Hello, and thank you for standing by. My name is Bella, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to DTE Energy Q3 2025 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]. I would now like to turn the conference over to Matt Krupinski, Director of Investor Relations. You may...

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Before we get started, I'd like to remind you to read the safe harbor statement on Page 2 of the presentation, including the reference to forward-looking statements. Our presentation also includes references to operating earnings, which is a non-GAAP financial measure. Please refer to the reconciliation of GAAP earnings to operating earnings provided in the appendix. With us this morning are Joi Harris, President and CEO; and Dave Ruud, CFO. And now I'll turn it over to Joi to start our call this morning.

Thanks, Matt. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. While this is my first time leading our earnings call as CEO, I've had the privilege of engaging with many of you over the past couple of years and appreciate the dialogue. I'm off to a running start and continuing to build on the strong foundation we've established. I have a number of exciting updates to share with you today, which include highlighting the progress we're making on achieving our 2025 financial goals, providing a strong 2026 operating EPS outlook and outlining our enhanced 5-year plan that now extends through 2030. A highlight of our strategy is the transformational growth we're seeing in data center demand. I am pleased to announce we finalized an agreement with a leading hyperscaler to support 1.4 gigawatts of data center loads. This is an exciting milestone that I'll expand on as we walk through our updated strategic plan. Aside from the 1.4 gigawatts of new load, we are still in late-stage negotiations with an additional 3 gigawatts of data center load providing potential further upside to our capital plan as we advance these negotiations. As a result of this first data center transaction and continued need to modernize our utility assets, our updated plan includes significant increases in utility investments for our customers and deliver 6% to 8% operating EPS growth through 2030. We are confident we will reach the high end of our targeted range in each year, driven by R&D tax credits and the flexibility they provide. This plan supports our continued strategic shift toward higher-quality utility earnings fueled by increased demand, continues our efforts to build the grid of the future while transitioning to a cleaner generation and demonstrates our ongoing commitment to affordability for our customers. Thanks, Matt. Good…

Thanks, Joi, and good morning, everyone. Let me start on Slide 9 to review our third quarter financial results. Operating earnings for the quarter were $468 million. This translates into $2.25 per share. You can find a detailed breakdown of EPS by segment, including our reconciliation to GAAP reported earnings in the appendix. I'll start the review at the top of the page with our utilities. DTE Electric earnings were $541 million for the quarter. Earnings were $104 million higher than the third quarter of 2024. The main drivers of the variance were timing of taxes and rate implementation, partially offset by higher O&M and rate base costs. The impact from the timing of tax for the quarter was fairly significant at $63 million favorable relative to third quarter 2024. This is due to the timing of investment tax credits associated with when our solar projects are placed in service. This timing was known and built into our plan and the remaining year-to-date timing favorability of $33 million relative to 2024 will reverse in the fourth quarter. Moving on to DTE Gas. Operating earnings were unfavorable $38 million, which is $25 million lower than the third quarter of 2024. The earnings variance was primarily driven by higher O&M and rate base costs. With our confidence that we will hit the top end of our overall DTE operating EPS guidance range this year, we've been able to unwind onetime lean operational measures and other unsustainable reductions that were implemented over the past few years at DTE Gas to counteract warmer weather. This will likely bring this segment in below its guidance range in 2025. Let me move to DTE Vantage on the third row. Operating earnings were $41 million for the third quarter of 2025. This is an $8 million increase…

[Operator Instructions]. Your first question comes from the line of Shar Pourreza with Wells Fargo.

So obviously, the upside slide, it seems fairly material around incremental data center opportunities. Are the data center deals kind of are they an inflection point to rebase higher or shift that 6% to 8% CAGR? Or should we still kind of assume lengthen and strengthen? I guess, what do you need to see to revisit that guided trajectory, especially since some of it can hit the back end of the plan and you're already growing at the higher end?

Thanks for the question. Yes, we're really excited about the first 1.4 gigawatt deal we have on the table, and we feel well positioned to execute on that. We're continuing conversations. As I mentioned in the intro, we've got 4 gigawatts -- well, 3 to 4 gigawatts that we're continuing to work with hyperscalers with a total pipeline of roughly 7. That said, as we are advancing these negotiations, our intent would be to find terms that we can then -- and the ramp that we can then incorporate into our next year's IRP and then determine the generating resource to support that load. It could be a large generating load or a combination of batteries and renewables. But the intent would be to get it into the 5-year plan, if at all possible, and that would give us growth opportunities above and beyond where we are today. So we feel really good about the deal we have on the table and our ability to execute on it.

