TFIN 2026年第3四半期決算説明会：2027年の経費目標とLoadPayの成長

主要なポイント

• TFINは、2026年第3四半期に輸送料金収入が大幅に増加した一方、ファクタリングおよび決済部門の利益率が拡大したと発表しました。LoadPayも引き続き規模を拡大しました。
• 経営陣は2027年の費用目標を4億ドル未満に設定しており、現在の実行レートから少なくとも2,000万ドルの効率化が必要となります。同社は、削減額の大部分が2027年後半より前に実現すると見込んでいます。
• 平均請求単価が100ドル上昇した場合、推定で1,200万ドルの増収および850万ドルの税引前利益がもたらされます。ファクタリングによる増収分の約4分の1は調達コストに吸収される見込みです。
• 経営陣による2027年の収益ブリッジは、請求単価を横ばい、与信コストを標準的、費用規律をより厳格に維持した場合、1.0%〜1.2%の総資産利益率（ROA）を達成できる可能性を示しています。
• 現在、LoadPayはTriumphネットワーク全体の決済額の1.1%を扱っています。経営陣は、今後数年間で2%、5%、10%へと拡大していくことを合理的と見なしていますが、最終的な浸透率は依然として不確実であると強調しています。
• ファクタリング事業は年初来で706件の顧客を獲得しました。同事業の税引前ROAは5%を超えており、経営陣はより広範な運送業者の減少傾向にもかかわらず、拡大を続ける意向です。

主要財務データ

事業および営業業績

ファクタリング

ファクタリングの成長は、顧客の新規獲得、売掛金の増加、およびTriumphの配送ネットワークによって支えられました。当四半期中、同社は9万3,000社のファクタリング利用業者を含む13万4,000社の運送業者に支払いを行いました。運送業者向け支払いの70%近くがファクタリング会社へ送金されました。

経営陣は、バランスシートの拡大を抑えるためにファクタリングの成長を制限することはないと強調しました。モーゲージ・ウェアハウス預金が大幅に増加する一方、大口調達資金はほぼゼロまで減少しました。必要に応じて、TFINは全体的なバランスシートを大幅に拡大させることなく大口調達資金を追加する余地を維持しています。

同社はまた、流通戦略の一環としてC.H. RobinsonやRXOとのファクタリング・アズ・ア・サービス（FaaS）関係を強調しました。

決済

請求書1件あたりのブローカー収入は約3%増加し、これは主に価格改定を反映したものです。この取り組みはほぼ完了したため、経営陣は請求単価あたりの収入増加ペースが鈍化すると予想しています。今後の拡大は、取引量とクロスセルにより依存することになります。

最近の請求書取扱数量は前年同期比で約7%増加しています。経営陣は、営業リソースが価格改定から顧客獲得およびクロスセルへシフトするにつれ、1桁台後半の成長が達成可能であると考えています。

TFINは、上位100社の貨物ブローカーのうち69社、全体では560社のブローカーにサービスを提供しています。同社の決済ソリューションは、ブローカーによる運送業者の選定、賠償責任、およびバックオフィス管理を支援するための監査、決済、インテリジェンスの各ツールを組み合わせたものです。

LoadPay

Triumphのネットワーク決済額におけるLoadPayの現在のシェアは1.1%です。経営陣は、最終目標は設定していないものの、今後数年間で浸透率が約1%から2%、5%、10%へと進展する可能性があると述べました。

Triumphは年間約700億ドルの決済を処理しており、当四半期には2,500の金融機関に支払いを行いました。経営陣は、トラック運転手に対して業界特有の銀行機能とともに、より迅速かつ低コストな決済を提供することで、このネットワークがLoadPayの導入を支援できると考えています。

7台以下の車両を保有するフリートで最も高い導入率が続いていますが、第3四半期には最大20台の車両を保有するフリートへと利用が拡大しました。ドライバー向けの経費カード機能が、より規模の大きいフリートの獲得に貢献しています。

経営陣は2026年末時点で約1万4,000のLoadPay口座数を達成すると見込んでおり、今後数四半期にわたり同様の口座増加ペースを想定しています。開設から120日を超える口座は、1口座あたり年換算で1,200ドル以上の収入を継続的に生み出しています。

インテリジェンス

経営陣は、インテリジェンス部門のスケール化が想定よりも緩やかであることを認めました。買収した顧客層における解約圧力などの顧客離脱や、クライアントの業務フローへの統合不足が不振の要因となりました。

