Conferencia de resultados del T3 de 2026 de Talen Energy (TLN): previsiones para 2027 y perspectivas de flujo de caja para 2029

Puntos clave

• Talen Energy informó un EBITDA ajustado para el T3 de 2026 de 669 millones de dólares y un flujo de caja libre ajustado de 433 millones de dólares, con un flujo de caja libre que casi duplicó el nivel del año anterior.
• En los primeros nueve meses de 2026, el EBITDA ajustado alcanzó 1.516 millones de dólares y el flujo de caja libre ajustado sumó 995 millones de dólares.
• Talen reconfirmó los puntos medios de sus previsiones para 2026 de 2.125 millones de dólares para el EBITDA ajustado y 1.275 millones de dólares para el flujo de caja libre ajustado. La dirección presentó los puntos medios para 2027 de 2.675 millones de dólares y 1.625 millones de dólares, respectivamente.
• La dirección prevé aproximadamente 6.000 millones de dólares de flujo de caja libre ajustado acumulado hasta 2029. Incluyendo sus supuestos de asignación de capital, Talen proyecta un flujo de caja libre ajustado por acción de 56–60 dólares en 2029.
• La empresa amplió su autorización de recompra de acciones a 3.000 millones de dólares hasta diciembre de 2028, incluida una recompra acelerada de acciones por 1.500 millones de dólares, y sigue teniendo como objetivo devolver aproximadamente el 70% del flujo de caja libre ajustado a los accionistas.
• Los contratos adicionales de centros de datos y la monetización de terrenos equipados con energía no están incluidos en la perspectiva base. La dirección los identificó como un potencial de crecimiento, al tiempo que enfatizó la disciplina en las transacciones y el valor por acción ajustado al riesgo.

Datos financieros clave

Desempeño operativo y del negocio

Talen generó aproximadamente 53 teravatios-hora durante los primeros nueve meses de 2026, con un factor de capacidad de la flota del 64%. Su tasa de incidentes registrables en lo que va de año fue de 0,31.

La mayor demanda en PJM, unos márgenes de reserva más ajustados y las elevadas interrupciones aumentaron el despacho de la flota. El factor de capacidad del tercer trimestre para la flota intermedia de Talen aumentó a aproximadamente el 52%, desde el 36% en el tercer trimestre de 2025.

Los resultados se vieron beneficiados por Freedom y Guernsey, así como por las contribuciones del trimestre completo de Lawrenceburg, Waterford y Darby. Los mayores precios liquidados de la energía, los volúmenes de generación y los ingresos por capacidad adjudicada también contribuyeron, compensados en parte por los resultados de coberturas realizadas y los mayores intereses en efectivo tras la financiación de adquisiciones.

La dirección señaló que los spark spreads a plazo continuaron fortaleciéndose. Durante el trimestre, los spark spreads para 2028 aumentaron un 19% en AD Hub y un 11% en la zona de PPL. Ambos aumentaron casi un 30% en lo que va de año.

Talen cuenta con aproximadamente 6 GW de capacidad de generación de carga base, 4 GW en emplazamientos provistos de energía y una cartera de proyectos de más de 3 GW de proyectos potenciales de nueva capacidad, incluidas ampliaciones de potencia, baterías y plantas de picos. La dirección afirmó que los emplazamientos provistos de energía podrían conectarse a la red en el período 2028-2029.

Previsiones de la dirección

Las previsiones de Talen para 2027 reflejan su cartera actual, las curvas a plazo al 30 de septiembre y coberturas que abarcan aproximadamente el 70% de la generación prevista para 2027. La empresa contaba con aproximadamente un 35% cubierto para 2028, mientras que 2029 permanecía en gran medida sin cobertura, al margen del contrato con AWS.

El escenario base de la dirección no asume ningún otro acuerdo de gran consumo energético. El potencial alcista adicional podría provenir de nuevos contratos de centros de datos, la monetización de terrenos provistos de energía, operaciones de M&A, una aceleración en el despliegue del campus de AWS, curvas de precios de energía más sólidas o una mejora en la base zonal.

Acelerar la rampa de carga del campus de AWS en un año podría aportar aproximadamente $2 por acción de flujo de caja libre ajustado, según la dirección. La rampa mínima contractual alcanza los 840 MW en 2029, y no se contempla ninguna aceleración en el rango base.

La dirección también señaló que cada $5/MWh de mejora en la base zonal en toda la cartera podría corresponder a aproximadamente $5 por acción de flujo de caja libre ajustado anual. Un cambio de curvas de energía en backwardation a curvas planas podría añadir aproximadamente $2-$3 por acción.

Talen mantiene su objetivo de apalancamiento neto a largo plazo de 3,5x. La dirección prevé volver aproximadamente a ese nivel en el segundo semestre de 2027, a medida que la obligación de monetización de capacidad se amortice y el negocio crezca.

Riesgos y áreas de atención

• Base zonal de PJM: La dirección prevé que la base zonal de PPL se estreche a medida que aumente la carga local y se completen las mejoras de transmisión, pero la ampliación a corto plazo ya está reflejada en las perspectivas del 30 de septiembre.
• Exposición a los precios de la energía: El rango base para 2029 incorpora curvas a plazo en backwardation y se mantiene en gran medida sin cobertura fuera del contrato de AWS.
• Incertidumbre regulatoria: Las normas de interconexión para gran demanda de PJM, el diseño del mercado de capacidad, los límites de precios y la asignación de costes siguen en debate. La dirección señaló que estas cuestiones podrían alterar el curso y los plazos de las transacciones.
• Ejecución de transacciones: La contratación de centros de datos, la monetización de terrenos provistos de energía y las operaciones de M&A dependen de condiciones aceptables, plazos adecuados y contrapartes dispuestas.
• Costes de generación: La dirección indicó que la nueva generación de ciclo combinado puede costar más de $120/MWh todo incluido, lo que refuerza la sensibilidad de los hiperescaladores ante los costes de la energía.
• Cambios en la cartera: Las perspectivas para 2029 deben absorber la transición de Brunner Island hacia una operación exclusivamente con gas, así como la reducción interanual de los precios a plazo de la energía.

