Hello, and thank you for standing by. My name is Tiffany, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the FuelCell Energy, Inc. first quarter of fiscal 2026 financial results conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers' remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question during that time, please press star then the number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to turn the call over to Michael Bishop, Chief Financial Officer. Michael, please go ahead. Thank you, operator.

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us on the call today. This morning, FuelCell Energy, Inc. released our financial results for 2026, and our earnings press release is available on the Investors section of our website at www.fuelcellenergy.com. In addition to this call and our earnings press release, we have posted a slide presentation on our website. The webcast is being recorded and will be available for replay on our website approximately two hours after we conclude. Before we begin, please note that some information you will hear or be provided with today consists of forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements express our expectations, beliefs, and intentions regarding the future and include statements concerning our anticipated financial results, plans and expectations regarding the continuing development, commercialization, and financing of our fuel cell technology, our anticipated market opportunities, and our business plans and strategies. Our actual future results could differ materially from those described or implied by such forward-looking statements because of a number of risks and uncertainties. More information regarding such risks and uncertainties is available in the safe harbor statement in the slide presentation and in our filings with the SEC, particularly the risk section of our most recent Form 10-K and any subsequently filed quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. During this call, we will be discussing certain non-GAAP financial measures, and we refer you to our website, our earnings press release, and the appendix of the slide presentation for the reconciliation of those measures to GAAP financial measures. Our earnings press release and a copy of today's webcast presentation are available on our website under the Investor Relations tab. For this call, I am joined by Jason Few, our President and Chief Executive Officer. Following our prepared remarks, the leadership team will be available to take your questions. I will now hand the call over to Jason for opening remarks. Jason?

Good morning, everyone, and thank you, Mike. I appreciate everyone joining us today. Before we begin, I want to acknowledge the events unfolding in the Middle East. Our thoughts are with the civilians affected across the region, and we are grateful for the courage and service of the American men and women in uniform and those of our allies working to protect stability and safeguard lives. We hope for the safety of all innocent people and for a path toward peace. With that said, I would like to turn to FuelCell Energy, Inc.'s results and the progress our team continues to make. Let me set the stage before we dive into the quarter. FuelCell Energy, Inc. delivers continuous, scalable power for critical applications and grid resilience. Our mission remains unchanged. However, the world around us is changing rapidly. The explosive growth of AI, digital infrastructure, and compute-intensive workloads collides with a power system that cannot scale quickly enough. Interconnection timelines now take years instead of months, and customers simply cannot wait that long. This environment demands solutions that are proven, scalable, and ready to deploy immediately. And that is where FuelCell Energy, Inc. excels. We do not need to prove the need for distributed baseload power with our solutions. We have already demonstrated it over decades in utility-scale, real-world, and demanding environments. Please turn to slide four. I will focus today's discussion on a few key themes. First, commercially. Data centers are driving demand for power that does not depend on grid timing in the commercial sector. Our DC-native continuous platform is a ready backbone for data centers. We are seeing this shift reflected not just in conversations, but in the types of projects actively entering our pipeline. Second, operationally. Our momentum in South Korea is demonstrated by servicing the…

Thank you, Jason, and good morning to everyone on the call today. I will cover our first quarter financial results and backlog on slides 16 and 17 and then close with the liquidity and utilization discussion on slide 18. In 2026, we reported total revenues of $30.5 million compared to revenues of $19.0 million in the prior-year quarter, an increase of approximately 61%. This increase was primarily driven by module deliveries to GGE and CGN under long-term service agreements. We reported a loss from operations in the quarter of $26.3 million compared to $32.9 million in 2025, an improvement of approximately 20%. The net loss attributable to common stockholders in the quarter was $23.7 million, or $0.49 per share, compared to $29.1 million, or $1.42 per share, in the prior-year period. The improvement in net loss per share reflects both the reduction in net loss attributable to common stockholders and a higher weighted average share count due to equity issuances since 01/31/2025. Net loss was $26.1 million in 2026 compared to a net loss of $32.4 million in 2025. On a non-GAAP basis, adjusted EBITDA totaled negative $17.0 million in 2026 compared to negative $21.1 million in 2025. Please refer to the appendix of the earnings release, which provides a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures. Turning now to slide 17, I will walk through the mix and key drivers of revenue, which was $30.5 million. Product revenues were $12.0 million, reflecting the delivery and commissioning of a total of four modules, two for GGE and two for CGN, under long-term service agreements. Revenue for the quarter was approximately $6.0 million lower than planned, driven by the timing of commissioning for two delivered and installed modules that entered service shortly after quarter end, which was previously planned to take place…

We will now open for questions. At this time, if you would like to ask a question, press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, simply press star one again. We kindly ask that you limit your questions to one and one follow-up for today's call. We will pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from the line of Dushyant Ailani with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hi. Yes. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Guys, just wanted to touch on that 1.5 gigawatts of proposals that you submitted. Could you walk us through what the next steps would look like before we can see a project being added to the backlog?