Okay. Got it. But just -- I guess, just to -- is it accretive to the 6% to 8%, I guess, how do we sort of think about how you currently guide?

Yes. I think that is a fair assumption that it would be upside to our current 6% to 8%.

Perfect. And then just -- and obviously, you noted a more conservative outlook for Vantage due to commodity pricing. But I guess what are you seeing on the energy service side? And does it make sense to monetize certain assets, especially with the inflection of equity needs starting in '26?

Yes. We're continuing our focus on our energy service business line and Vantage. We're working on behind-the-meter project, in fact, outside of the state of Michigan for our data center, and that could be an additional vertical that we pursue. But Vantage has been a really great part of our portfolio for over 20 years with a really strong BD pipeline and opportunities for really good returns. So -- but as always, we look for ways to optimize value for shareholders. We don't have anything imminent right now, but it's something that we'll continue to examine.

Got it. Perfect. And big congrats, Joi, on your first earnings call. I know Jerry is listening. He's proud and just keep that dividend growing for him now that he's on a fixed income. Appreciate it, guys.

Thanks Shar.

And your next question comes from the line of Jeremy Tonet with JPMorgan.

This is actually Aidan Kelly on for Jeremy. Yes. So just regarding the EPS CAGR, is the right math to think about like 2026 high end and then growing 8% off that until 2030? Or should we think about the EPS CAGR kind of being based off the midpoint each year?

So midpoint this year is the way we guide. And the 45Zs give us the potential to hit the top end of our range. And as you know, those 45Zs extend through 2029.

Got it. Okay. That's helpful. And then just on the incremental load, maybe just like how much should we think about like the load is needed to trigger a new gas plant versus just more energy storage at this point? I mean like when you look at the 7 gigawatt pipeline, how should we think about like what's needed for new base load versus just like incremental storage?

Yes. So think of it this way, any new data center load that we bring on after this 1.4 gigawatts will require additional resources. If we bring on something in the gigawatt range, it would require a combined cycle to support it. Anything lower than that, we could do a combination of either smaller CCGT and some renewables and batteries. But we'll know all of that for certain once we sign the deal and incorporate it into next year's IRP. And that will really dictate the resource requirements and the resource mix.

Your next question comes from the line of Julien Dumoulin-Smith with Jefferies.

Congratulations again, Joi, and to the whole team here. Nicely done here, I got to say, and nicely done on firming up this contract here, as you say. Now with that said, and just to follow up on some of the last questions here, how do you think about the data center timing here? You talk about it being accretive to the plan. How do you think about the time line for its ramp? I know that you already cautioned that it wasn't entirely clear cut. But how do you think about it being accretive versus perhaps serial and an extension of the 6 to 8. We don't mean to nitpick too much here, but I think we heard your comments earlier, and I just wanted to come back and understand when that would really start to kick in and be accretive.

Yes. You can think of it toward the tail end, given just the lead times on some of the materials and the construction cycle Julien, you could think of it towards the back end of our plan. So call it, late 2029 into the early 2030s.

Got it. So that uptick would potentially be probably that first year really would be that 2030 time frame. And then the question would be how sustained that elevated growth rate would be predicated on the success of the 3 gigawatts in late-stage negotiations?

Yes. And again, I'll repeat, we're going to take all of this and incorporate it into next year's IRP. And really, that will dictate not only the timing, but the right resource mix, which will then drive timing of construction, lead times for materials and such.

Right. In your owned versus a contracted piece, et cetera, et cetera.

Exactly.

Your next question comes from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley.

I was wondering just on the advanced stage data center pipeline. Is there any rough timing for when you'd expect the potential to finalize those deals and bring them forward or advance other projects maybe into the -- from the earlier stage pipeline into the advanced stage pipeline? What's the pace of crystallization of some of the projects?

Yes. Thanks for the question. So we're in active negotiations, and we have been for some time. We are still settling on some key terms and ramp rates. I would envision that we would have at least an idea of the ramp and firming up some of the terms before we file next year's IRP. We're pulling that forward. That's the idea into the third quarter. So we would want to be able to understand the ramp, understand exactly when that ramp would lay out over a 5-year plan and incorporate it into our modeling, so we can put it into the IRP.

Okay. Perfect. Yes, that's helpful. And then you piqued my interest with the behind-the-meter project that you're working on for Vantage for a data center. I was just wondering if you might be able to elaborate on maybe how big of a project that might be, what kind of power generation technology you're using? Any thoughts on maybe how returns stack up for that type of a project versus others in the Vantage pipeline? Yes, curious about that overall opportunity.

