管理層發言
Good morning, and welcome to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. If you have any objection, please disconnect at this time. I will now turn the call over to Kip Rupp, Vice President, Investor Relations, for introductory remarks.
Thank you, and welcome, everyone, to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. This morning, we issued a press release announcing our second quarter 2026 results, which can be found in the Investor Relations section of our website at quantaservices.com. This morning, we also posted our second quarter 2026 operational and financial commentary and our 2026 outlook expectation summary on Quanta's Investor Relations website. While management will make brief introductory remarks during this morning's call, the operational and financial commentary is intended to largely replace management's prepared remarks, allowing additional time for questions from the institutional investment community. Please remember that information reported on this call speaks only as of today, July 30, 2026, and therefore, you are advised that any time-sensitive information may no longer be accurate as of any replay of this call. This call will include forward-looking statements intended to qualify under the safe harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements reflecting expectations, intentions, assumptions or beliefs about future events or financial performance. You should not place undue reliance on these statements as they involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict or beyond Quanta's control, and actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. We will also present certain historical and forecasted non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations of these financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in our earnings release and operational and financial commentary. Please refer to these statements for additional information regarding our forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures. Lastly, please sign up for e-mail alerts through the Investor Relations section of quantaservices.com to receive notifications of news releases and other information and follow Quanta IR and Quanta Services on the social media channels listed on our website. With that, I would like to now turn the call over to Mr. Duke Austin, Quanta's President and CEO. Duke?
Thanks, Kip. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. I want to begin by recognizing our people in the field. Everything we are about to discuss starts with our more than 85,000 employees and the execution they deliver for our customers safely, on time and on budget every day. This morning, we reported second quarter results that meaningfully exceeded expectations with strong double-digit growth in revenues, adjusted EBITDA and adjusted earnings per share, robust cash flow and record backlog of $53 billion. Given when these acquisitions closed, their contribution to the quarter was minimal. The strength you're seeing today reflects broad-based organic strength across our segments, service lines and end markets and the successful execution of our strategy and the investments we have made against it. During the second quarter and in July, we completed the acquisitions of Phalcon, Enerfab, Percheron and PSD, and we welcome each of these excellent companies and their employees to the Quanta family. These acquisitions enhance our geographic presence and continue our strategy to scale self-perform, craft-skilled capabilities across electrical, mechanical, civil and fabrication and to lean into the front end of our customers' programs where the work takes shape and where getting involved early maximizes the value we can deliver. These are companies that have executed successfully for decades and whose owners and leadership came up through the craft with customer relationships often built over generations. These acquisitions strengthen our position in technology and load centers, while adding meaningful diversification across end markets we've served for decades. Quanta runs on a culture of absolute performance and is dedicated to the continuous improvement and the success of our customers. Every acquisition has to fit our strategy, and the culture has to fit. That is the first thing we evaluate and something we do not compromise. When a company that has built its name over 50 or 100 years decides to join Quanta, they are choosing a home that protects their legacy, keeps their management team and gives the people more opportunity than they could create alone. Our solutions-based model is performing well, creating markets and unlocking growth opportunities because it is a platform that brings our customers industry-leading capabilities, scope and scale with the largest craft workforce in North America at the center. The rigor we built over decades serving utilities, the planning, the safety and the programmatic execution is exactly what we are bringing to technology and load center and generation markets. Technology is trying to move as fast as possible. Utilities are working to protect the ratepayer, and Quanta sits in the middle of the nexus, providing solutions to both. Our customers realize how important speed and certainty is and the trust and track record we have built over decades is what differentiates Quanta. Quanta's core strategy remains grounded in craft-skilled labor, execution certainty and disciplined capital deployment. Craft is built over time, and we prioritize that investment for well over a decade. We self-perform 80% to 85% of our work, which is what allows us to deliver on time and on budget at scale. That certainty, quarter after quarter and year after year is what our customers count on, is what has produced record adjusted EPS for the last nine consecutive years and why our customers keep asking us to do more. As a result of our strong first half, improved visibility into the remainder of the year and expected contributions from the acquisitions announced this morning, we are significantly increasing our full year 2026 financial expectations across all metrics. The record backlog we reported reflects the demand in front of us, but we're still in the early stages. The larger programs across the utility, generation and technology load center markets are ahead of us, and we expect them to stack in the years to come. In many ways, we are just getting started. We remain focused on executing for our customers' success, deploying capital with discipline and compounding earnings and shareholder value over the long term. I will now turn the call over to Jayshree Desai, Quanta's CFO, to provide a few remarks about our results and 2026 guidance, and then we will take your questions. Jayshree?