Yes, Dushyant. Thank you very much for that question. As it relates to backlog, just to clarify our position on that, everything that is in our backlog are firm, committed orders before it goes into backlog. So even upon a project award, we would not move it to backlog until such time that we have finalized all of the contracts. So from the submittals that we have made, what the team is doing now is going through technical details, working through initial considerations around the contract, and trying to work with those customers to advance it to full contract negotiation and ultimately contract closure. We think that the opportunity that we have around that set of projects really starts to materialize over the coming quarters, but the team is in active negotiations on all of those as we speak.

Understood. That is helpful. And then maybe also, kind of touching on the MOU with InuVerse. Can you talk about the key milestones there to think about that as well on how that kind of converts to a definitive agreement?

Sure. So as we discussed, one of the key milestones was actually them solidifying and lining up the land. So that is now done. And so now the next phase of that is really working through the off-takers and who is going to be part of that site in Korea. So for us, we will begin to be part of designing architecture and planning around the power delivery for that site, working collaboratively with InuVerse.

Understood. Thank you.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Jason Tilchin with Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead.

In the prepared remarks, you talked about the percentage of sales pipeline from data centers doubling over the past year. Specifically, as it relates to the partnership with SDCL, can you talk to the experience they bring to the table, how that changes the math in terms of the types of projects you are exploring, and potentially the timelines for when those could move forward?

Yes. For sure. Jason, thank you. So if you think about SDCL, SDCL as a private equity firm, or really an infrastructure fund, you can think about them that way. Today, they own multiple gigawatts of projects that they run and operate as a provider for that. SDCL believes very strongly in delivering sustainable power generation projects on a distributed basis. So what they bring is not only the opportunity from a financial investment standpoint, but also just their experience in delivering large-scale infrastructure projects and being part of running and maintaining those. And so as we think about our way in which we deliver projects, our ability to run and maintain remotely, provide service wrappers around that, we think the combination between us and SDCL is very strong, and we are aligned in terms of what we want to be able to deliver to customers.

Okay. Great. That is very helpful. And then just as a quick follow-up, the run rate at Torrington was a bit lower in Q1 than it was in Q4. Could you just speak to some of the puts and takes there? And how should we be thinking about the gating factors and timeline getting closer to that 100 megawatt target?

Sure. Good morning, Jason, and thanks for joining the call. So really just seasonal around Q1. It was a little bit lower than where we were in Q4. Today, we are targeting a current run rate in the 40–41 megawatt range. But as Jason described, as we get traction on new commercial, we will look to increase that run rate, and as I discussed in my remarks, we are still targeting positive adjusted EBITDA when that run rate achieves 100 megawatts.

Great.

Thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Manav Gupta with UBS. Please go ahead.

Good morning. I actually had just one question. Can you talk about the benefits of absorption chillers? How it makes the fuel cell offering more competitive, what it does to the overall efficiency of the system if you can combine your fuel cells with absorption chillers, versus a simple-cycle gas turbine or a combined-cycle gas turbine. If you could talk around those dynamics, I will be very grateful. Thank you.

Thank you very much for the question. If you go back to page eight in our presentation, what we tried to do there is really lay out a very straightforward example of the benefits of leveraging absorption chilling. When you think about power usage being 20% to 30% going toward cooling, our ability to deliver absorption chilling by leveraging the thermal properties of our platform, which is the ability to deliver high-grade steam and integrating with steam-efficient absorption chilling, adds to the efficiency of actually delivering a cooling solution. You can pick up not only additional cooling capabilities but reduce the power required, effectively increasing the PUE of that data center. And just taking a simple example, if you think about a 100 megawatt data center today, where maybe 69.5 megawatts are going toward IT load, by leveraging chilling, you can increase the amount of power going to the IT load. And if you think about the offset between delivering absorption chilling, the CapEx required around that, but the operational efficiencies and pickup and reduction of power, the example that we are showing here, you pick up about $127 million in incremental value over that 20-year period. So we think that is a really strong value proposition. And the capability to do that is inherent in the platform. So I think as power density and heat continue to increase, and a bigger focus on delivering more compute power to the racks, absorption chilling becomes a very compelling opportunity for data center customers. And as a company, we have demonstrated our ability to do that. We have delivered absorption chilling solutions. And if you just think about the core capability that we need to have there, that is actually the recovery and delivery of that heat. So if you go beyond just even looking at what we have done in terms of absorption chilling, if you look at our solutions today where we are delivering district heating, or where we are delivering steam to an entire steam loop, providing steam across an industrial complex, really showing our capabilities in this area. And so we think that we have a unique advantage to really deliver a strong value proposition via absorption chilling.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Pfingst with B. Riley. Please go ahead.

