TFIN 2026년 3분기 실적 발표 콘퍼런스 콜: 2027년 비용 목표 및 LoadPay 성장

핵심 요약

• TFIN은 2026년 3분기 운송 부문 매출이 실질적으로 성장한 한편, 팩토링 및 결제 부문의 마진이 확대되었다고 밝혔다. 로드페이(LoadPay) 역시 스케일업을 지속했다.
• 경영진은 2027년 비용 목표를 4억 달러 미만으로 설정했으며, 이는 현재 런레이트(run rate) 대비 최소 2,000만 달러의 효율화를 필요로 한다. 회사는 절감액의 대부분이 2027년 하반기 이전에 나타날 것으로 예상하고 있다.
• 평균 송장 가격이 100달러 증가할 경우 약 1,200만 달러의 추가 매출과 850만 달러의 세전이익이 발생할 것으로 추정된다. 팩토링 매출 증가분의 약 4분의 1은 조달 비용으로 흡수될 전망이다.
• 경영진의 2027년 실적 브릿지(earnings bridge)에 따르면 송장 가격이 동일하게 유지되고 정상적인 신용 비용과 엄격한 비용 규율이 적용될 경우, 자산수익률(ROA)은 1.0%~1.2%를 기록할 잠재력이 있는 것으로 나타났다.
• 로드페이는 현재 트라이엄프(Triumph) 네트워크 전체 결제액의 1.1%를 처리하고 있다. 경영진은 향후 수년간 점유율이 2%, 5%, 10%로 확대되는 것이 합리적이라고 보고 있으나, 최종 침투율은 여전히 불확실하다는 점을 강조했다.
• 팩토링 부문은 올해 들어 현재까지 706개 고객사를 신규 확보했다. 해당 사업은 5%를 상회하는 세전 자산수익률(ROA)을 기록 중이며, 경영진은 전체 운송업체 수가 감소하는 상황에서도 확장을 지속할 계획이다.

핵심 재무 데이터

사업 및 영업 성과

팩토링

팩토링 성장은 신규 고객 확보, 매출채권 증가 및 트라이엄프의 유통 네트워크에 의해 뒷받침되었다. 회사는 해당 분기 동안 9만 3,000개의 팩토링 운송업체를 포함해 총 13만 4,000개 운송업체에 대금을 지급했다. 운송업체 지급액의 70% 가까이가 팩토링 회사로 전달되었다.

경영진은 대차대조표 확장을 제한하기 위해 팩토링 성장을 억제하지는 않을 것이라고 강조했다. 모기지 창고(mortgage warehouse) 예금은 실질적으로 증가한 반면 도매 자금 조달은 거의 0으로 감소했다. 필요한 경우, TFIN은 전체 대차대조표를 크게 늘리지 않고도 도매 자금 조달을 추가할 수 있는 여력을 보유하고 있다.

회사는 또한 유통 전략의 일환으로 C.H. 로빈슨(C.H. Robinson) 및 RXO와의 서비스형 팩토링(factoring-as-a-service) 파트너십을 강조했다.

결제

송장당 중개 수수료 매출은 주로 가격 재조정(repricing) 영향으로 약 3% 증가했다. 해당 정책이 이제 거의 완료됨에 따라 경영진은 송장당 매출 성장이 둔화될 것으로 예상하고 있다. 향후 확장은 거래량과 교차 판매에 더욱 의존하게 될 전망이다.

최근 송장 처리 건수는 전년 동기 대비 약 7% 증가했다. 경영진은 영업 자원이 가격 재조정에서 고객 확보 및 교차 판매로 다시 전환됨에 따라 한 자릿수 후반의 성장이 가능할 것으로 보고 있다.

TFIN은 상위 100개 화물 중개업체 중 69개사를 비롯해 총 560개 중개업체에 서비스를 제공하고 있다. TFIN의 결제 솔루션은 중개업체가 운송업체 선정, 책임 관리 및 백오피스 행정을 관리할 수 있도록 지원하는 감사, 결제 및 인텔리전스 도구를 결합한 것이다.

로드페이

트라이엄프 네트워크 결제액 중 로드페이의 현재 점유율은 1.1%이다. 경영진은 최종 목표를 설정하지는 않았지만, 향후 수년간 침투율이 약 1%에서 2%, 5%, 10%로 확대될 수 있다고 밝혔다.

트라이엄프는 연간 약 700억 달러의 결제액을 처리하고 있으며, 해당 분기에 2,500개 금융기관에 대금을 지급했다. 경영진은 이 네트워크가 트럭 운송업체에 산업 특화 금융 기능과 함께 더 빠르고 저렴한 결제 서비스를 제공함으로써 로드페이 채택을 뒷받침할 수 있다고 믿고 있다.

동력 장치(power unit)를 7대 이하 보유한 트럭 보유 업체에서 채택률이 가장 높았으나, 3분기 동안 최대 20대를 보유한 업체로 이용이 확대되었다. 운전자를 위한 경비 카드 기능이 더 큰 규모의 운송 업체를 유치하는 데 도움이 되었다.