Thanks, Duke, and good morning, everyone. This morning, we reported historically strong second quarter results with revenues of $9.6 billion, net income attributable to common stock of $451 million or $2.96 per diluted share, adjusted diluted earnings per share of $4.24 and adjusted EBITDA of $1.1 billion. Those results included approximately $11 million of adjusted EBITDA from acquisitions made during the second quarter. The performance in the first half of 2026 exceeded our initial expectations, led by the strength of our end markets and our strategies in action. The versatility of our workforce and our customer-centric delivery model are translating to greater scope, better resource utilization, elevated revenues and improved margins. And our customers are increasingly recognizing how the breadth of our capabilities can contribute to their success as evidenced by another quarter of record backlog. Given the strength of our first half performance, improved visibility into the second half and expected contributions from recent acquisitions, we are raising our full year financial expectations. We now expect revenues to range between $39.3 billion and $39.7 billion, adjusted EBITDA to range between $4.1 billion and $4.2 billion, adjusted EPS to range between $16.45 and $16.95, and free cash flow to range between $2 billion and $2.5 billion. As Duke described, subsequent to our first quarter earnings release, we acquired four companies for approximately $1.24 billion of upfront consideration, net of cash acquired, plus approximately $242 million of contingent consideration that can be earned based on financial performance in the years following the closing. Included within our increased full year financial expectations are $1.2 billion to $1.4 billion of revenues and $120 million to $140 million of adjusted EBITDA from these acquisitions. Importantly, as evidenced by the ratings upgrade by Moody's, our balance sheet and credit profile strengthened even as we deploy capital on the aforementioned acquisitions. As calculated under our senior credit agreement, at the end of the second quarter, our debt-to-EBITDA ratio improved to 1.7, down from 1.95 at the end of 2025, and we had total liquidity of approximately $2.8 billion. The larger programs, broader service offerings and multiyear commitments we're negotiating every day are a direct reflection of the trust our customers place in our ability to execute at scale. Combined with the disciplined way we're allocating capital across our strategic initiatives, we believe we're well positioned to keep converting that trust into durable, attractive returns for our shareholders. Additional detail and commentary on our 2026 financial guidance can be found in our operational and financial commentary and outlook expectation summary, both available on our Investor Relations website. With that, we're happy to take your questions.
分析師問答
Your first question comes from Steven Fisher with UBS.
Can you hear me? Sorry about that. Just was saying congrats on the strong beats across your business in the quarter. But maybe focusing on the strong margin performance. I know you've been, Duke, a little bit reserved and Jayshree on the margin upside messaging. I guess, to what extent are you now thinking maybe a little bit more positively longer term about the margin potential here as you have more self-perform and you've got more large load projects becoming more of the mix? I guess, any reason why that wouldn't add to some margin upside over the longer term?
Yes, now we can.
Yes. Thanks, Steve. Thanks for the comments about the quarter. I think when we're looking at the margin profile, we said the UI segment had some room, and we felt like it would move up. The businesses that we've acquired, how we look at that business today, the risk we're willing to take, certainly is moving that profile up, and you're seeing that in the quarter. And I believe you'll see that on a go-forward basis. So that moved up electric as well. I think we moved that up as well on the backside. Look, structurally, fundamentally, the business has changed. We're seeing it change. We have two addressable TAMs, both of which are growing. That mix, we're looking at it constantly to make sure that we're giving you good, prudent guidance. Yes, I do think we posted a real nice quarter. We were prudent in the guidance that we gave you in the back half. You're seeing synergies show up. We're seeing a lot of book-to-burn. So I do believe there is some room in the margins in the backside. We took a prudent approach to it. We take everything into account — claims, northern climates and weather. We take project slips and other risks, and all that's already baked into our numbers. So yes, I think there's upside in the back half. As we see the work mix and the mix in the electric segment, it's a big segment. So we have to really take into account everything in there. And I think we've done a nice job of that. I do think there's room for margin improvement in the backside. We've always said that the electric segment has the ability to operate 10% to 12% on the utility side; 12% would be the utmost margins that you would see. And that's when you stack in large transmission and all aspects at once. So you get full utilization. You're also training a lot of people. We've added about 15,500 people over the year, of which approximately 8,000 are organic. So a significant amount of training is underway. We're getting better at training, and if we get better at training, we can get scale out of that as well. I do think we have the ability to improve margins. It's still something we're trying to compound. We have ratepayers on the utility side. It's very much regulated. And so that said, we're doing a nice job on the technology TAM, and we're also getting some synergies out of our training and getting people to the field. So super happy with where we're at.