For the 1.5 gigawatts of proposals delivered in 1Q, could you break that down a bit by geography or perhaps average project size?

Yes. So the vast majority of those projects are weighted toward the U.S. market. And they range across customer types from hyperscalers to colocation developers, infrastructure players, also real estate developers and power land developers, if you think across the whole set of opportunities that we are talking about. And the average sizes for these typically are in the 50 to 300 megawatt range when you think about that as a per facility. So you might have larger sites, but when you think about really powering a number of sites at a particular location, and as those data centers scale their capacity, we are seeing the building block sizes match very nicely to our scalability.

Got it. Appreciate that, Jason. And then with the two carbon capture modules expected to ship next month, can you talk about the next milestone to look out for there?

Yes. So we will ship the modules to Rotterdam, and ExxonMobil is completing the work that they need to do on their end at the Esso refinery there. And so the team will go through an integration process. We are actually setting up the platform to be able to capture the flue gas directly from the Esso refinery. And, ultimately, upon completion of that work, we will be demonstrating our ability to directly capture carbon from the point source while simultaneously producing power, hydrogen, and thermal energy. And we think the combination of being able to deliver those three incremental value streams, and certainly the efficiency that comes from being able to capture directly at the point source, gives us an opportunity to deliver what we ultimately believe will be a very compelling low cost of capture. In addition to the fact that one of the other things that this demonstration will show is something that is very difficult for other carbon capture technologies to do, and that is to actually capture carbon from lower CO2 concentration streams. So when you start to get to 6%, 8%, 12% streams of carbon, it becomes a lot harder to capture that CO2. We are going to demonstrate how efficiently and effectively we can do that. So this demonstration will show those two things, we think, quite well: the simultaneous production of three revenue streams and the ability to capture CO2 in a low CO2 concentration stream.

Got it.

Appreciate it, guys. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Colin Rusch with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Thanks so much, guys. Can you talk a little bit about the modular design you are working with on some of these data centers, the building blocks that we can think about, and how leverageable this first award will ultimately be in terms of being able to drive a template for other customers to use for building out similar-type facilities?

Colin, thank you for your question. So our building block size is a 1.25 megawatt building block size. And as we look to deploy larger sites, we pair those, and you can think about it in a two-by-two configuration. So we are delivering 2.5 megawatt blocks essentially to customers. And so if you think about what a data center is ultimately trying to do, they want to match not only the power they need for compute, but the power they need for the overall facility. And as we just talked about, if they leverage our absorption chilling capabilities, they will actually need less power. And then as that data center scales, our ability to scale in lockstep with that data center customer, we think, gives us an advantage. So if you think about a 100 megawatt data center, the next block of power they need is probably not another 100 megawatts. Maybe it is more like 20 or 50. And so our modularity gives us the ability to match exactly to the power needs that that data center customer has. In addition to that, as we think about the value proposition that we offer overall, not only in terms of accelerated time to power—we have demonstrated our ability to deliver infrastructure-grade scalability across our deployments that we have today—but we think that we also offer two additional really compelling things. Ultimately, the ability for that customer to transition to DC when the market moves that direction. And the fact that our building block is 1.25 megawatts and rack sizes are going to a megawatt, that is a perfect alignment with our building block. And the whole goal there is actually to reduce the number of products needed, the number of connection points, the number of piping and wiring, and other things that are required to make that data center operate. So that matchability with our platform at 1.25 megawatts is really compelling. And then the other piece is just around our ability to really provide not only that capital preservation, but regulatory resilience. So as you think about a changing regulatory environment, our low emissions profile, our lack of SOx, NOx, and other particulates, the fact that we operate near-silent, and our platforms are deployed carbon capture-ready, the ability to ultimately take advantage of that and deliver that to a customer when they are ready, we think, puts us in a really nice position. And in terms of leveraging, we think the initial commercial win successfully deploying and delivering power to that data center customer will serve just as yet another proof point of our ability to deliver utility-scale distributed power generation. And now we will have a reference, if you will, of a data center customer, and we think that is ultimately really leverageable by our sales team and the other customers that they are working with to close transactions.

Thanks so much. And then just turning to the operational side, it looks like you guys are set up for a pretty substantial amount of operating leverage as you scale revenue. Could you just talk about what other elements you need for the organization to really meet the opportunity that you see coming on the data center side?