Yes. We're still in discussions with the data center provider. It's primary power. So it's behind the meter. You can think of that as more like CTs. And again, it's a little too early for us to give a lot of details around this deal. We haven't fully closed it yet, but it's a really good opportunity for the Vantage team and it's right down the fairway if you look at our skill set as an enterprise. So this is just a really good example of the type of projects Vantage has in the pipeline that supports their income targets, and we'll look for additional opportunities like that should they become available. We'll keep you posted, though, as things develop.

Your next question comes from the line of Bill Appicelli with UBS.

Just a question around the rate case in the ERM. I guess what is the potential upside for investment there should more supportive regulation and decisions come your way around -- in terms of just the capital outlook on that mechanism?

Yes. So just to give clarity, the IRM, the investments are already in our plan. What we did hear back from the staff was strong support for the investment profile that we laid out in the case and the pace. So the -- our intent, though, is to continue to grow the IRM in future cases. So in this case, we requested up to $1 billion beginning in 2027. And what we were really happy to hear the staff support even a pull forward. So they did pull out maybe $200 million of the pull out maintenance and suggested that, that should get incorporated into our existing IRM in 2026. So that would be incremental IRM spend that would show up next year should we get that final ruling in 2026 in February. So again, it just showcases that we're aligned with the staff on the type of investments we need to make to improve reliability and the pace.

Okay. Great. And then just taking a step back, I mean, when we think about the broader growth rate through 2030, just to be clear, when you guys say bias to the upper end, that's with the plan as it stands here today? Or would that need to require some additional capital to push you to the upper end? Or I just want to clarify that? Or would that be then to the points made earlier, upside to the plan overall?

That 6% to 8% through 2030 is our plan that we've laid out here today. And we say we have a bias to the upper end in each year, again, in that plan due to the 45Z tax credits and the flexibility that they provide. Joi talked about the additional opportunities we have with additional data centers that would drive some additional upside to that plan.

Okay. So then when we talk about the through 2030, which is post the tax credits, when you talk about the bias to the upper end extending out that far, that reflects just the capital plan as it stands today?

Yes. Yes. We see -- when we get to 2030, because of the 45Zs also, you have flexibility year-to-year. So we think there's opportunity in 2030 to hit the upper end that year 2 of the 6% to 8% range.

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Sullivan with Wolfe Research.

I just wanted to pick right up on that last question, Dave. So in 2030, when the 45Zs go away, what is it that pushes you to the high end? Or is there like some way you can continue to book those a year beyond the expiration? Or just a little more color on that would be helpful.

Yes. What we see with these 45Zs is flexibility, right? So we've been able to -- as we've done this year is find ways to pull forward some expenses to help future years. And we just see that favorability from 2029, helping us in 2030 as well to be able to be in a good position to reach the higher end when we get out there, too.

Okay. That's really helpful. And then another one for you, Dave. I think in the past, you may have all pointed to more of like a 15% to 16% FFO to debt range and looks like now just 15%. Any color on what's going on there?

Well, I'll just say, Mike, we have got great growth opportunity in our utility as we're doing this work that Joi described for reliability and cleaner generation also at the data center. So we're comfortable targeting this 15% range continues to give us the right cushion over the thresholds that we think. And it puts us in a really good place, remain committed to having a good balance sheet. And we're working with the rating agencies to ensure they fully understand our financing plan, really our strong cash flows, too, and they'll be comfortable with it going forward.

Okay. And one last quick one. Just the $2.5 billion for CCGT investment, I think you're building a 1.5 gigawatt plant. Is that the full amount? Or are you not capturing the full investment in the 5-year and the plant itself could cost a little more than that? Because that just seems a little on the lower end, I would have thought of what a combined cycle would cost.

Yes. It trails into '31, so beyond the 5 year.

Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Weisel with Scotiabank.

Dave, a question for you first. You mentioned that at gas, you're unwinding some cost-cutting efforts from the past few years. I know that as a company, you're masterful about being nimble with O&M expenses, but I thought that was typically more short term, like within a year, maybe 2. So I'm a little surprised to hear you talk about it over a multiyear period. Can you discuss some examples of what might be included in there? What type of actions you're referring to? And then as we look to '26 and beyond, how should we think about the O&M outlook for the gas business?

Yes. We've essentially let some of the backlogs, maintenance backlogs we allowed those to rise, and we're unwinding a lot of that this year. So that's just an example of some of the things that we typically do in the gas company. And we were ahead of plan when -- before we saw warmer weather. So we had some opportunities to relax our maintenance efforts, and this is nonemergent maintenance backlog. And this year, we're just getting back on track. We're getting back to our normal run rate for maintenance and other expenses.