Your next question will come from Julien Dumoulin-Smith with Jefferies.
Hopefully, you can hear me okay. Just wanted to ask, one, we've seen a large utility in the Midwest recently indicate for at least for their gas generation RFP that they're electing to self-perform because there's inadequate resources. Again, given this backdrop, how do you think about your willingness to participate in the gas generation side of the business? Obviously, we saw a press release from you guys on NiSource earlier. How do you think about leaning further into that? And what would that look like inasmuch as a JV structure is not obvious? I'm curious for your thoughts about the EPC or EPCM?
Yes. No, look, Julien, we're seeing the same thing. I do think some utilities are trying to self-perform. Yes, it sounds easy. It's not. We know the risk. We know the risk of the people that we need to employ. Our craft-skilled labor is there. We're doing a nice job of building that business. It's something meaningful in the future. As far as the robust nature of EPC on generation, not only in front of the meter but also behind the meter, we're on both sides of that. We're seeing small engines, big engines, all types of generation, and we're installing EPC in it. I like the business. We're just not willing to take the risk on the large combined cycle side and some of the single-cycle engines unless we can get the type of contracts that make the risk profile acceptable. If we can get the contract protections we need, we'll do it. The inbound work and asks from our customers — we did mention NiSource — I do believe a significant amount of that will go into backlog in the third quarter. That's moving nicely. There are other opportunities in that part of the world that will continue to compound. And not only them, but every customer we have, we're working with them on their capital plans to build both generation and T&D.
Guys, appreciate it. Just a quick one on the technology side. Can you speak a little bit to how you're scaling that business? Are you — is this just land and expand with existing customers? What exactly is going on within the details, if you can? Obviously, it's a nascent business model for folks, you've got a lot of new entrants. Just curious, do you have a lot of interest relationships you're hearing about out there. How much of this is new customers and new platforms? And what are you going to do from a strategic M&A perspective to continue to build this business, too?
A lot to that. When we thought about it and when we acquired Cupertino, we acquired a platform. We talked about the technology customers that we thought we could take our collaborative approach to and build another TAM that's every bit as big as our utility TAM. We're doing that. It's showing up direct to the hyperscalers, direct to the larger customers; we show our collaborative, self-perform capabilities — we show up, we're on time, we're certain. And that's leading to balance-of-plant type builds in multiple areas. Call it 80% of what a data center build is, less chips — maybe 90% in some cases. We have the abilities to do that. As people see that we're certain and our projects are on time and on budget and self-perform, more and more addressable market comes our way. We like what we see; the collaborative nature works. We talk about synergies a lot, and we don't put them into our guidance, but you can see from the quarter they show up. We're crossing labor across T&D as well as into data centers with our people. You can see the queues on the utility side of substations. We're right in the middle of that interconnection challenge. Interconnection is difficult, and we're right in the middle of that. The interconnection along vertical supply chains and the various strategies we've discussed are showing up and the synergies are right there. So I do believe, Julien, as we look at technology, we're, in a collaborative way, helping customers be certain on not only cost but getting it done on time. So we really like where we sit.
Your next question will come from Chad Dillard with Bernstein.
So my question is on the modular and prefab side of the business. It's increasingly clear that you guys are investing in that organically and inorganically. So I'd be curious to hear what share of your RFPs have that capability? And how do you think about that over the next five years? And maybe you can talk about just the labor cost savings that you see when you deliver that and to the extent to which you can value-based price with your customers on that?
Yes. We talked about having seven million square feet of fabrication, and we just added, call it, 0.5 million square feet with the acquisitions we've made. So yes, we're adding to that. We've always done some fabrication, but this integrated fabrication we're doing is different. It's a solution-based approach. It has a lot of VDC engineering and a lot of technology in front of it. We can really design from a construction perspective and work with the client on what they're trying to accomplish — less water, closed-loop systems, no water, and other innovations — and we can work with the client upfront. I think we have some of the best engineers in the world because they've been in the field and they know how to construct. That allows us to really lean into these projects and become much more efficient if we work in a collaborative manner with our clients, much like we've done with AEP on 765. If we can do that, the benefits of fabrication are exponential. Whether it's cost less or more depends, but it can cost less overall because it's less people in some cases, depending on logistics. Logistics cost can be significant, so you need to be close to where you're building. The acquisition of Phalcon really gives us a lot of opportunity in the East and in fabrication in the East. Being inside allows more certain outcomes and the engineering in front of it allows the cost to come down. The more collaborative the client is with us, the more the total cost goes down significantly for them.