TFINはデータ製品アプローチからデータプラットフォームモデルへの転換を図っています。このプラットフォームにより、顧客や第三者はTriumphの検証済み取引データを使用してアプリケーションを構築できるようになり、同社も独自のデータ製品の開発を継続します。

経営陣の業績見通し（ガイダンス）

TFINは2027年の総費用を4億ドル未満とすることを目標としており、これは現在の実行レートから少なくとも2,000万ドルの削減を意味します。経営陣は具体的な費用項目を明言しなかったものの、効率化は2027年後半よりもかなり前に実現するはずだと述べました。

同社は、標準的な与信コスト、規律ある費用管理、および約10%の運輸収入成長に基づく2027年の例示的な収益ブリッジを提示しました。これは公式な部門別ガイダンスとしては位置づけられていません。

請求単価を横ばいと仮定した場合、このブリッジにより2027年の総資産利益率（ROA）は1.0%〜1.2%になると経営陣は述べています。この枠組みはLoadPayとインテリジェンスが引き続き収益の押し下げ要因となることを前提としており、これらの事業が意味のある利益貢献者となれば、経営陣は更なる中長期的な上振れ余地があると見込んでいます。

TFINは第4四半期の費用見通しを1億ドルに据え置きましたが、インセンティブ報酬の個別見積もりは提供しませんでした。

リスクと注目点

• 経営陣は貨物需要について確定的な予測を持っておらず、好調な1年から景気後退局面まで幅広い結果があり得ることを認めています。
• 同社は、ドライバーの確保状況、規制、訴訟などにより、トラックの輸送能力が制限され続けると見込んでいます。需要の大幅な減退が起これば、このような供給主導の環境は弱まる可能性があります。
• TFINが自社のデータプラットフォームを顧客の業務フローに組み込もうとするなか、インテリジェンス部門は顧客の離脱や執行上の課題に直面しています。
• ファクタリング活動の活発化には追加資金が必要です。経営陣は、成長を抑制するのではなく、利用可能なバランスシート上の許容量を活用する方針です。
• LoadPayの長期的な浸透率は、その価値提案に対する経営陣の自信にもかかわらず不確実です。
• 第3四半期の与信コストには一時的な悪化要因が含まれていましたが、2027年の収益枠組みでは正常化された与信環境が前提とされています。

アナリストQ&Aの要点

アナリストは2027年の効率化プログラムの時期、資金調達能力、決済事業の成長、およびLoadPayの導入状況に注目しました。経営陣は、計画されているコスト削減案はすでに社内で明確に定義されており、2027年の早い段階で効果が表れるはずだと示しました。

請求単価の感応度について、TFINは、以前提示された700万ドルの税引前影響額から850万ドルへの増加はファクタリング残高の拡大を反映したものであると説明しました。1,200万ドルの増収と850万ドルの税引前利益との差額は、主に調達コストに起因します。

経営陣は、決済事業の成長は価格改定よりも取引量の増加やクロスセルから生じる割合が高まるはずだと述べました。大手貨物ブローカーはすでに同社の主要ターゲット市場であるため、ブローカーの集約が同社の戦略を変更させることはないと予想されています。

貨物市況に関して、経営陣は需要拡大よりも供給制約の継続に対して高い確信を示しました。主な要因として、資格を持つドライバーの不足や新規運送業者の参入障壁を挙げました。

決算説明会トランスクリプト全文

決算説明会の完全なトランスクリプト

経営陣による説明

Luke Wyse

Good morning. It's 9:30 in Dallas, and we're ready to get started. Thanks for joining us this morning and for your interest in our third quarter results. We're glad you're here. Aaron's shareholder letter published last evening outlines a quarter of strong operating progress. Transportation revenue grew materially, margins expanded in factoring and payments and LoadPay continue to gain scale.

The letter also discusses the freight environment, our evolving North Star metrics and the work underway to translate the investments we have made into greater operating leverage and earnings. That letter and our quarterly results will form the basis of today's discussion.

Before we begin, I would like to remind you that this conversation may include forward-looking statements. Those statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual and anticipated results to differ. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly revise any forward-looking statement. For details, please refer to the safe harbor statement in our shareholder letter published last evening. All comments made during today's call are subject to that safe harbor statement.

With that, I'd like to turn the call over to Aaron for a welcome and to kick off our Q&A. Aaron?