Lo más destacado de la sesión de preguntas y respuestas con analistas

Base zonal de PPL: La dirección señaló que las perspectivas para 2027 y 2028 utilizan las curvas de precios zonales al 30 de septiembre y, por tanto, incorporan una base más amplia. Talen prevé que el crecimiento de la demanda y las mejoras en la transmisión respalden una eventual normalización, al tiempo que cubre activamente su exposición a corto plazo.

Estrategia de terrenos con suministro eléctrico: Talen no considera la monetización de terrenos como un negocio independiente de rendimiento prémium. Los emplazamientos están destinados a facilitar contratos de energía y capacidad a largo plazo, combinando potencialmente la generación existente con nuevas incorporaciones de capacidad.

Contratación para centros de datos: La dirección afirmó que no está sujeta a un calendario específico de contratación bilateral o de subasta de capacidad. La empresa está evaluando múltiples oportunidades, pero priorizará la rentabilidad económica y el valor ajustado al riesgo por encima de los plazos de las transacciones.

Respuesta a la demanda: Talen aboga por un producto de respuesta a la demanda de PJM diseñado específicamente para grandes cargas de centros de datos. La dirección argumentó que la reducción de carga a escala de gigavatios podría funcionar de manera similar a la generación para horas punta o las baterías, pero requeriría señales de despacho anticipadas y una compensación adecuada.

Asignación de capital: La recompra de acciones de Talen sigue siendo el punto de referencia para los usos alternativos del capital. Sin embargo, la dirección mantiene su disposición a aumentar temporalmente el apalancamiento para adquisiciones o inversiones que ofrezcan rendimientos superiores ajustados al riesgo, siempre que exista una vía de retorno al 3,5x objetivo.

Transcripción completa de la llamada de resultados

Transcripción completa de la conferencia de resultados

Comentarios de la dirección

Operator

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Talen Energy Corporation Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to your speaker for today, Bill Apaselle. Please go ahead.

William Appicelli

Thank you, Lisa. Welcome to Talen Energy's Third Quarter 2026 Conference Call. Speaking today are Chief Executive Officer, Matt McFarland; President, Terry Knut and Chief Financial Officer, Cole Moller. They are joined by other Talen senior executives to address questions during the second part of today's call as necessary.

We issued our earnings release this morning along with the presentation, all of which can be found on the Investor Relations section of Town's website, talenenergy.com. Today, we are making some forward-looking statements based on current expectations and assumptions. Actual results could differ due to risk factors and other considerations described in our financial disclosures and other SEC filings.

Today's discussion also includes references to certain non-GAAP financial measures. We had provided information reconciling our non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures in our earnings release in the appendix of our presentation. With that, I will turn the call over to Mac.

Mark McFarland

Thanks, Bill. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Before we get into the quarterly results, I want to spend a few minutes on what we're seeing in the market, how we're thinking about the business and a few topics on investors' minds. Talen is in a fundamentally stronger position today than at any point since we began rebuilding this company.

Our financial outlook continues to improve. Our cash flows are becoming more durable, and we have more ways to create value than ever before.

We own advantaged assets in advantaged locations in markets where demand is growing, supply remains constrained and the value of our reliable generation continues to increase. These assets would be extraordinarily difficult, expensive and time-consuming to replicate today. Across PJM, we've seen a significant move in forward power prices and spark spreads this year.

I know there's a debate about whether those levels are sustainable. Our view is straightforward. We don't expect markets to move in a straight line. There will be volatility, but we don't believe this is simply another commodity cycle. The underlying fundamentals have changed.

Demand is growing, new supply is difficult and expensive to build and the time line for bringing new generation online continues to stretch. The demand is here, the supply isn't and we already own the assets the market needs. Now basis matters, congestion matters and how we hedge and manage our portfolio matters.

Our commercial team remains focused on managing those exposures and converting stronger market conditions into realized financial performance. We're seeing that translate directly into our financial outlook. Today, we're providing 2027 guidance, updating our '28 outlook, and initiating our 2029 outlook. Focusing on the '29 outlook, our adjusted free cash flow is in the range of $56 to $60 per share. That outlook assumes no additional large load transactions. That's the cash-generating power of the business we've built, supported by our capital allocation strategy.

Additional large load contracting and powered land monetization represent upside. While the magnitude of the cash flow is important, so is its quality. Our objective is to generate more durable cash flow and grow that cash flow on a per share basis. That's what the Talent Flywheel is all about. Strong assets in attractive markets generate significant cash flow.

That gives us the flexibility to make high-return investments, pursue attractive long-term contracts, optimize our portfolio and return capital to shareholders, all while maintaining our balance sheet discipline. Contracting can lock in attractive economics and reduce risk. Strategic investments can expand our earnings base and disciplined share repurchases can drive further growth and free cash flow per share.

We're not dependent on any single lever to create value. We have several and they reinforce 1 another. That's the power of the flywheel, and it's working which brings me to large load contracting and powered land monetization. I know there's a lot of interest in when we're going to announce our next data center transaction. So let me address that directly.

We're actively engaged with customers across our footprint, evaluating a variety of commercial structures and working to bring additional transactions to fruition. We have existing generation infrastructure interconnections and strategically located land. Those are all real advantages for customers trying to solve increasingly difficult power challenges. Some need speed to power, some need reliability. Some need long-term price certainty. Increasingly, they need all 3.

We can provide solutions ranging from long-term power contracts to powered land development and monetization. We don't have to build a position in these markets. We already have one. And we're going to be disciplined about how we monetize it. We are focused on creating value, not headlines.

The objective is to lock in attractive economics, increase the durability of our cash flows and create lasting value for our shareholders. We know what we own, we know what it's worth, and we're not going to compromise that value to meet someone else's time line. That's not a lack of urgency, that's just discipline. Every attractive transaction we execute creates an opportunity to build on an already compelling financial outlook.