Great. That's helpful. And then have you started to see RFPs for 800-volt work yet? When is that starting? And just from a labor standpoint, is there any difference in complexity, the mix of labor force or even the use of modular when you're shifting from 54-volt to 800-volt architecture?
I'll just say it this way: we haven't seen it show up yet. We're in the middle of engineering with it and we're all over it from the high-voltage side as well as equipment. Anything complicated, anything with a higher voltage — the higher the voltage, the better for Quanta. We love complicated high-voltage infrastructure; the more the better.
Your next question will come from Justin Hauke with Baird.
Great. I just got one — obviously, there's a lot of positives on this quarter, but one to stand out as well was the free cash flow. I just wanted to ask, are you seeing changes in kind of prepayments or other things that are favorable to working capital from some of these large load customers that maybe it's a sustainable dynamic that improves the free cash flow conversion over time? Or is it kind of just a one-off here this quarter?
Justin, we're very pleased with what's happening with free cash flow in our business. The first half of the year was very strong. I think it's a real testament to the operators and how well they're performing. We are getting favorable contracting terms across the business. But the growth of the MEP business, our EPC business and our renewables business is contributing to that free cash flow growth. So we believe that we're going to continue to see those types of factors coming into our free cash flow profile. It's improving our working capital as you said. Having said that, we do think the right way to think about our business continues to be that conversion rate of around 55%. I talked about it at Investor Day that we have the opportunities to be higher than that, 55% to 60%. Do I believe that we can be at the high end of that even this year and going forward? I do. And I think there's opportunities even to beat it. But growth — where the growth comes from matters. The strong utility business continuing to grow in the back end has a slightly different working capital profile, and it can pressure free cash flow. We've taken all that into account in our guide. But I think you can expect, Justin, that we have real abilities to be at the high end of those free cash flow ranges and even better.
Your next question will come from Sangita Jain with KeyBanc.
Can I ask one on Percheron, if I'm pronouncing that right, the acquisition that you made? How much of the revenue that they do is already revenue from Quanta and how much is third party? And as you bring it in, are you going to focus it more on just working for Quanta? And then does this allow you to do more front-end work with data centers? Or is it purely just a T&D type operation?
Thank you, Sangita. Percheron is primarily right-of-way and land acquisition and related services. Very little, if any, of their revenue was previously Quanta revenue. It's largely third-party. Their customer base includes utilities and hyperscalers, so both sides. From our standpoint, anything that helps our field forces move forward or that allows us to collaborate with the client on constructability we want as part of the solution. Percheron will allow us to provide a unique solution to clients on the front end — helping on routes, permitting and land acquisition — so we can move faster and more economically to get people in the field for both technology pipeline and utility T&D. We're super proud of the company, and we believe we can grow it exponentially with endless synergies.
Our next question will come from Nick Amicucci with Evercore ISI.
I just had a quick one, too. Given the obviously strong organic performance within the quarter, I wanted to see if we could kind of break that out; was there any kind of pull-forward of timing or weather implications within there given more of a mild spring season?
No, you bring up a good point on seasonality. We used to have a much more pronounced seasonality in the business. With being inside and having electricians and fabrication facilities in more places, you'll see seasonality level out between the second and fourth quarters; it won't be as pronounced as it was in the past. As far as pull-in, nothing was pulled in that I'm aware of. What is happening is we're getting on sites and people are starting to see us perform and they're asking for more services immediately. We may book and bill $300 million on a site in a quarter and you never see it show up in backlog. That's part of MEP. That book-and-burn is prevalent and will continue because we capture more balance-of-plant opportunities and full-scale data center opportunities. You'll see us on quite a few sites in the future.
Our next question will come from Adam Thalhimer with Thompson, Davis.
Congrats on another great quarter and a great year-to-date. Duke, I wanted to dial in on your traditional T&D business. How would you say that's trending versus your initial expectations at the beginning of the year? And then I wanted to get an update on your long-term expectations from electric utility customers?