Aaron Graft

Thank you, Luke. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Last evening, we released our shareholder letter. And by way of introduction, let me reiterate its opening message because I've learned that if you have something important to say you should probably say it multiple times. What we wrote is we told investors we would invest through the freight cycle and we did exactly that. Not everyone agreed with the strategy, but we were true to our word. Investors should now expect that same level of commitment as we take the steps necessary to translate that potential we built into earnings performance consistent with our historical results and beyond.

In doing so, we'll demonstrate the returns on the investments we have made. So our priorities have evolved, but our commitment to delivering on what we say we will do has not. And with that, I'll turn the call over for questions.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from Joe Yanchunis from Raymond James.

質疑応答

Joseph Yanchunis

I'm going to start off. So you've now formally established a sub-$400 million expense target for 2027. As you called out, requires at least $20 million of efficiencies from the current run rate. Are you able to give some more color on where those savings will come from? How much is already identified versus still to be executed and whether we should expect those efficiencies to materialize kind of evenly throughout the year? Or do you think that will be more back half weighted?

Aaron Graft

Well, the first thing I would say is if you've known us a long time, Joe, if we tell you that there's $20 million of efficiencies to go get, you should assume that we have a pretty good idea of what we're going to do. I don't know that this is the appropriate venue to give you specifics on where those efficiencies are -- what I would say is you should expect those efficiencies very much sooner than the back half of next year.

Joseph Yanchunis

Okay. That's helpful. And then -- last quarter, you discussed roughly $7 million of annual pretax income sensitivity for every change in average invoice price. And you've actually been calling out the $7 million for a few years now. So in this quarter's shareholder letter, you noted that the $100 swing should generate $12 million in revenue and $8.5 million of pretax income. So I'm going to try to sneak in a 2-parter here. One, what caused the increase from $7 million to $8.5 million of pretax income? And two, why isn't that contribution margin higher for the change in invoice price? I just assumed any change would fall right to the bottom line.

William Voss

Two things, Joe, to your question. The reason that it is more sensitive to changes in invoice prices than it was before is because we've got more of it on our balance sheet. We're starting from a higher base. So from a percentage basis, it hasn't moved a lot, but we are when we reran those numbers, we've got a higher base of revenue to work with. The reason that, that $12 million goes to $8.5 million comes down to funding costs. So if you look at our factoring business, that revenue number, we haven't really talked about that in this perspective a whole lot, but about 1/4 roughly of our factoring revenue is given back to incremental funding costs. So that's the difference between the $12 million and the $8.5 million.

Operator

Our next question is from Gary Tenner from D.A. Davidson.

Gary Tenner

On the funding comment question, another really good quarter on the mortgage warehouse deposits, and you've really used those to materially reduce the brokered funds over the last several quarters. As those get down to 0, how do you think about kind of funding the balance sheet on a go-forward basis? Obviously, the factor receivables have had some great momentum as well. And real nice contribution to revenue. So just kind of thinking of balancing the warehouse deposit business against the funding needs.

William Voss

Number one, our warehouse business, if you just look over the last year, that deposit business has grown materially. Just looking at the changes in the balance sheet over the last year. As you noted, yes, we've driven our wholesale funding down to near 0. That was about $1 billion of funding a year ago. And we've taken our cash balances up about $1 billion as well. I wouldn't expect a ton of incremental growth from here in that mortgage warehouse deposit business. What we are not going to do is constrain our growth in the factoring business. We will find other places to make room for that if we need to. I wouldn't anticipate much incremental overall balance sheet growth. But you've got to remember, we do have all of that capacity to add funding on the wholesale side should we need it.

Operator

Our next question is from Timothy Switzer from KBW.

Timothy Switzer

First one I have is, could you update us, Aaron, on the progress of monetizing TPay? The broker revenue per invoice rose about I think 3%, that's pretty good progress. But wondering how that metric should track over the next year or 2. And with everything going on in the industry right now, have you seen any new challenges to pricing?

Todd Ritterbusch

Yes, I'll take that one. So yes, we've seen nice growth in revenue per invoice. A lot of that came as a result of the repricing effort. That repricing effort is largely complete at this point. And so I think you'll see much slower growth in revenue per invoice going forward from here. At this point, the shift is really in driving more volume and more cross-selling. The cross-selling will drive additional growth in the revenue per invoice, but it will be slower than what we've seen in the last year.