And Andrew, I'll say like on our ability to be nimble, like we had a couple of years of warmer weather at gas. And so that did extend over a couple of years, but it still shows that we're able to balance things across our business to make sure we do everything to hit the numbers.

Okay. Great. And that is part of the outlook?

The outlook for Gas?

We think about O&M -- yes, the outlook for O&M at gas going forward?

Yes. The O&M for gas. This is -- I think this is a normal run rate that we would typically see. And then as usual, we build in some flexibility where we can lean if we need to or invest, should we see colder than normal temperatures.

Okay. Got it. And then, Joi, in your prepared remarks, I want to ask about affordability a bit. I think you said the 1.4 gigawatts of new data center load should bring meaningful affordability benefits the existing customers. But then you also talked about protecting them. So I'm just wondering, can you give more specific -- are you expecting the new data centers and this specific deal to be neutral to residential customer rates or monthly bills or deflationary? And how will that impact flow through? Will that go through rate cases or through the industrial tariff? How is that going to work for existing customers?

Yes. This is great for existing customers because we don't have to build anything substantial to support the load. We're using our excess capacity to support the load and building batteries on top of it just for peak shaving purposes. And the customers get that full benefit. So it will show up in the form of a lower ask over our next rate case cycle. So customers will get that flow through in that form. In terms of the protections, the contract terms protect our customers from stranded assets or rate shock over a period of time when we're serving the customers, the data center customers that is.

Thank you very much and congrats.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Anthony Crowdell with Mizuho.

Hope all is well. I just wanted to follow up 2 quick cleanups. One to Mike's question earlier on the FFO to debt, Dave. As Vantage becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the company's earnings mix, any conversation with the agencies of an improved or a lower downgrade threshold?

We are in constant communication with the rating agencies I think right now -- and because we have a lot of really utility-like projects at Vantage, I don't know if that will lead to lower thresholds, but we will continue those conversations because we will be moving more into that going forward as well.

And the current threshold is 14% or 15%?

It's down around 14%. It depends -- the rating agency depends on the way they measure it also relative to how we do, but more in the 13% to 14%.

Great. And then one of the earlier questions, I think Bill was asking on the IRM mechanism. You highlighted, I think, staff is $1.2 billion. I guess just is the cadence of spend, if you could just talk about that? And then also, the company previously or historically would file maybe an electric case every maybe 12 to 24 months. Does that stretch out the filings, the frequency of the filings?

Yes. So the way -- the IRM is $1 billion. It starts in 2027. We have an existing IRM, but it starts to ramp up in our filing in 2027 and grows to $1 billion over 3 years. And the way that we've laid this out, we would start to see that investment grow and make adjustments along the way based on performance. So in our next filing, we will look to update it and increase it even further. You asked about will that keep us out of rate cases. Where we have it right now, it would give us maybe 6 to 8 months worth of, I think, benefit that we could push out a rate case for that period of time. As it continues to grow, that time will lengthen.

Great. Joi, such an improvement versus Jerry. Great move.

Thanks Anthony.

Your next question comes from the line of Paul Fremont with Ladenburg.

I guess my first question is the junior subordinated debt that you talked about, is that instead of or in addition to the planned equity -- annual issuance of equity?

Yes. We do expect to have some junior sub that comes within our plan. We're going to look at that strategically, but that would be additional to the equity that is laid out. What we've laid out is what we would need to do for true equity issuances of $500 million to $600 million.

Great. And then on the CCGT, what is the cost per kW that we should assume for the CCGT?

Well, we're seeing ranges. So right now, it's roughly $2,500, and we're still updating our estimates. We'll know for certain once we get the finalization of our RFPs and see what is coming out. We've got the IRPs for our power island, but there's still some additional work. But that's our initial estimate at this point.

Great. And then turbine availability, if you get the 3 gigawatts that you're in advanced stage negotiation, do you see -- what time frame do you see sort of being able to get turbines?

Yes. Well, we're actually in the queue for our turbines that we want to bring on to replace Monroe only. And that CCGT we have in the plan, it only supports the retirement of Monroe has nothing to do with data centers. If we want to bring on another CCGT to support data centers, we're still seeing a 3- to 4-year time line for at least 1 gigawatt and above. There is some flexibility we're seeing for smaller turbines. It just depends on how big of a data center load we're trying to serve and when the ramp kind of gets to the top end. So we'll flesh all of this out in next year's IRP and again, pick the right resource mix to support the load.