I think we're right on target. We haven't yet seen the compounding effect from the big projects — most of the larger projects are not yet in backlog. Even the generation work, most of it is not in backlog. Those big projects — 765 corridors, 345, 500 kV work — are just starting; a lot of it's in engineering now. You'll start to see it hit backlog in the later half of the year and into next year, and we expect those big programs to stack in the years to come. It's a long-term build well past 2030 on both sides of the business. We see those projects today; they'll show up in backlog and we'll go to the field, call it, second half of 2027. The compounding stacking effect will start to hit the backlog. I continue to expect record backlog into the third and probably even into the fourth quarter. Right now, the business is performing well and we're seeing what I would call double-digit-type growth in many areas, and it will get greater as big programs compound. We're in the early stages and it will take time, similar to the big-project cycles we've seen in the past.
Your next question will come from Liam Burke with B. Riley Securities.
Duke, just a quick follow-on on your longer-term planning on the electric side. Going back to the backlog, your backlog, similar to what you discussed last quarter, is it more broadly based across the businesses rather than you bringing in these larger projects?
That's right. The backlog is broad-based. You will also see some lumpy quarters where you bring in large chunks of project awards — 1:1, 1:2, or 1:5, 1:6 — as big projects are added. We saw that with the 765 project last quarter, which was a big boost. It won't be straight line; you'll get lumpy quarters, but lower lows and higher highs across the period. Timing on large work is difficult to predict; it takes time, and we're in LNTPs and receiving verbals with many clients in a collaborative way. I'm pleased with the collaboration the company is doing and how we're helping clients reduce cost to the ratepayer and deliver certainty.
Your next question will come from Philip Shen with ROTH Capital Partners.
Congrats, again, on the strong results. I wanted to check in with you on the recent New York state ban or pause on data centers. We published recently that we could see as many as 10 more states pursue data center bans or pauses by the end of this year. What are your thoughts on this potential risk? How could it impact your business? And then when you add data center work to your backlog, have these projects been cleared of all permitting, environmental approvals, community support? I'm guessing the answer is yes, but just wondering if some of these state bans or pauses could take some of the projects out of backlog.
Sure. A couple of things. First, the technology segment represents roughly 15% to 20% of our business — a spectrum that includes data centers and other chip and manufacturing work. That's not a huge piece relative to the whole company, and it's grown to that range over the last two years, which is significant. We've built a substantial business already and have a long runway. The quality of the companies we've acquired has been excellent. Regarding New York, we haven't seen much built there historically because it's difficult to build in New York. A moratorium in New York doesn't worry me. I do hope we can get enough power to continue to keep the lights on in regions like PJM. More broadly, I think the discussion about water and local impacts on data centers misses a lot of benefits: in rural areas, data center investments have improved local economies, increased wages for teachers and others, and provided long-term jobs. Designs today can use less water, and we should be doing a better job talking about the benefits of these projects, including national security and economic development. It reminds me of past rhetoric about fracking; there are trade-offs, but there are real community benefits. We're not seeing a shortage of places to work and build. We're moving forward and working locally to provide jobs. As long as we can communicate the benefits and structure projects responsibly, I like where this is going.
Phil, on backlog treatment, we take those considerations into account. The way we treat backlog is consistent across our businesses — T&D, generation and data center work. On the data center side, we tend to include in backlog only those elements that have LNTPs; we don't include projects until the project is a go. So you can be confident in what we have in backlog as a result.
Yes, and we're seeing multiyear projects as well. We're out well beyond 2030 on some engagements.
Your next question will come from Alex Rygiel with Texas Capital Securities.
Great quarter. Could you speak a bit more about underground and infrastructure, and in particular, pipelines? Are you seeing any green shoots develop?
Yes. We certainly have opportunities. We booked some Canada work in the quarter with ATCO, which was a nice win. I think we'll book more in Canada. Opportunities in the later half of 2026 and 2027 are developing; that business is improving. We typically think about a mid-range and we will re-evaluate how to reflect it in our guidance, but the pipeline work and generation-related pipe feed give us bundling opportunities. Our project management teams and assets on the generation side can be used to support pipeline work as well. The solution-based approach on the technology side applies to pipeline too and gives us opportunity to do unique things with pipe.
And Jayshree, earlier you mentioned contract terms have improved. Can you expand upon that a little bit? In particular, how have they changed across various end markets?