Aaron Graft

And Tim, if I can, first of all, Todd's leadership in payments has been exceptional, right? You can see it in the financial results. We called it out in the letter. I mean, what a journey it's been from logos to density to revenue, to EBITDA margin, now to operating income. But just -- I think it's important investors understand. We can talk about cross-selling individual products and where we price certain products, but where we're really going. If you think about the customer in that business is a broker. And a broker's job is really hard, but it's also really simple.

It's how do I make margin between what my customer is paying me and where I hire the truck, that's number one. How do I make sure I hire a truck that's defensible, especially in a post-Montgomery world? How do I avoid liability? And number three, how do I reduce my back office administration once I've done the first 2 things, right? And the power of what we've built is audit, payments and intelligence all speak to those 3 questions. And so as we're engaging with the market, 69 of the top 100, 560 brokers, there isn't anyone else out there who can go to a broker and say, in all 3 dimensions of how you achieve your goals, we can help. And so it's not just about where we price individual components or repricing. It's about total value contribution to the customer, and I'm very, very excited about where we're going in that regard.

Timothy Switzer

Yes. Very helpful. And Aaron, your letter -- made it very clear that a tight truck market is here to stay. But if I read between the lines, do you also expect demand and volume in truckload to pick up? Or is it more a comment on the lack of driver availability if that occurred?

Aaron Graft

Yes. So we have no firm view in demand. Next year could be extraordinary. Next year could be a full-blown recession, like we just -- we don't know. I can point you to things that would suggest there's green shoots and I can point you to other things that say it's completely uneven. So let's just talk about what we do know. What I do know is that it is difficult.

You can own a truck, but it is difficult to find a qualified driver to operate that truck. And so we're not the only one saying this. Knight-Swift reported yesterday, J.B. Hunt reported a week ago. Everybody is saying singing out of the same hymn book. This is a supply-driven market. And so the question is, what changes a supply-driven market.

There's only 2 things that can happen. Number one, you have radical demand destruction, which would mean we go into a recession next year. I don't think that will happen. But like I said, we don't know. But then the second thing would be new entrants come into the market. That's what we saw in late 2021 and early 2022. It is very difficult for me to see how you're going to get a flood of capacity coming into this market where brokers can no longer just choose the cheapest truck, and a lot of them never did that. But just if we generalize here, it's not about choosing the cheapest and closest truck. It's choosing the truck that is a defensible hiring decision, it's kind of hard for new capacity to come into a market like that. So we don't know about demand, but we are pretty confident that supply constraints will continue as a result of regulation and litigation for the foreseeable future.

Timothy Switzer

Got it. Yes, that makes sense. And if I could have 1 more. I appreciate all the color on the challenges in the Intelligence segment and the difficulty becoming integrated to customers. Could you provide some more details on if that has been more like a technical issue or just like the solution, was it properly aligned with customer workflows? And what are you guys doing to fix that?

Aaron Graft

Yes. So let me start off, then I'll let Ben finish with how we fix it because I need to own the problem. We have not come out of the gates in intelligence nearly as quickly as we anticipated. And I could point you to a lot of things, not the least of which is many of the customers of the Intelligence business we acquired in this new market are struggling to make it, and so you've got customer attrition. But also -- it's on us about some of the things we could have done better.

So I can sit here and own that, right? Don't shy away from it. But I can tell you, it's not -- as I think about where intelligence goes, I am absolutely convinced. We, as a team, are absolutely convinced that the industrial logic of us using the largest payments data set available in the world for U.S. trucking to deliver value back to our customers is unquestioned. So we didn't choose to join the wrong race. We just came out of the blocks, not as fast as we wanted. And I've got a lot of confidence in the things we're now doing. And one of the things you should read through in the letter before I turn this over to Ben is one of the things we've learned is the value is in the data.

I mean there is obviously value in building customized models and point solutions, but the value is in the data, and we are a platform business, meaning we will allow other companies to use our platform to achieve their goals and licensing that data to them gives us a tremendous opportunity. Ben, any like specifics on where you would say what people can look for in the next few quarters?

Ben Volkwyn

Yes. Absolutely. On our side, like we said, on the churn side, we've identified it. We're working really closely with our clients. We're truly understanding where the product needs to go now. On our side, we acknowledge the fact that when we initially went down this path, we looked at it through the lens of data products where we're going now is a data platform, which is truly embedded into workflows and we truly believe that this is the process where our valuable data becomes a form and function of where the market participants really want to use it. Yes, we will continue building on data products but we also are going to offer a platform that allows others to build on top of our verified transaction data. And so we confidently believe that the thesis is correct, and we're moving in the right direction.