We're negotiating from a power -- position of strength, not necessity and that matters. That same conviction is reflected in our capital allocation decisions. The $1.5 billion ASR is a tangible example. We believe in the value of the business and the ASR puts capital behind that conviction. Our cash generation gives us the flexibility to invest in the business and return capital to shareholders.

We can advance large load contracting, monetize powered land, optimize our portfolio and repurchase shares. These opportunities aren't mutually exclusive. We're focused on maximizing value per share, period. All of this is happening against the backdrop of the continued regulatory and market design reform in PJM. There is considerable discussion around large load interconnections, reliability requirements, capacity market design, price caps and how the cost of serving new demand should be allocated.

We support reforms that facilitate load growth, maintain reliability, protect existing customers from inappropriate cost shifts and provide the economic incentives necessary to retain and build new generation. But I've made 2 points. First, the changing market rules doesn't change the underlying physics of the system.

PJM needs more reliable generation to meet growing demand. That generation takes time and capital to develop and the existing fleet needs to be maintained economically viable. Whatever market structure ultimately emerges has to recognize those realities. You can't regulate your way out of a physical supply shortage. You can change how the market compensates generation, you can't change the fact that the system needs it.

Second, we're not waiting for every regulatory issue to be resolved before moving our business forward. We're continuing to engage with customers advanced development opportunities and evaluate commercial structures in parallel with the regulatory process. Because we have multiple ways to serve large load customers, we believe we're well positioned to adapt as those rules evolve.

Regulatory uncertainty may change the path. It doesn't change the fundamental need for power or the value of the assets we own. Capacity market design matters and auction outcomes matter, and we'll continue to engage constructively in that process. So let me close with this. We have attractive market fundamentals, an advantaged portfolio and a strategy focused on generating increasingly durable cash flows and growing adjusted free cash flow per share, and we're not done.

We're working to capture additional value through large load contracting, optimizing our portfolio and returning capital to shareholders. We've built a company with multiple paths to create value and the financial strength to pursue them. The strategy is working. The flywheel is working and the opportunity in front of talent is substantial.

As I look ahead to the leadership transition, I have tremendous confidence in Talen's future. Carrying the entire management team know these assets, understand these markets and have the experience and discipline to take this business forward.

One of the things that I'm most proud of is that we've built a company whose success isn't dependent on any 1 individual. We have the strategy, the culture and the leadership team to keep moving forward and creating value. I believe the best days for talent are still ahead of us. And with that, I'll turn the call over to Terry.

Terry Nutt

Thank you, Matt, and good morning, everyone. Turning to our key highlights for the quarter. Our plants performed well during periods of strong demand, and I'm pleased to report that we delivered $669 million of adjusted EBITDA and $433 million of adjusted free cash flow in the quarter.

In September, we announced an increase in our share repurchase program to $3 billion through the end of 2028, including the $1.5 billion accelerated share repurchase previously announced. And when that transaction is completed, we expect to have repurchased approximately 1/3 of our shares outstanding since emergence just 3 years ago.

That's a significant return of capital and a clear demonstration of our commitment to creating value for our shareholders. PJM fundamentals remain strong. We saw continued improvement in forward spark spreads across 80 hub and PPL zones where we have significant generation exposure.

During the quarter, strong demand, tightening reserve margins and elevated outages across PJM drove increased run hours across our fleet. The market increasingly needs reliable generation. we own it, and we're seeing that value reflected in both our operating performance and our financial outlook.

With 9 months behind us, we're reaffirming our 2026 guidance and introducing formal 2027 guidance. We're also increasing our 2028 outlook and initiating our 2029 outlook. We expect to generate approximately $6 billion of cumulative adjusted free cash flow through 2029, and with continued disciplined capital allocation, we expect adjusted free cash flow per share to reach $56 to $60 per share in 2029 representing nearly a 30% annual growth rate from our original 2026 space. We have multiple opportunities to create additional value beyond that. The strategy is working, and we're executing.

Turning to Slide 3. For the 9 months ended September 30, 2026, we are reporting $1.516 billion of adjusted EBITDA and $995 million of adjusted free cash flow. Numbers that validate the continued growth trajectory over the past several years. Turning to our operational metrics. Our fleet achieved strong levels of safety and reliability during the year. including during the record-setting demand that PJM experienced during the third quarter.

We generated approximately 53 terawatt hours of power with a capacity factor of 64% so far this year. Our intermediate dispatch assets continue to have increased run times to support the higher demand in PJM. We took time in September and October during the seasonal outage period for additional maintenance to ensure the fleet is ready for the winter.

We continue to make investments in our assets to ensure that our fleet meets the level of reliability and performance standards we expect. This will continue to be a focus for us through the coming years, especially as the market backdrop continues to point to tightening supply and demand for several years to come.

Safety remains our first priority across the fleet, and our year-to-date recordable incident rate was 0.31. I would like to thank the men and women of Talen who continue to demonstrate strong operational and safety performance. The team's commitment to operate in a safe and reliable manner is an important part of Talen's value proposition.

Turning to Slide 4. We have seen a continued appreciation in the forward curves through the next several years. While not as pronounced as the moves in PJM West Hub, 2028 AD hub and PPL Spark spreads rose 19% and 11%, respectively, over the quarter, as you can see from the graph on the bottom right-hand side of the slide. On a year-to-date basis, 2028 AD hub and PPL zone spark spreads both increased by nearly 30%. Our views on PPL's zonal basis remain unchanged.

We continue to see this as an upside lever to our financial outlook as the combination of load ramping in the zone and completion of transmission network upgrades drive a narrowing of the zonal spread over time. In the meantime, our commercial team continues to deploy a hedging strategy around zonal basis that mitigates short and near-term risk associated with price volatility. We while larger macro factors like transmission build-out, line upgrades and load growth within the zones, will impact the longer-term outlook.

Moving to Slide 5. The power demand outlook continues to remain strong. The 2 charts on the top of the slide show cumulative load additions for AEP and PPL zones. By 2031, AEP is estimated to have an additional 31 gigawatts of contracted large load additions and PPL will have an additional 10.7 gigawatts. In the PPL zone, this includes 6 gigawatts of data centers currently under construction. We have assets and locations that are able to support the coming increase in load. The increase in demand is illustrated in the lower left of the slide where you can see the Q3 average electricity demand in PJM.