Good morning, Colin. Thanks for joining. So, yes, as you mentioned, we are set up for scale. And as I said in my remarks, as we get closer to 100 megawatts of production volume, we get to adjusted EBITDA positive. But also, as Jason talked about in his remarks, as you look at how we scale beyond 100 megawatts, we have plans in place to expand Torrington to at least 350, and then plans beyond that. And we have allocated a range of capital this year to begin that with long-lead items. So, as an example, we are installing a high-capacity tape caster. So that is an example of what is going into the factory today. But also what we have talked about is essentially a hub-and-spoke model to really optimize Torrington, to bring final assembly and conditioning facilities closer to where our customers are, and we will gain a lot of leverage from that by having lower operating costs and lower transportation costs to the company or to the customers, and then also being able to localize certain activities. This is a model that we followed in the past with the activity that we have done in Korea and Germany. So those are a few examples that I would point to.

Thanks so much, guys.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Noel Parks with Tuohy Brothers. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. Just had a couple. And I was wondering if you could maybe talk about what you are seeing in your contract negotiations overall since you said so much of your pipeline is the data center business. I was wondering, in particular, if there are any differences on service terms with this customer base compared to historically, either in terms of how willing they are to go into the service agreements with you, whether they balk at all on pricing, or whether they are sensitive to duration. Anything like that would be really interesting.

Thank you for the question. So as we have the conversations with data center customers, if we just focus on that for a moment, we are not seeing resistance to service agreements. I mean, if you think about their core business, they want to deliver data center compute to their customers. They are not necessarily looking to be in the business of managing generation assets. And one of the benefits of our platform is the fact that we can and we do run and operate the platform remotely. And our service wrapper includes all of the service and maintenance as well as the repowering of those modules as part of our service agreement. So we are not seeing any resistance to that. We are having conversations with customers around duration, as customers really try to balance between how they lay out their full architecture and continue to think about when grid connections might be available, and then how that ultimately plays into the architecture that gets deployed. So in a pure behind-the-meter scenario where a grid connection may be five years out or more, they really like to think about, okay, what does that mean in terms of the power need once that grid connection becomes available, and if that grid connection would even be to the level of power that they would need for the data center anyway. So the conversation we are having is about how does the grid come along, we operate in a parallel way, they look at the grid as a way to get incremental power or even perhaps serving as part of the backup architecture for the data center. It is more of an integration conversation as opposed to an either/or conversation that we are having with our customers.

Great. Thanks. And you are talking about sort of the horizon of a 100 megawatt capacity at Torrington and ultimately seeing a path to 350 megawatt capacity. And with the data center market so strong, it sort of feels like there is an inevitability or maybe an unusual degree of visibility to very strong growth trends. I just wonder, is there any interest on your part or from parties approaching you on the financing side about maybe securing that financing? I mean, maybe not pulling the trigger on it in terms of execution, but, for example, an infrastructure fund or something like that being willing to come in at this point and say it is really likely your demand is going to bring you to that capacity, and can we set up what that might look like now, even if only conditionally? So I just wondered about that because, like I said, the visibility seems pretty good.

Hi, Noel. This is Mike, and thanks for that question. Yes. So as we have laid out, we have a very strong commercial pipeline around data center opportunities. We talked about a gigawatt and a half of recent proposals. The company is doing a lot of planning around these opportunities. I talked about the expansion in Torrington to 350 megawatts, and then Jason's remarks talked about additional potential expansion, 500 megawatts to a gigawatt, beyond the Torrington factory. So as part of our planning, we are planning for financing for this as well. As Jason said in his remarks, as we get closer to final investment decisions, we will have more to say around capacity expansion and potentially financing that goes along with that.

Okay. Great. Thanks a lot.

Thank you.

That concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call back over to Jason Few for closing remarks.

Thank you, Tiffany. Thank you, everyone, for joining today's call. In summary, the first quarter reflects progress in several key areas: robust revenue growth, strengthened operating discipline, improved liquidity, and continued advancement in commercial and operational priorities. More importantly, these results reinforce a broader point. We have already proven distributed baseload power works. What is changing is who needs it, how urgently, and at what scale. We remain committed to disciplined execution, converting the pipeline thoughtfully, advancing vital programs like Rotterdam, and continuing to scale our platform for the long term. Before we conclude, I want to thank our team members, customers, partners, and shareholders for their continued support. The team at FuelCell Energy, Inc. remains focused on executing our strategy, advancing our technology, and delivering reliable, resilient power solutions that strengthen energy infrastructure around the world. Thank you again for your time today, and we look forward to updating you on our progress next quarter.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.