Operator

Our next question is from Matthew Olney from Stephens.

Matt Olney

Aaron, I appreciate you providing that letter last night with the thoughts, always a great read. Within payments, the letter highlighted just the focus remains on cross-selling the existing clients. I think you already kind of touched on this briefly. Can you also talk about the volume growth from here? I think the number of invoices processed has been pacing at that 7% level year-over-year in the last few quarters. Just curious if you think that kind of mid- to high single-digit growth is reasonable. I guess what's kind of embedded in that question is just the pace of new wins in that business.

Todd Ritterbusch

Sure, Matt. Thanks for the question. I'll take it. So if you look at the broker universe, there are still an awful lot of brokers out there that we don't serve. So there's a lot of opportunity to add additional volume. The 7% growth figure that you referenced, high single digits. It seems very attainable to me going forward. As you reflect on how we've had to focus on repricing over the course of last year. Of course, that involved using our salespeople to help with that effort. And now that that's in the rearview, we can refocus on selling our core business and cross-selling from here. So yes, I think high single-digit growth is very attainable.

Matt Olney

And I guess kind of a similar topic on the payment side. That invoice pricing has always been lower than on the factoring side. And as I understand, that's from just shorter routes on the payments, not just the long-haul routes. Correct me if I'm wrong on that. But outside of this, should we assume the general trend of invoice pricing within payments will be similar to factoring? Or is there any other nuances we should consider within that?

Todd Ritterbusch

No, I think that's exactly right. The trend will be very similar to what you see in factoring, it will just be at a different level.

Operator

Our next question is from Eric Bedell from Bloomberg Intelligence.

Eric Bedell

I was just wondering if you could tell us a bit more on the LoadPay update. You identified 1.1% of payment volumes going through the Triumph network. And I'm curious if you have a target percent in mind that you like to capture up from that 1.1%.

David Vielehr

Thanks for the question and thanks for noticing the new metric in there. I don't think we have a feeling of where that can end up getting to, right? It's a natural progression that we start -- where we're starting at that 1% and moving closer and closer to 70%. We don't think we're going to ever get to 100% share, but we don't think it's unreasonable to jump from 1% to 2% to 5% to 10% over the course of the next couple of years.

Aaron Graft

And Eric, one of the things we put in this letter, it was an interesting thing for me to read or as our team prepared it. So I hope you captured that we paid 2,500 different financial institutions in the last quarter. And that the number of institutions where truckers bank has got to be way higher than that. And the reason I can say that is because many of the payments we make go to factoring companies who then remit funds to who the trucker banks with, so that would be masked from us.

So here's how we think about it. And with what David and the business we're building, if you have a marketplace that is that fragmented of where truckers bank. We know this. They did not choose their financial institution because that financial institution held itself out as passionate about trucking. I think we're a universe of one of the only company -- the only bank that feels as passionately about trucking as we do. So they chose that their bank for all the reasons people choose banks, okay? So as we now think about going and winning market share, we have to convince them that whatever made them like the bank they are currently using, LoadPay can match many of those features and give them many more features and savings and rewards and opportunities that help them run their business. And that, we think, is compelling.

The second thing that's compelling. And if we were just doing it that way, that would be a marketing exercise. And you could probably win, but understand, no one in the world pays as many truckers as Triumph. And so if we're pushing out $70 billion a year, and we can then go to the end user and go if you have a LoadPay account, you will get that money faster and cheaper, and we are offering you a product that's tailored for your business. We think that is a right to win because we're competing against incumbents who don't wake up every day and think about trucking. So we can't predict how much we'll get, how soon we'll get there, but it's the value chain of being on both sides of the transaction, making the payment and owning the bank account on the receiving end and then building a product that is tailor-made for truckers, that's why we're excited about investing in LoadPay.

Eric Bedell

Got it. And just a quick follow-up on this as well. Where are you seeing more increase in LoadPay use? Is it on the larger account size or some of the smaller account adds that you talked about in the last few quarters?

David Vielehr

Yes, absolutely. And so we've really been focused on the small fleet. And so for us, it's about 7 power units or lower. And so we've seen higher adoption, higher utilization of the tools within that. What we've actually seen though in the third quarter is that started to ramp up north of 7 power units, up to 20 power units. And we're now hearing back from carriers on all the utilization that they're able to do. Some of the things that we unlocked in the first half of this year, were larger fleets being able to issue out expense cards to their drivers. And so when Aaron says, we're getting adoption away from the traditional operating makeup they may have been, is because some of these very bespoke or tailored solutions that are being built that are industry-specific are making even larger fleets move into LoadPay.