2026 demand was significantly above both 2025 and the 5-year average. Increased demand and higher prices result in higher run times for our intermediate fleet as you can see on the bottom right. Compared to Q3 2025, the capacity factor for our intermediate fleet increased from approximately 36% to 52%. This continues the trend that we have seen over the past several years.

All of this validates our driving thesis. That large load growth is here and more is coming. It's notable demand and the desire for more long-term certainty has not been slowed by regulatory rulings as shown by recent transactions in the market.

On the regulatory front, we view the Pennsylvania executive order as setting balance standards for project development and we are working with stakeholders to ensure future projects have a fair and measured approach. We have a track record of working well with the state, as evidenced by the Susquehanna AWS transaction.

and intend to continue working to bring large loads and the related economic benefits to Pennsylvania. In addition, recent regulatory progress from PJM and FERC has been helpful and we continue to see opportunities in the bilateral market as counterparties look for energy and capacity.

Turning now to our long-term contracting solutions. As Matt noted, we continue to work with customers to find the right solutions for their needs. We believe these offerings will continue to translate into value-enhancing contracts that leverage our assets. We have 6 gigawatts of baseload generation length across our portfolio that can support customers who desire price certainty and/or physical capacity commitments.

We have 4 gigawatts of powered land sites with significant speed to power advantages. These sites can be grid connected in the 2028, 2029 window and continue to advance. Sites with this timing and scale are very attractive to hyperscalers and large developers. We also have a 3-plus gigawatt pipeline of new capacity projects under development, including uprates, batteries and peakers.

Some customers specifically desire these types of projects to help either meet their rate payer protection pledge or other corporate commitments. Additionally, Talen can offer both existing generation such as the 300 megawatts of uncontracted nuclear power from Susquehanna or 1 of the lowest carbon intensity combined cycle portfolios in the PJM fleet as well as new capacity options like multiple battery projects under development. With that, I'll turn the call over to Cole to discuss our financial performance and outlook.

Cole Muller

Thanks, Terry, and good morning. Terry described how stronger demand is driving higher dispatch across our fleet and outline the commercial opportunities ahead, and I'll focus on how these dynamics translate into cash generation, our financial outlook and value per share.

On Slide 7, third quarter adjusted EBITDA was $669 million and adjusted free cash flow was $433 million. nearly double what it was for the same period just a year ago.

Year-over-year improvement reflects contributions from Freedom and Guernsey and beginning fully this quarter, Lawrenceburg, Waterford and Darby. We also benefited from higher settled power prices, greater generation volumes and increased cleared capacity revenues.

Realized hedge results partially offset these gains while acquisition financing increased cash interest payments. Our expanded fleet and stronger market conditions are translating into higher cash generation. That is the financial foundation for the per share growth Mac described earlier.

On Slide 8, we are reaffirming our 2026 guidance midpoints of $2.125 billion in adjusted EBITDA and $1.275 billion in adjusted free cash flow, and we have narrowed each range by $25 million on either side. We're also introducing our 2027 guidance. Adjusted EBITDA was a $2.675 billion midpoint and adjusted free cash flow with a $1.625 billion midpoint.

At these midpoints, this represents more than 25% growth over the 2026 adjusted EBITDA and adjusted free cash flow. This guidance reflects our larger portfolio and September 30 forward curves and that we are approximately 70% hedged r expected 2027 generation.

For 2028, we are approximately 35% hedged. And in 2029, we remain largely open except for the impact of the AWS contract. Our commercial desk continues to manage zonal basis exposure as we approach the delivery year. As Mac emphasized, the investment case does not depend on another large load agreement.

This guidance is grounded in the portfolio that we own today. Please see updated modeling assumptions and hedge disclosures in the appendix for more detail. Slide 9 goes to our central measure of value creation, adjusted free cash flow per share. The bar shading distinguishes underlying cash generation from the incremental per share effect of future repurchases.

Holding our share count constant at approximately 42.9 million shares following the completion of the ASR our base guidance is approximately $38 per share of adjusted free cash flow in 2027, and our 2028 outlook has a midpoint of $48 per share. This 2028 base outlook has increased approximately 20% since just last quarter.

In 2029, we introduced an outlook range of $46 to $50 per share. We provide a range given we're still 3 years out. Our 2029 range midpoint is flat to 2028, overcoming Bruner Island shipped to gas only and the backwardation in current forward curves, which declined by more than $2 per megawatt hour year-over-year.

We mark our outlook to these curves rather than assuming a recovery of power prices. Applying our capital allocation assumptions, including repurchases funded with roughly 70% of annual adjusted free cash flow, our 2028 outlook grows to $53 per share and 2029 increases to a range of $56 to $60 per share. This more than doubles our 2026 baseline of $26.60 per share outlined last quarter.

At today's share price, our free cash flow yield is approximately 17% when looking out to 2029. Importantly, this outlook is just executing on the base business and does not require us to capture additional opportunities in front of us. These incremental opportunities represent upside to this outlook, and that is the distinction Mac made earlier. The base outlook can stand on its own with new contracting and powered land opportunities providing potential upside.

Slide 10 shows the magnitude of these potential upside levers on a free cash flow per share basis. The M&A and new data center contract upsides are illustrative impacts based on our recently announced transactions. Accelerating the AWS campus load ramp by 1 year would add approximately $2 of incremental adjusted free cash flow per share. We remain encouraged by the pace of development and see potential for the load ramp to exceed the existing contractual schedule, perhaps by multiple years.

Turning to the market sensitivities. Our outlook incorporates backward dated forward curves, as I mentioned earlier. A move to flat curves would represent approximately $2 to $3 per share of additional adjusted free cash flow with further potential if curves move contango. These are upside sensitivities, not assumptions embedded in our outlook. This also holds true for zonal basis. every $5 per megawatt hour improvement in general basis across the portfolio corresponds to approximately $5 of annual adjusted free cash flow per share.