경영진은 2026년 말 기준 약 1만 4,000개의 로드페이 계정을 보유할 것으로 예상하고 있으며, 향후 수 분기 동안 유사한 계정 성장 속도가 이어질 것으로 전망하고 있다. 개설된 지 120일이 지난 계정은 계속해서 계정당 연환산 1,200달러 이상의 매출을 창출하고 있다.

인텔리전스

경영진은 인텔리전스 부문의 스케일업이 예상보다 더디게 진행되었음을 인정했다. 인수된 고객층에서의 이탈 압박을 포함한 고객 이탈과 고객사 워크플로와의 통합 부족이 이러한 부진의 원인으로 작용했다.

TFIN은 데이터 제품 중심 방식에서 데이터 플랫폼 모델로 전환하고 있다. 이 플랫폼을 통해 고객과 제3자는 트라이엄프의 검증된 거래 데이터를 활용하여 애플리케이션을 구축할 수 있으며, 회사는 자체 데이터 제품 개발도 지속할 예정이다.

경영진 가이던스

TFIN은 2027년 전체 비용을 4억 달러 미만으로 목표하고 있으며, 이는 현재 런레이트 대비 최소 2,000만 달러의 절감을 의미한다. 경영진은 구체적인 비용 항목을 밝히지는 않았지만, 2027년 하반기보다 훨씬 이전에 효율화가 이뤄질 것이라고 밝혔다.

회사는 정상적인 신용 비용, 절제된 비용 집행, 약 10%의 운송 매출 성장을 전제로 한 2027년 예시적 실적 브릿지를 제시했다. 이는 공식적인 부문별 가이던스로 제시된 것은 아니다.

송장 가격이 동일하게 유지될 경우, 해당 브릿지 모델을 통해 2027년 1.0%~1.2%의 자산수익률(ROA)을 달성할 수 있다고 경영진은 밝혔다. 이 프레임워크는 로드페이와 인텔리전스가 수익에 계속 부담으로 작용한다고 가정하지만, 경영진은 이 사업들이 의미 있는 수익 기여원으로 자리 잡는다면 장기적으로 추가적인 상승 여력이 있을 것으로 보고 있다.

TFIN은 4분기 비용 가이던스를 1억 달러로 유지했으나, 성과 보상금에 대한 별도 추정치는 제공하지 않았다.

리스크 및 관전 포인트

• 경영진은 화물 수요에 대한 확고한 전망치를 가지고 있지 않으며, 호조를 보이는 해부터 침체 국면에 이르기까지 다양한 가능성을 인정했다.
• 회사는 운전자 수급, 규제 및 소송 등으로 인해 트럭 수송 능력이 계속 제한될 것으로 예상한다. 심각한 수요 파괴가 일어날 경우 이러한 공급 주도형 환경은 약화될 수 있다.
• TFIN이 데이터 플랫폼을 고객 워크플로에 내재화하기 위해 노력하고 있으나, 인텔리전스 부문은 고객 이탈과 실행력 측면의 과제에 직면해 있다.
• 팩토링 활동의 증가는 추가적인 자금 조달을 필요로 한다. 경영진은 성장을 제한하기보다는 이용 가능한 대차대조표 여력을 활용할 것으로 예상한다.
• 가치 제안에 대한 경영진의 자신감에도 불구하고 로드페이의 장기 침투율은 불확실하다.
• 3분기 신용 비용에는 일시적인 압박 요인이 포함되었으나, 2027년 실적 프레임워크는 정상화된 신용 조건을 가정하고 있다.

애널리스트 Q&A 주요 내용

애널리스트들은 2027년 효율화 프로그램의 시기, 자금 조달 여력, 결제 부문 성장 및 로드페이 채택에 주목했다. 경영진은 계획된 비용 절감이 내부적으로 이미 명확히 정의되어 있으며, 2027년 늦게보다는 일찍 실현될 것이라고 언급했다.

송장 가격 민감도와 관련해 TFIN은 세전 영향액이 기존에 언급된 700만 달러에서 850만 달러로 증가한 것은 팩토링 잔액 확대를 반영한 것이라고 설명했다. 1,200만 달러의 매출 증가분과 850만 달러의 세전이익 간의 차이는 주로 자금 조달 비용에 기인한다.

경영진은 결제 부문의 성장이 가격 재조정보다는 거래량 증가와 교차 판매에서 더욱 활발히 일어날 것이라고 밝혔다. 대형 화물 중개업체가 이미 주 목표 시장이므로 중개업계의 재편이 회사의 전략을 바꾸지는 않을 것으로 예상된다.

화물 시황과 관련해 경영진은 수요 성장보다는 지속적인 공급 제한 가능성에 더 높은 신뢰를 보였다. 자격을 갖춘 운전자의 부족과 신규 운송업체 진입 장벽을 주요 요인으로 꼽았다.

실적 발표 컨퍼런스 콜 전문

전체 실적 발표 컨퍼런스 콜 녹취록

경영진 발표

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.

질의응답

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.