Eric Bedell

And then just one last quick one, if I can. Should we expect a similar growth rate in the accounts on both the total and active carrier over the next few quarters?

David Vielehr

We think we're running at the same pace for the next couple of quarters. And what it looks like. It will be -- we'll exit this year right around 14,000 accounts. And as we look forward into next year, we'll probably on a very similar run rate for the remainder of 2027.

Operator

Our next question comes from Joe Yanchunis from Raymond James.

Joseph Yanchunis

Just have a couple more. So in the shareholder letter, you noted that you added 706 new factoring customers year-to-date despite the broader carrier population contracting. So without spilling the secret sauce, how are you accomplishing this? And do you believe that the current pace of customer additions will be sustainable throughout '27?

Kimberly Fisk

Yes, I'll take that, Joe. I do. I mean, I think that when I look at our payments network and the amount of carriers that they pay, and we were paying about 6,000 -- or sorry, 8,000 carriers in the factoring business. I think we have a large runway and to your point, without giving away the secret sauce, the one thing we do is we immediately cover liquidity on the factoring side for the carrier. But to pair what David was saying is we've given them a tool to manage their business and their money in one place. And so I feel like that's where the value chain comes in for the carrier.

Aaron Graft

And Joe, Kim is too kind because what she should have said is she needed her CEO to get out of the way. Like I owned it in the letter, our caution as we were building the open loop payments network, we pulled back on factoring growth, and she and that team have been troopers despite their misguided CEO at certain times. And so now I'm like I'm out of their way and go build because we learn things, right? You have a thesis you execute on the thesis and then hopefully, you're humble enough to learn when your thesis was wrong, admit when you're wrong and course correct.

And the last thing I would say on that in addition to pursuing factoring, this is really important. We have built a tremendous factoring product. There are other really, really good, and probably even other tremendous factoring products in the marketplace. Building a product is one thing distributing it is another. And the power of 15 years of doing the same thing under the Triumph brand and being known as people of our word, that's helpful. Number two, the fact that we paid 134,000 carriers last quarter, that's really helpful. And number three, when you have businesses like C.H. Robinson and RXO and more to come that build factoring as a service on top of our platform, that's all very helpful.

So our distribution to the marketplace of 90 -- last quarter, we paid 93,000 factored carriers. Almost 70% of all carrier payments went to a factoring company. The distribution we have, the reputation we have, the product we have and the partners we have and the excellence with which Kim and her team service our customers, that's the value proposition.

Joseph Yanchunis

Okay. That was great. I was also kind of hoping to talk about this 2027 framework of low double-digit transportation revenue. Can you help us unpack the segment level growth assumptions embedded in that framework? And specifically, how much growth are you contemplating from factoring versus payments and intelligence? And within factoring how much is driven by continued market share gains versus higher average invoice prices?

Aaron Graft

Yes. Let me take that top down and then Brad can clean up in the segments because there's a purpose that, that was in there. I mean like you've seen our letters. We're not in the business of giving forward guidance. Like that's not what we do, except as it relates to expenses. So all we were -- what we were trying to do with that very simple metric is say, if you assume normal credit cost, which that's what we assume, this quarter didn't love. There were some episodic things but like normal credit costs and expense discipline that I think we've been very transparent about and that won't stop going forward, which is a pivot from what we've done historically. And then if you just assume 10% transportation growth, I don't think that's the shot we're going to call for next year.

We haven't updated the North Star metrics, but we just did it for purposes of this exercise. And I don't think we're ready to go into each individual segment. But Joe, let me tie it to a broader narrative on this 2027 earnings bridge. I mean every analyst who's asked us a question on this call save one, is a bank analyst, right? And so while we are very different than almost any of the 3 -- almost 300 other publicly traded banks, we are a bank. And if we look at the last 4 years, our investors have -- I mean, some have not liked it. Some have given us permission. I mean -- but as a company, we said we were going to invest and we had no idea the freight cycle we were about to go into, right? And it was the worst of times to be investing.