These are illustrative and depends on transaction terms, timing and execution, but illustrates the additional growth potential of the business. Our test for every opportunity remains the same. Does it improve risk-adjusted value per share relative to the alternative.

On Slide 11, we show how we are putting our capital discipline to work. In September, we expanded our share repurchase authorization of $3 billion through December 2028, including the announced $1.5 billion accelerated share repurchase. The ASR is supported by our capacity monetization transaction, which brings forward contracted cash flows through May 2029.

Approximately 3.8 million shares were retired upfront and we expect to complete the ASR by the end of the first quarter 2027 with the final share count subject to the discounted vapor the duration of the program. We continue to target returning approximately 70% of adjusted free cash flow to shareholders. repurchasing our own shares remains the benchmark against which we evaluate other uses of capital, not a reason to pass on investments that offer superior risk-adjusted returns.

Across our outlook for 2029, we expect to generate approximately $6 billion of adjusted free cash flow, $6 billion to enable significant value creation opportunities for shareholders over the next few years. At our targeted allocation rate, that supports more than $4 billion of aggregate repurchases, including the ASR, while retaining flexibility for strategic investments and balance sheet priorities.

Balance sheet strength remains core to our framework, and we continue to target net leverage of 3.5x over the long term. Following the capacity monetization, we expect this obligation to amortize between June 2027 through May 29. Together with expected growth in the business, this supports our objective of returning to approximately 3.5x net leverage in the second half of 2027.

Slide 12 illustrates another part of the flywheel, the opportunity to improve cash flow durability through long-term contracting while retaining participation in attractive power markets. The objective is not simply to contract more megawatts. It is to lock in attractive risk-adjusted economics.

The existing AWS agreement continues to ramp towards its full contracted level, which gets us to approximately 35% contracted gross margin. Additional contracts could increase the contracted portion of gross margin and reduced reliance on future market conditions. We show the impact of another 2 gigawatts of premium data center deals, which would take us to 60% plus contracted with potential to meaningfully go further.

These incremental opportunities are illustrative and not included in our base outlook. The overall combination, higher underlying cash generation, disciplined capital allocation and opportunities to contract at attractive economics is how we intend to compound value per share. With that, I'll turn it back to Mick.

Mark McFarland

Great. Thanks, Cole, and we're going to turn it back to the operator to open the line for questions at this point.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question today will be coming from the line of Shar Purreza of Wells Fargo.

Preguntas y respuestas

Shahriar Pourreza

Mac, Harry, just on the negative zonal basis in PJM, I mean we you continue to see even further widening, especially after you guys marked on September 30. I guess what are you assuming is the normalization path there -- and has that kind of been incorporated into the free cash flow figures for '27 and '28?

Mark McFarland

Yes. Shar, let me start on this, and then I'll turn it over to Kyle to give you some details of what's in our numbers. We continue to think that the believe that the zonal basis is going to narrow over the next couple of years. And we think there's 2 primary drivers to that. One, Obviously, we see load growing inside of PPL zone. We can see that very clearly with respect to the AWS Susquehanna campus that's going up today as well as other projects in the -- and then secondly, there's a significant amount of transmission upgrade work that's getting done. It's been -- that work started at the end of last year and continues into this year and goes into the next year. So we're confident that, that basis will narrow. With respect to the numbers, let me turn it over to Cole, and he can give you some details on what's included.

Cole Muller

Thanks, Terry, and Maria. Yes. So in terms of the impact for '27 and '28, as I said earlier, our our free cash flow guidance and outlook looks at just whatever the marks are. So for basis, we mark to our zonal pricing for all of our assets. And so that's already incorporated that widening basis as of 9/30, right? And so again, all these -- all these numbers are reflective of the 9/30 curve. And just as a reminder, as I said in the script, we're hedged 70% in '27 and 35% in and our commercial desk is always actively working to minimize any exposure that we have on the zonal basis.

Shahriar Pourreza

Got it. Okay. Perfect. And then just on the 4 gigawatts opportunity, I know you noted that powered land is kind of the higher-value solution that you are marketing. I guess what's the right benchmark in terms of return on invested capital, especially relative to new build options and off-grid solutions.

So maybe another way to ask is how much margin above current market prices, which are obviously up significantly, does that solution require? And is it still kind of competitive?

Mark McFarland

Shar, it's Mac. Look, I think the monetization of powered land for us is a means to an end, the end being long-term capacity and energy contracts and how we service those off of a combination sometimes we describe as a hybrid model, which is bringing some new capacity from these additions that we have in the pipeline or selling our existing capacity and energy in combo or discretely against those power land opportunities. So we're not necessarily -- obviously, when we -- if we invest in acquiring land we want to get a fair return for that acquisition, but that is a means to an end.

We're not looking to create premium out of that. What we're looking to do is facilitate the ability to locate data centers principally in the PPL zone for a lot of those that we've -- that we're advancing. And so -- our goal is to take those -- combine them into a transaction with a long-term PPA, if you will, and create value off of our existing fleet plus potential capacity additions in a hybrid model.

So when we think about what a fair return for that hold is we -- first of all, we're not investing a lot of dollars in that. Let's just be clear. It's not like we're going out and investing hundreds of millions of dollars in these assets billions of dollars in these assets. We're acquiring land that we hope to just get a fair sort of equity-type return on for the whole period. So I hope that answers your question. If you have a follow-up, please let us know.

Shahriar Pourreza

No, no, that actually do touch it. I appreciate it guys. That's all I had and terrific execution.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our next question is coming from the line of Matt Pettit of Barclays.

Nicholas Campanella

It's actually Nick Campanella on for Matt. Maybe just to ducktail off that last question, just with the end of the bilateral contracting window now being in February, I believe. Can you just talk about your interest in participating in that as an avenue and just given the fact that you're talking about you can get people connected to '28 now. I'm just curious, why would that not be the window to do deals now and net down this RBA requirement? Are there reasons we could be waiting past February. Could you talk to that a little?

