Loading annual review details
Micron Technology, Inc. (MU)FY2026 investor yearly review
Across the year, Micron’s story moved from strong AI-led demand and rising supply pressure to a more contracted, investment-intensive outlook. HBM and broader data-center memory gained prominence, while customer agreements offered greater visibility; long fab lead times and price-sensitive end markets remained important constraints.
Overall investor read
Strong momentum, capacity constrained
Management described demand exceeding available supply across memory markets, while emphasizing that new clean-room capacity takes time to deliver.
Primary financial signal
$58.96B free cash flow
The supplied annual financial data show substantial cash generation, supporting investment plans and balance-sheet flexibility.
Primary call signal
SCAs add longer-term visibility
Management described multiyear customer agreements with specific commitments as a way to improve planning visibility for both sides.
Annual financial results and balance-sheet capacity
Revenue
Annual scale in supplied financial data
Gross margin
High annual margin in supplied data
Diluted EPS
Annual per-share earnings in supplied data
Free cash flow
Cash generation supported investment capacity
Operating cash flow
Strong operating cash generation in supplied data
Net cash
Year-end balance-sheet flexibility
Capex to revenue
Investment intensity remains relevant to execution
The calls traced a shift from AI-led demand optimism to a more explicit debate about supply limits, customer commitments, and investment timing.
AI demand
Q1 emphasized AI data-center build-outs and HBM; by Q2 and later calls, management also discussed traditional servers, CPU-based agentic workloads, storage, and edge devices. Management said this broader set of use cases was increasing memory requirements, while the calls did not quantify each workload’s contribution.
Supply and capacity
Quarter-by-quarter materiality and tone for annual transcript themes.
Scroll horizontally to see more columns.
| Theme | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Next monitor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI-driven memory demand breadth | Positive Data-center build-out lifted memory requirements | Positive AI demand spread across server and storage products |
The year brought stronger execution, product breadth, and customer visibility, alongside persistent supply limitations, rising investment needs, and uneven end-market exposure.
Management reported record financial results and free cash flow in Q1 and Q2, while discussing continued balance-sheet improvement. The supplied annual data also show substantial operating cash flow and free cash flow.
Management described 1-gamma DRAM and G9 NAND ramps as progressing well, with both expected to become major sources of bit output. Q2 also highlighted faster-than-prior-node volume ramping and customer quality recognition.
Across the calls, Micron discussed HBM alongside high-capacity DRAM, LPDRAM, and data-center SSDs. Management described customer engagement and product demand across this portfolio, with enterprise SSDs gaining particular emphasis in Q2 and Q3.
Quarterly revenue, gross margin, and free cash flow rose through the supplied sequence, while management increasingly stressed supply limits and capacity timing.
Profitability and capacity
The year moved from AI-led growth and initial supply tightness toward longer-term commitments, heavier capacity investment, and a more explicit view of persistent constraints.
Management opened the year with results above guidance and records across products and business units. The narrative already paired AI-led demand and HBM momentum with an inability to meet all customer demand and a higher investment plan.
Read earnings transcriptThe call extended Q1’s demand story with further records and a stronger outlook. The first five-year SCA made longer-term customer commitments more concrete, while management raised planned capital spending to expand clean-room capacity.
Read earnings transcriptRevenue and gross-margin guidance was measurable for Q1 through Q3; the supplied Q4 transcript has no comparable quarterly guidance.
$12.5B ± $300M; 51.5% ± 100 basis points
Revenue $13.64B; Gross margin 56.0%
Q1 revenue and gross margin exceeded the prior Q4 guidance ranges, matching management’s stated expectation for records and stronger margins.
$18.7B ± $400M; 68% ± 100 basis points
Revenue $23.86B; Gross margin 74.4%
Q2 actual revenue and gross margin exceeded Q1’s ranges; management attributed the improvement primarily to pricing, with mix and cost performance also contributing.
The calls left investors focused on whether customer demand converts into supply, how contracts shape planning, and whether product and capacity ramps sustain performance.
Shipment growth depends on how quickly new capacity becomes productive.
Track clean-room openings, equipment installation, qualification, and management’s supply outlook.
Contract coverage may improve visibility but pricing terms vary.
Monitor agreement coverage, pricing frameworks, extensions, and customer commitments.
Management began the year describing tight DRAM and NAND supply and a higher investment plan. The Q3 and Q4 discussions made the constraint more structural: clean-room lead times, HBM trade ratios, node-transition yields, and qualification delays limit the speed of added output.
Customer commitments
Q1 introduced discussions of stronger multiyear contracts; Q2 marked the first signed five-year SCA. In Q3, management described take-or-pay terms and customer financial commitments, and Q4 updates covered agreements across all business units and further extensions.
Product mix
HBM remained a major opportunity throughout the calls, with HBM4 production shipments discussed in Q2 and customer demand extending beyond available supply in Q3. Management also highlighted data-center SSDs, LPDRAM, and conventional DRAM as relevant parts of the portfolio rather than treating HBM as the only growth area.