But once we made the call and we believed in the long-term value, we stuck to the call. But you can't run a financial institution, and we don't want to run a financial institution with -- that's in the bottom quartile of publicly traded companies from an ROA perspective. But on the other hand, we also weren't willing to sacrifice the long-term vision. So if you think about that 2027 earnings bridge, right? If you take the median of all publicly traded banks and many of them are stabilized business models, right? 1.2% ROA is rough median right now, and I'm not telling you anything you don't know. So I think our earnings bridge in 2027, if you assume invoices remain flat, get somewhere between 1% and 1.2%.

That's what we already wrote in the letter, so I might as well say it out loud here. The point I want everyone to understand is if you get there at a time when LoadPay and intelligence are still a drag on earnings. And you believe that LoadPay and intelligence have a future where they don't just break even, but they actually are meaningful contributors. And on top of that, you believe there is a lot of opportunity to grow factoring which is running at over 5% pretax ROA right now. Then you start to see the earnings power of what we've built is very different than our "peer group" of banks.

So like I said a lot, but that's the reason it was -- it's in there. That's what's driving our thinking on operating efficiency and profitability, and it will be in next quarter's letter where we get a little more specific on giving you any updated targets for 2027. But don't -- we didn't assume that invoices were going to continue to go up because we can't make that prediction. What we can tell you is October quarter-to-date invoices have continued to rise and new clients have continued to join. And so that's obviously meaningful for factoring. So I hope I answered your question, but I hope I also did it in a way that's helpful for people to understand the context behind it.

Joseph Yanchunis

No, I appreciate it. That was a thoughtful response. And then the last kind of question I had was on the incentive comp. You had talked about potentially there being $6 million that was going to be spread across the back half of the year. And then in the same vein, you talked about how in this quarter, you outperformed a lot -- on a lot of the several operating metrics, which determine us. I guess how much of that should we expect to be accrued in the fourth quarter?

Aaron Graft

We don't -- so an interesting thing, we try to be extremely transparent, right? We've been wrong many times in -- I think this is our -- my 47th earnings call, which is hard to believe. We always try to be transparent. We're wrong often. But if we tell you something, that's what we believe at the time. And this is where, I suppose, transparency came back to bite us because we tried to give you that guidance that we were thinking because I didn't want anyone to be surprised. But in the real world, you have to react to what's happening.

And frankly, delivering 70 basis points of ROA this quarter and all the things with the credit noise and like it just -- it did not seem appropriate to take that additional bonus expense in the quarter, even though many things are going well. And so like it's our job, right, the permanent tension that exists between capital and labor between investors and the team is to manage that. I can't tell you with any specificity of what we're going to do in Q4. What I would tell our team is we've done certain things remarkably well this year. We've done other things not so well this year. And so we're always trying to think about how do we reward the team for what went right but also make sure we're rewarding investors for taking the risk and investing in us. So we gave you $100 million of guidance for Q4. That's as specific as we're going to get as it relates to what we do compensation wise for that quarter.

Operator

Our next question is from Eric Bedell from Bloomberg Intelligence.

Eric Bedell

Just had a few follow-ups. Number one, I'm curious how you're thinking about freight market where we might see more broker consolidations. Has anything changed in your approach to how you serve your clients?

Todd Ritterbusch

No, nothing has changed in the approach that we take to serve our clients. As we've reported, a lot of our business comes from the largest freight brokers. That tends to be the sweet spot for us. And so more broker consolidation is exactly what we expect and exactly where we aim to play.

Eric Bedell

And then if I could just get one more quick one on the LoadPay side. Was the tick down in the revenue per account just primarily due to that late adds in the quarter that you talked about? And also, do you still have the same target for annualized revenue per account?

David Vielehr

So what we see there, and we highlighted it in a footnote underneath that chart, right, where we -- what you're looking at is a month-over-month comparison for that one. But if we actually dive into the third quarter. What we saw was we saw a continued growth on a month-over-month basis. And so we didn't have a down quarter. We just had that tough comparable with the number of accounts being opened, the number of active accounts on a June to September. And so that's -- it was just a little bit of noise, a touch of seasonality and the account issue. So we have -- we still have high levels of confidence in our target rate. And if we look at the accounts that have been opened over 120 days, we're still at north of $1,200 in revenue on an annualized basis per account. And so we feel very confident as we move forward.

Operator

Thank you. There are no more questions at this time. I'd now like to turn the call back over to management for closing remarks.

Aaron Graft

Thank you, everyone, for joining us. We look forward to seeing you next quarter. Have a great day.