Cole Muller

Sure, Nick, it's Cole -- as we've said before, we're not beholding to a specific time line for our deals. And so Obviously, the RVP window has been extended here. So as deals get done between now and when that option is run, of course, there may be some additional netting -- but we don't see the RVP timing as kind of driving hyperscaler decisions and our time line necessarily. -- if deals get done within that time frame, great. We're obviously working on a bunch of opportunities, as Mac and Tory outlined. And when we got something to talk about, we'll talk about it.

Nicholas Campanella

Okay. Great. And then maybe just with the BRA still on track for December, seemingly, this is the last 1 that's capped, I believe. Just what are stakeholders or yourselves advocating for as we kind of look forward to the spring in terms of keeping the cap or reevaluating this?

Mark McFarland

Nick, I'll respond to that. Obviously, we've got the December auction coming up. parameters are out there. I think most everybody has got a similar view that that's going to clear at a pretty high level all the way to the gap at the end of the day.

I think when we look towards the May auction, a couple of things from our vantage point. One, we need to make sure that auctions continue to get executed on time, continue to move forward. I think that's 1 of the challenges that the market experienced several years ago when we got into the delay is we had to delay.

And then we had price clear that was fairly high. There is discussion out there, rumors that maybe there's another price cap in the spring -- we'll obviously participate in that discussion as it comes around. But our biggest driver is we need to continue to have the options to execute because at the end of the day, we think that's a primary the primary function of the market is to have sort of durability and certainty around those capacity revenues because that's ultimately going to be what helps finance new build and new generation.

Operator

Our next question is coming from the line of Michael Sullivan of Wolf.

Unknown Analyst

Hey, good morning. I wanted to ask maybe just -- Terry, on Slide 10, when you list out the incremental value drivers, what would you say is your highest conviction 1 of being realized over the kind of near medium term?

Cole Muller

Michael, this is Cole. Great question. Look, we outlined levers there that we think they're all great opportunities for them across we wouldn't be talking about them. Obviously, some of them we control more than others.

The bottom 3, for sure, depending on other parties, right, the market on the bottom 2 on Sparks and general basis, days in our build-out, which we don't control, but we -- as I said in the script, we see great progress.

It continues to progress more than linear. I wish folks could get out there and see the site. So that's the upside that we see that's tangible. But again, we don't control it. Obviously, deals, the top 2 M&A and data center deals sorry, got them flipped the second and third one, but you get the point. data center deals and M&A, there's stuff we can control somewhat, but obviously depend on good deals and willing counterparties. So all are good upsides. I know I'm not answering your question directly, but we see them all as potential here.

Unknown Analyst

Okay. Great. No, that makes sense. And just a follow-up on the acceleration of the AWS contract, I think you've got here going to 480 megawatts in the '28 guide. What is embedded in the '29 outlook?

Cole Muller

Yes. So we don't embed any acceleration within the range. Obviously, as we accelerate and as we outlined for every year of acceleration, you can see a couple of dollars per share increase. So to get to the higher end of the range in 29 for sure, some of that acceleration could be helpful. But to get into that range, we're not dependent on any acceleration. It's the minimum commit, basically the contract, Michael.

Unknown Analyst

Okay. So I just wanted to make sure because I think there's a step function change there, if I remember correctly, like the original slides had 840 to 1,200 megawatts. Though is $840 the right number to use there basically?

Mark McFarland

Yes. So the PPA does start to ramp faster once you get out to 29% because of the revamped deal that we did. And so they start moving from 120-megawatt increments to 360, so the minimum commits out in '29 as we outlined a little over a year ago, to ramped 840 in 2029.

Operator

Our question will be coming from the line of Jeremy Donut of JPMorgan Securities.

Unknown Analyst

Just wanted to come back to Power Lane, if I could, and specifically for time to power. Just wondering if you could talk a bit, I guess, about the different types of solutions for resource their battery, solar, fuel cell, small gen assets.

Where do you see, I guess, the best opportunities right now when we focused on speed.

Terry Nutt

Yes, Jeremy, I'll start and then Mac and Cole can chime in. I think, first of all, the interconnection to the grid in the 2028 time frame is really key for a number of customers, right? When you talk about large-scale reliability and what they want, getting that interconnection and getting it in a short amount of time is 1 of the highest priorities when we talk to hyperscalers and other developers.

The additional capacity resource, whether, as I mentioned in the script, to meet their rate payer protection commitment or other sort of corporate commitments, it varies. There are some customers who are really keen on battery technology and storage technology.

And that has been a topic of conversation that we've had with a number of counterparties. And then some are more interested in maybe a combination. I think 1 of the interesting things that we've noted and we'll reiterate here is -- at the end of the day, the solution matters, but the cost also matters. I think that's been a misnomer in the market is that these hyperscalers or some of these large entities will will pay any price whatsoever.

You take a look at some of the inflation on large-scale generation technology, and it's been pretty sizable in the last several years. And so we still think cost matters because ultimately impacts what they pay for and what the affordability is. And so those solutions make a ton of sense as we're talking to customers.

Mark McFarland

Jeremy, it's Mac. Let me tack on there a little bit. First of all, I think that the focus over the past year has been on land opportunities or data center sites that could be electrified '27, '28. And I think '29 is becoming the new '28 as we roll into next year.

And so I think you'll see a focus and we sit squarely with our land opportunities in that sort of '29 development time frame, which is what we've been trying to do in the background for the past years is to advance those. I think the other thing that sometimes, and I'll throw this little nugget out there, I think 1 of the things that's a growing trend isn't that it's just new capacity additions in addition to existing contracting for capacity and energy off of existing assets, but also the opportunity to look at curtailment in terms of PPA of existing that can then satisfy the requirements.

Because if you think about it, if you can curtail AKA demand response, you can provide effectively a -- something that looks like a peaker or a battery. It's just by having net negative load at that time or negative or 0 load at that time, providing that resource that then satisfies the hours that you're effectively developing a reserve margin across all of PJM 4.

