriately to the systems required to serve them.

CEO letter: executed hyperscale data-center electric service agreements · Filed 20/03/2026

Publication history

Publication history
VersionUpdatedCompetitive advantage
418/10/2026narrow
318/10/2026narrow
218/10/2026narrow
118/10/2026Unavailable

Sources

Research methodology and limitations · What is an economic moat?