JPMorgan 2026 Outlook on Private Credit and Stress Scenarios

Key insights from Bunge’s Q1 2026 earnings report and performance analysis

1) Headline results: Q1 materially better than last year on adjusted earnings, despite GAAP headwinds

• Reported EPS was $0.35, down from $1.48 in Q1 2025, largely because Q1 included an unfavorable mark-to-market timing difference of $1.28 per share and $0.20 of unfavorable Viterra-related transaction and integration costs. ¹
• Adjusted EPS was $1.83 vs. $1.81 in Q1 2025—roughly flat year over year but still strong given the GAAP bridge impacts. ¹
• Adjusted segment EBIT was $661 million vs. $406 million last year, indicating a significant improvement at the operating-segment level. ¹

2) What drove performance: strong execution in Soybean and Softseed Processing/Refining; mixed picture in Grain Merchandising

Soybean Processing and Refining

• Management attributed higher results primarily to South America, citing stronger processing performance in Argentina and Brazil, plus higher results in North America across processing and refining. ¹
• Higher process volumes were largely linked to expanded production capacity in Argentina, with additional volume increases in North America and Brazil. ¹
• The “destination value chain” mix showed higher origination in Brazil but lower processing results in Europe and Asia, implying regional demand/supply and margin volatility. ¹

Softseed Processing and Refining

• Results were higher across all regions, with Argentina, North America, and Europe each contributing through different processing/refining dynamics. ¹
• Higher softseed process volumes reflected expanded production capacity in Argentina, Canada, and Europe, and higher merchandise volumes reflected expanded softseeds origination footprint. ¹

Grain Merchandising and Milling / oils-related

• In Grain Merchandising, performance was impacted by distribution-related factors, including higher logistics and energy costs. ²
• Specifically, management noted lower results in ocean freight due to a significant spike in bunker fuel costs, and they characterized forecasting difficulty for this segment while expecting better balance-of-year results despite the rough Q1 start. ³⁴

3) “Through-the-cycle” operating thesis reinforced—platform scale and integration matter

Management framed Q1 as evidence that the company is positioned for a complex environment, citing:

• An integrated global platform, disciplined risk management, and operational excellence enabling performance “through the cycle.” ²
• The advantages of Bunge’s larger platform and reach benefiting value chains—while Grain Merchandising faced margin pressure from logistics/energy, those same conditions were described as supporting higher demand for renewable feedstocks, benefiting soy and softseed value chains. ²
• A broader end-to-end system logic: with a larger platform (especially originations, storage, and distribution), the team can allocate to where value is created across origination → processing → merchandising → refining/distribution. ⁵

4) Viterra integration: running ahead of plan and already showing up in operating momentum

• Bunge stated that Viterra cost synergies are running ahead of plan and that it has identified network and commercial opportunities, tying this to a “meaningful phase of value creation.” ⁶
• The Q1 results also included unfavorable Viterra transaction and integration costs of $0.20 per share in reported EPS, which management separated out in adjusted results. ¹
• Management emphasized the integrated capabilities and “unmatched global footprint” after Viterra integration. ⁶

5) Updated full-year guidance: a major upward revision to adjusted EPS

• Bunge increased full-year 2026 adjusted EPS guidance to $9 to $9.50. ²⁷
• The company explicitly noted this is up from the $7.50 to $8 range provided on its Q4 call. ²⁷
• Management tied the raise to Q1 strength plus the forward curves and prevailing outlook inputs. ²⁷
• They also reiterated uncertainty in macro/geopolitics, but argued diversification and footprint provide tools to adapt, while long-term demand fundamentals remain in place. ²

6) Segment-level outlook: some areas improving, others expected to be weaker in 2H

For the full year 2026 vs. the prior outlook:

• Soybean and Softseed Processing and Refining: forecasted to be higher. ⁸
• Tropical Oils and Specialty Ingredients and Grain Merchandising and Milling: expected to be lower. ⁸
• Corporate and other: expected to be in line. ⁸

Management commentary also highlighted where curve dynamics are shifting:

• Soybean and softseed average 2026 curves across the footprint were described as up versus prior forecast, with US strength a driver for soy. ⁹
• For softseed, management linked improvement to North America canola with references to RVO clarity and ample seed supply, while Europe/Black Sea expected margin pressure until new crop (coming off small sun crops). ⁹

7) Balance sheet, leverage, and cash generation: liquidity strong; leverage improved vs year-end; returns acceptable but not “breakout”

Cash flow and capital allocation

• Q1 generated $530 million of adjusted funds from operations. ³
• After $95 million sustaining CapEx, Bunge had $435 million discretionary cash flow available. ³
• Dividends paid were $136 million, and Bunge invested ~$240 million in growth and productivity-related CapEx plus $105 million to acquire IFF’s soy protein concentrate and processing businesses, resulting in net use of $47 million. ⁷

Leverage and liquidity

• At quarter-end, readily marketable inventories (RMI) exceeded net debt by ~ $400 million. ⁷
• Adjusted leverage ratio (adjusted net debt / adjusted EBITDA) was 1.6x at end of Q1 vs. 1.9x at end of 2025, indicating leverage improvement. ⁷
• Liquidity remained strong with ~$9.7 billion of committed credit facilities, all unused, and essentially all of a $3 billion commercial paper program unutilized. ⁷

Returns

• Trailing 12-month adjusted ROIC was 8% and ROIC was 6.7%; after adjusting for construction-in-progress and excess cash, adjusted ROIC increased to 9% and ROIC to 7.2%. ⁷
• Trailing 12-month discretionary cash flow was ~ $1.35 billion, and cash return on equity was 9.1% vs. cost of equity of 7.2%. ⁷

8) Key risk themes emphasized: geopolitics/logistics, uncertainty in fertilizer and crop mix, and cost pressures into Q2

• Bunge described the first quarter as occurring in a “more rapidly changing operating environment” and cited the Middle East conflict disrupting global trade flows, logistics costs, and supply chains. ¹⁰
• In response, the company said it is taking prudent operational steps to support customer supply, including maintaining shipping flexibility and leveraging global capabilities and “regional capillarity.” ¹⁰
• Management also highlighted ongoing uncertainty around how conflict impacts farmer inputs (including fertilizer), fuel prices, and potentially the crop mix in the next growing season. ¹⁰
• In Q&A context, management noted potential shifts in acres (e.g., possible more soy vs corn in the US) but did not expect a “big shift,” while advising that the key watch items later in the year include availability/price of fertilizer (linked to South America/Brazil next cycle and US early ’27) and the possibility of El Niño affecting market signals and planting decisions. ¹¹

9) Near-term operating cadence signals: Q2 could face higher interest and corporate expense; tropicals expected more challenging

• Management described expectations for higher interest level in Q2 and a higher tax rate, with “everything else” mostly in line or higher, except Tropicals expected to be more challenging in Q2. ¹²
• They also noted higher corporate expense in the next quarter vs. Q1 because Q1 historically was “a little bit low” on the performance-based incentive side. ¹²

Bottom line

Bunge’s Q1 2026 story is one of strong segment operating performance concentrated in Soybean and Softseed Processing/Refining, system-level benefits from scale and integration (Viterra), and a material upward full-year adjusted EPS guidance revision to $9–$9.50. ²¹⁷ The main offsets/risks were GAAP headwinds from mark-to-market and integration costs, softness/volatility in Grain Merchandising linked to ocean freight and bunker fuel, and broader geopolitical/logistics uncertainty affecting inputs and supply chains. ¹²³¹⁰