I think that's going to become a growing trend and I think that's going to become a -- the other growing trend is that '29 is going to be the new focus of data center development

Unknown Analyst

Got it. That's -- very helpful there. And then maybe just, I guess, pivoting when you talk about new deals, we've only seen nuclear so far. Just wondering how you think about the potential for other resources coming forward here in the future?

Unknown Executive

They're coming. That's how we see it. They're coming. Trust me.

Operator

Our next question is coming from the line of Julian Dolan Smith of Jefferies.

Unknown Analyst

Excellent. Good morning, team. Thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Look, maybe Mac, you just said it yourself, a second ago, why don't we take it up a little bit on that curtailment subject because that's certainly a burgeoning subject. I'm glad to hear you talk about it. How do you think about cultivating that yourself as a business?

A, we have some of your peers that have these DR businesses embedded. But what I hear you saying is this is the curtailment of the actual load site. You don't need to develop a full VR suite of capabilities I presume. How do you think about pivoting your business to enable that kind of contracting? And when you say they're coming a second ago, is that sort of the principal vector for addressing additionality that you're thinking through today? Is that lends for me that pledge?

Unknown Executive

First of all, Look, Julian, I I would tell you that in addition to capacity additions, whether it be batteries, peakers, combined cycles that helps solve some of the in so-called additionality requirement, which is really ill defined by the way.

But there are ratepayer protection pledges and people are thinking about how to meet some of these obligations. I think we've been talking for at least I've been mentioning this for a year that load management on the data center on the demand side needs to get better. And in the past, it was you popped out a data center.

You took power when you needed it, you didn't take power when you didn't need it and you didn't worry about any of the rest of it. But now when you're developing gigawatt or more than in Susquehanna's case, 1.9 gig of data center development, you need to think about your load management.

And I think that, that's a growing concern. And so we are advocating, and I think we would all take the position that PJM needs to come out with a new large load demand response product that's different than what I think you were mentioning with C&I.

The C&I type demand response stuff is stacking nickels and dimes to make a dollar. These things are dollars themselves and need to be -- need to have a different construct. They need to be paid for it. So that's the carrot as opposed to the stick of like an IRAS.

You know that we were never supporters of IRS. We've talked about that. and we think that it's discriminatory and all the other pieces. But if you could voluntarily subscribe to a demand response that was equitable and fair and paid appropriately. And then, I'll call it dispatched appropriately within the response by PJM, that is a solution that can be 1 of the most economic to solve some of these issues with respect to reliability and the capacity market.

So when Terry was talking about the capacity market reforms, 1 of the things we'd like to see is how does demand response fit in there? I think we started to see a rationalization of load forecast. You saw that most recently going into this auction about what the load forecast would be, what will be the requirements of the RVP, et cetera.

So we're starting to get real sort of rationalized supply -- demand forecast. Now let's add load management to those demand forecasts and get real about what is the right solution there. And I think there's a growing consensus that demand response is going to solve some of these issues. But I don't think it's akin to the C&I that you described there. I think it's something different because it's much larger.

It needs to be managed not real time, somewhat longer in advance. So it's either a day ahead, DR or a week ahead type DR response because people need to know how to shut down a gigawatt. So I can give you an example, like Terry and I, when we were working in ERCOT, there's a big assembly line in Fort Worth.

That was a big 50-megawatt -- that was a big demand response asset that provided optionality. That's 50 megawatts. That was huge. Okay? We're talking gigs here and people that are managing the gigawatts or greater than gigawatts of load need to have a signal further in advance. So we're out pushing and advocating for a demand response product to be incorporated in long-term capacity reform.

Unknown Analyst

Yes. No, thank you for elucidating on that point because I think that's what I was trying to tease out is the difference for the new versus the old DR paradigm. If I can, just to follow up a little bit. Like I'm trying to read between the lines on the leverage target.

Do you say an ability to achieve 3.5 net leverage target by the back half of '27. I don't know if that's an incremental take on your prior commitment. And really, what I'm trying to get at there is how do you think about deploying the balance sheet? Obviously, we see the ASR here.

But how do you think about deploying strategically? You went back to this contract by philosophy earlier. Where are we in potentially going back in and diversifying the portfolio further? And again, maybe I'm trying to read too much into some of the credit commentary here. But it would seem as if there's a a little of different permutations that you could evaluate here that would diversify you in different directions from what you have today?

Unknown Executive

Julien, yes, it's a good question. It's a good point. Obviously, we view the balance sheet as a key part of our strategic options, right? We've -- as we've done in the past, we've taken the opportunity to take leverage up slightly to do really accretive transactions for the business, and we'll continue to focus on it.

Our 3.5x net leverage target is a target, obviously, we went up a little bit above that to this most recent acquisition. And the idea is, okay, let's get back to a level to where we can sort of redeploy it again. I think we'll always look at how to utilize that in any part of our strategic alternatives, whether it's in the M&A space or the share repurchase space, or other ways to grow the business and ultimately grow free cash flow per share.

Mark McFarland

And Julian, just as Terry said, when we've done the last 2 acquisitions, we've temporarily gone above the target, but with line of sight to get back down. And we meaningfully did that this quarter post the Cornerstone acquisition. The comment in the script around second half of '27 is reflective of a lot of folks are going to treat the capacity monetization of short-term debt and so as that amortizes we'll get right back down to the 3.5x this time next year going forward.

You were asking a question about diversification. I mean, look, we like the position we're in. Let's not forget that we sold the ERCOT assets a couple of years ago, recycled that capital into share repurchases at a time that now in hindsight, that doubled up the value that we sold those assets for.

We are more than doubled, as I'm reminded here in the room. I was being conservative there. But look, that -- we like the position that we've concentrated in PJM. We like the exposure to PJM. We diversified through 2 acquisitions of over $7 billion and toggle the balance sheet to do so, toggled equity issuance to do so. So we remain flexible across all of those things, and I think we remain disciplined with respect to maintaining our balance sheet. But at the same time, we're willing to lean in and toggle those different aspects when we find the right opportunities. And so we'll do that in the future if we find a new one, too.

Operator

Our next question is coming from the line of Angie Storozynski of Seaport.