So I guess, just theoretically, if some of the 3 gigawatts were to be finalized, if their need were sort of before that 3- to 4-year time line, you would serve that load potentially through purchase power? Or how would that work?

Yes. The way that we're going to address these contracts is really get a sense of how quickly they want to ramp and then use the IRP modeling to tell us what is the optimal resource mix to support that load. It could be a combination of renewables and battery storage, similar to what we're doing with this -- the deal that we have on the table or it could require a CCGT. Still too early to say. All of that will get fleshed out as we finalize the negotiations and incorporate it into the IRP next year.

Great. And then last question for me. You're looking at potentially higher trading contributions in '25. Can you give us a sense of how much? And will next year's trading contribution be sort of back at the 50 to 60 level that it was this year?

Right, Paul, Trading is having a really good year. We're seeing these strong margins. We talked about both gas and physical power portfolio, again, structured and hedged. Right now, our year-to-date is above the range, and that's given us some flexibility across our business. We don't plan for earnings to continue at that pace. We put in the $50 million to $60 million, as you mentioned. However, because some of these contracts are longer term, we do see some favorability that could come into '26, but we don't forecast that long term. We forecast around the 50 to 60 still.

Your next question comes from the line of Angie Storozynski with Seaport.

So lots of questions ahead of me. But can you give me a sense the 1.5 gig or the current data center contract that you just finalized 1.4 and then the additional contracts in the works. I mean, how do they compare versus the load that you currently serve? Yes, like a percentage-wise, how big of an impact is it?

Yes. So the 1.4 increases our load by 25%. So that should give you a sense of what an additional gigawatt could equate to if we were able to bring it on.

Yes. I mean, yes, that puts it in perspective. Now on Vantage, I understand that you're shifting investments towards basically a higher multiple business, which makes sense. But I would -- it's kind of surprising to see that there is less of growth opportunities for Vantage in this day and age where you have this seemingly an explosion of behind-the-meter generation, like cogen seems to be such a hot investment right now. Omni because it's behind the meter, Omni because it's time to power. So again, you did mention some commodity price pressures, but I'm a little bit surprised to see this lower growth CAGR for that business.

Yes. Angie, we're going to continue to work the BD pipeline there. And this first deal that we're getting -- at least trying to get under our belt would inform if this is a vertical that we can pursue further. And again, this is outside of the state of Michigan. We're hearing more and more that this behind-the-meter option is something that data center providers want to pursue. And so to your point, we're going to keep working it and ensure that we've got the execution capability. We've settled on a design, we think that works, that gives the redundancy. So we think that could position us to be really attractive to data centers that are looking to pursue this type of solution.

Okay. And Dave, could you comment on growth expectations for your dividend in this new higher CapEx environment?

Yes, Andrew, we're going to continue to revisit the dividend growth. We said in our prepared remarks, we're going to grow them with our operating EPS. And right now, we're in a payout ratio that's right in the midpoint of our peers. But we're going to continue to look at that and make sure that it supports both growth and what our investors prefer here.

Very good. Congrats, thank you.

Thank you.

Your last question comes from the line of Travis Miller with Morningstar.

Just want to confirm the cash flow and earnings mix here over the next couple of years. So do you hear it correctly, the ramp comes for this data center, the ramp comes next year. And then there's really no incremental capital that you would fund because they're funding the storage, right? So cash flow and earnings should be pretty close at least over the next 1 to 2 years as this data center contract ramps up. Is that correct?

Well, we're investing the storage to fund the storage assets. And then we'll be getting the cash flows from the ramp, which does ramp up really quick. But we will be investing in those storage assets. And that's why one of the reasons why we're pulling some of our capital forward and need some of this additional equity.

Okay. Okay. And that would be over a short period of time though, right?

Yes, short periods, few years time.

Okay. And what size is the storage? Investment? Not dollars, but how many gigawatts or megawatts?

It's a gigawatt of storage, and then we're going to use tolling agreements. So in accordance with our IRP settlements, we are going to build 2/3 of the requirement, and then we're going to use tolling agreements for the other 1/3, which are -- we'll get the FCM on the tolling agreements.

There are no questions at this time.

All right. -- thank you, everyone, for joining us today. I'll just close out by saying DTE continues to have a really strong year in 2025, and we are well positioned for 2026. And I am just really excited about our long-term plan and the opportunities ahead. And I look forward to seeing many of you at EEI in just over a couple of weeks. So thank you all for joining us today. Have a great morning. Stay safe and be healthy.

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining, and you may now disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.