Agentic workloads expanded CPU-memory use
Positive CPU-based agentic demand added another vector |
| Track server, CPU-based agentic, edge-device, and storage demand commentary. |
| Clean-room capacity and supply timing | Negative Supply limits constrained shipments and raised investment | Negative Long construction timelines kept supply tight | Negative Management saw no clear supply-demand intercept | Negative Clean-room lead times still delayed meaningful output | Watch clean-room openings, tool installs, qualification timing, and shipment growth. |
| Strategic Customer Agreements | Positive Multiyear contract talks included specific commitments | Positive First five-year agreement signed | Positive Take-or-pay terms and customer deposits detailed | Positive Agreements broadened across business units | Monitor SCA coverage, pricing frameworks, extensions, and customer commitments. |
| HBM roadmap and customer demand | Positive Calendar-year supply contracted; HBM4 ramp planned | Positive HBM4 volume shipments began | Mixed HBM asks exceeded available supply through 2028 | Positive HBM pricing reset higher for calendar 2027 | Track HBM4 and HBM4E ramps, customer qualifications, pricing, and supply allocation. |
| Data-center SSD and NAND adoption | Positive Data-center NAND revenue passed a new milestone | Positive SSD share and data-center NAND revenue advanced | Positive Enterprise SSD momentum remained exceptionally strong | Watch enterprise SSD demand, NAND availability, G9 output, and customer adoption. |
| Consumer price sensitivity and allocation | Mixed Management noted possible PC and phone unit pressure | Mixed Supply limits could weigh on device shipments | Mixed Mobile and client bits declined sequentially | Monitor mobile and client bit shipments, pricing, and premium-device mix. |
| Node transitions, costs, and startup effects | Positive 1-gamma and G9 ramps supported cost outlook | Positive 1-gamma and G9 targeted majority bit mix | Negative Greenfield ramps expected to raise near-term costs | Mixed Price and mix support offset startup costs | Track node yields, startup costs, cost per bit, and margin effects. |
The year progressed from SCA discussions to signed multiyear agreements and expanded customer coverage. Management said the agreements include specific commitments and help both parties plan supply and investment over longer horizons.
Management repeatedly said it could not meet all customer demand, including for DRAM and NAND. By Q3 and Q4, it described structural constraints and said it had no clear line of sight to supply-demand balance.
The calls described clean-room construction, equipment installation, and qualification as lengthy processes. Management said much of the planned construction spending would support capacity arriving in later years, not immediate shipments.
Management acknowledged that higher memory prices and constrained supply could affect price-sensitive PC and smartphone shipments. In Q4, mobile and client bit shipments declined sequentially even as revenue grew with higher pricing and mix.
Management expected startup costs from greenfield fabs to become more visible, particularly around Q4 and into the following year. It said these costs could partially offset pricing and mix benefits as the company expanded capacity.
Scroll horizontally to see more columns.
| Quarter | Revenue | YoY revenue growth | Diluted EPS | Gross margin | Investor read |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1Nov-25 | $13.64B | 20.6% | $4.6 | 56.0% | Early strength was broad, but management already framed available supply and clean-room timing as constraints. |
| Q2Feb-26 | $23.86B | 74.9% | $12.08 | 74.4% | The call strengthened the near-term growth narrative while making multiyear customer commitments more tangible. |
| Q3May-26 | $41.46B | 73.7% | $24.67 | 84.6% | Supply availability and the pace of capacity additions became more central than demand visibility alone. |
| Q4Sep-26 | $54.23B | 30.8% | $32.87 | 86.8% | The year closed with stronger demand visibility but no clear timeline for supply to catch demand. |
The focus shifted from the strength of demand to how much Micron could supply and when. Management described HBM and non-HBM DRAM demand beyond available capacity, detailed SCA terms, and acknowledged startup costs from new fabs.
Read earnings transcriptThe year ended with management citing stronger demand signals and broader SCA discussions extending into future years. Yet clean-room lead times, HBM trade ratios, and delayed qualification kept the supply-demand balance unresolved.
Read earnings transcript$33.5B ± $750M; Approximately 81%
Revenue $41.46B; Gross margin 84.6%
Supplied Q3 actuals exceeded Q2’s revenue range and approximate gross-margin outlook, while the quarter’s call emphasized persistent capacity constraints.
HBM demand and product transitions influence allocation and capacity needs.
Watch HBM4 and HBM4E ramps, customer qualification, pricing, and supply commentary.
Price-sensitive devices may face shipment pressure despite higher memory content.
Track mobile and client bit shipments, premium-device mix, and management’s pricing commentary.
New-fab expenses may offset some pricing and product-mix benefits.
Monitor startup-cost timing, cost per bit, node yields, and margin commentary.
Dafinchi