Unknown Analyst

Thank you, and good morning. My first question is we're hearing a lot about the return on investment for data centers and how sensitive hyperscalers have been coming to the cost of these investments and how big a component of that is power.

So just wondering how that is reflected in your discussions about what type of power source hyperscalers want. I mean we've all been waiting for announcements about contracts for combined cycles. Those are not coming seemingly or at least they haven't come yet. And just wonder how you're positioned vis-a-vis this new increase sensitivity on the cost side for hyperscalers?

Mark McFarland

Angie, it's Mac. That's a great question. We've always said, I think, that there's price sensitivity by the hyperscalers. A lot of people have said, well, they'll just pay anything because it's irrelevant. But we've always said that they're price-sensitive. Cole has been saying that for years. And we're very much attuned to that.

And I think that's why -- when you look at some of the solutions, and I'll just go through a couple quickly. First of all, you're looking north of $120 all-in a megawatt hour for a combined cycle, a new combined cycle. And that -- those costs aren't going down. They keep going up. anytime you read them.

And so I do think -- and maybe just to mention it quickly, the demand response piece that I was articulating earlier or batteries or some other new new capacity with existing gen is a much more economic solution. So we remain focused there. I think a lot of people have talked about the behind-the-meter solutions, which I do think that because of speed to power and sort of '27, '28 delivery, there's been a move into the behind the meter.

But all -- every time we talk to people, there's a reason why to be grid connected. It's much more reliable it in the long run is the lower cost. And so we're focused on grid-connected front-of-the-meter solutions, providing some form of additionality either through our backlog and new capacity or in figuring out this demand response aspect of things. So I do agree with you that there's price sensitive. We've always been in that price-sensitive camp and attuned to it. And so the solutions we're providing, we think, fit within that. And that's why we've targeted them.

Unknown Analyst

Great. And a little bit of a different topic. So if you're looking at power flows like exports and imports within PJM, it's pretty clear that the load growth is primarily in the Minion zone at least for now and that is a zone that continues to attract more and more imports from outside of Virginia.

So -- I mean, is it just that we are still waiting for these data centers to be energized in Pennsylvania and Ohio, those 2 states that seem to attract most debates about the power position or what is driving that?

Again, it just feels like the import of into Virginia continues to grow at a pace which is just not comparable to any other state.

Mark McFarland

Well, yes, I think you're right with respect to Northern Virginia, okay, or Dominion zone. And that's where a lot of this transmission that we think is going to get built over the next couple of years. We'll help in fact, there's 1 particular line, I can't remember the name of it. Chris probably knows. But those projects have been started. When you drive through Loudon County, which I did within the past year. When you go through, you'll see projects that are being completed.

Those things were started a long time ago, and so that's why you see those energized. But I do think that those projects are being built in Pennsylvania, I know that when we recently -- Terry and I and Brad, our Chief Operating Officer, were recently on the road and we went to all of our sites in Ohio. And as we drove into Columbus, you can see the data centers being built there live on the ground, just like if you look -- if you come up to Susquehanna, you can see in Burwick, you can see what's going on there. And there was just another site approved in Salem Township recently, I think, last week on the 28th or something like that. So they're coming.

It's just that I think Northern Virginia had a head start and they're just completing projects. I think Columbus and the surrounding areas in Ohio have a head start and they're completing projects. And so those will be energized just like the AWS contract. So I think that you're right with respect to Loudon County, but I also think they're coming in Ohio, and I think they're coming in Pennsylvania.

Cole Muller

Yes. And Angie, maybe to add to Mac's comments on that. I think the other thing that we see is when you look at interconnection, which once again goes back to key that the hyperscalers and the developers want. You get into some zones like Dominion where the transmission build out is there's just not a lot of ability to do anymore.

But then you take a look at PPL and different zones like AEP and they've got the ability to build out more transmission PPL, for example, already has done that, which is why you see a lot more focus in that market because there is the ability to get connected to the grid faster for reliability. So we think that, that advantages the grid and advantage of the assets that we have there, and that's why we expect to see more load growth. And obviously, we've got materials in the slides that show the projections for those 2 zones over the next several years, and we continue to have a strong belief that it will accelerate.

Unknown Analyst

Yes. And just 1 other question, completely unrelated. If you guys could explain to us what are -- how do we actually understand the upgrades of gas plants because I think we're all used to like very small capacity increases like anywhere between 3% to 5%. We see them being pursued, for example, by Capital Power on some of the assets that they recently acquired. When you guys talk about uprates of your assets, what kind of a percentage of the installed capacity are we talking about as a potential increase? And what do they entail?

Cole Muller

Angie, it's Cole. Look, as you said, there's a lot of different upgrade opportunities across the asset base, not just ours. Obviously, there's nuclear upgrades. We've said we've done our -- the larger ones. And so we have relatively small number of upgrades at nuke -- on the gas side, combined cycles, depending on the vintage, have different upgrade capabilities, and they're all in different stages of that so there's not 1 percentage.

There's also opportunities to convert simple-cycle to combined cycle. Those have meaningful larger percentages because you're kind of, let's call it, just doubling the size there, rough numbers. So we're evaluating all those opportunities and think that there's attractive opportunities to do those on a cost-effective basis relative to new build and also from a time frame standpoint on the execution front.

Look, Angie, we have a couple of hundred megawatts or more across our fleet. And you're right. When it comes to the gas plant, particularly when you go back to the F frames, you're talking about doing these -- I think we're [indiscernible] right now. and there's a [indiscernible] upgrade and you get those smaller percentages. But those come around like every 3 to 5 years from GE to upgrade and squeeze more megawatts out. So those are the kind of upgrades that you're looking at. That's absolutely right.

Operator

This does conclude today's Q&A session. I would like to turn the call back to Mac for closing remarks. Please go ahead.

Mark McFarland

Great. Thank you. Thanks, everyone, for joining us, and I appreciate your interest in Talen. We've got a bright future ahead of us, and we look forward to continue to execute. Thanks again. Take care.

Operator

Thank you. This concludes today's program. Thank you so much for joining. You may now disconnect.