We're seeing improved contracting and favorable cash flow terms across our businesses, including renewables, MEP and EPC work. MEP, renewables and EPC work on the traditional side tends to have the more pronounced favorable working capital profile, and that is getting baked in. This improvement is reflected across our business, not just in certain markets. We're focused on compounding and growing with our customers, and contracting terms reflect that collaborative approach. While we're not trying to take advantage of customers, the terms allow us to be confident in our execution and deliver for them in the right manner.
Your next question will come from Brian Brophy with Stifel.
Congrats on a really great quarter. There was a meaningful uplift in the technology and large load outlook. Curious if there were any notable large bookings on the integrated fabrication part of the business in the quarter? And if that was a core driver of the upside? Or is it more broad-based in MEP?
I think it's broad-based. The MEP business is growing faster percentage-wise, but the whole outlook moved up. Both segments are pushing upward. Our renewables business moved up nicely. I'd say many areas are showing double-digit growth, with some areas much higher. So the upside was broad-based across our portfolio.
Appreciate it. And then just one quick one, if you wouldn't mind. Did you see any notable SunZia closeout benefits in the quarter or anything that was more onetime?
No. Closeouts happen all the time given our size, and you'll have projects close out and projects start. There was nothing one-time in our quarterly results.
I do like it when closeouts go up, though. But in general, they're typical and in the normal course.
Your next question will come from Joseph Osha with Guggenheim Partners.
So Duke, you've been adding manufacturing capabilities in a couple of areas, transformers. You bought a utility pole company. I'm wondering if there are other areas that you're thinking about in terms of where you might want to add capabilities.
We did the breaker deal with HICO, which I thought was a critical path for us; high-voltage breakers are difficult to get. You've seen us build and partner in that vertical supply chain. Anywhere there's underinvestment or a critical path where capital investment can move delivery forward, that's an area we look at. We work with clients on innovation, R&D and vertical supply-chain investments. We've made selective investments in those areas and believe it shows up in synergies. We'll continue to be selective and invest where it helps execution and delivery.
We see a lot of people buying EBOS companies. Is that something that you think might be a good fit for Quanta?
We're not specifically looking at EBOS companies today. They may be components of solutions, but the core of our business is craft-skilled labor and delivering solutions in the field. If EBOS or similar capabilities fit into that solution, we would consider them, but it's not a primary focus right now.
Our next question will come from Jamie Cook, Truist.
Congrats on another fantastic quarter. Can you hear me?
Yes. Thank you.
I've been asking you about your underground margins for years. Finally, it sounds these margins are really starting to improve. With some of these acquisitions and structural improvements you're making, is there a path over time for your underground margins to approach the electric business? Or is that off base?
There's always opportunity; it depends on the work mix and risk profile. Some margins can be pulled up depending on the work and the fabrication content. We're focused on getting underground margins into double digits first, and then we can pursue parity with the electric margins. Some labor is fungible and can move across segments, which helps. So yes, there's a path to move underground margins toward electric, but it depends on mix and risk.
Your next question comes from Michael Dudas with Vertical Research Partners.
Duke, what's your sense of how far out your customers are asking to secure specialized craft labor? How has that changed in the last 12 to 18 months? Do you anticipate customers getting tighter and requiring more advance allocation of resources?
We're nowhere near capacity. There's been concern about capacity, but we've added about 15,000 employees this year, a significant portion organically. It takes about four years to develop a craftsman or journeyman, and we've invested heavily in training — roughly $250 million a year — for more than a decade. Customers are planning out several years; we're aligned with their capital plans which are typically five to seven years out. We're working collaboratively with customers on those plans and seeing decade-plus arrangements. So while customers are planning further out, we have the training footprint, recruitment and development in place and don't see near-term oversupply or capacity constraints for our operations.
Your next question will come from Maheep Mandloi with Mizuho.
Where are you seeing the bottlenecks as you go into data centers or for generation and transmission distribution? Is it still the craft labor? Is there a scenario where you foresee potential competition and oversupply on that aspect a few years down the line where labor might come from other industries with more training or more automation?
We're not seeing oversupply of craft-skilled labor in the near term. It takes multiple years to make a craftsman; more years of experience increases productivity. Bottlenecks can exist in generation to some degree; building combined cycles and other large generation projects at scale and pace is technically challenging and requires capacity. We're building those capabilities, and our generation business is growing. Data centers often want to interconnect to the grid at some point; utilities handle grid balance and interconnection better than anyone. So the queue to interconnect can be a bottleneck. Some lead times are long — ordering engines today may mean five or six years before they're delivered — which speaks to the longevity of the pipeline. Overall, utilities are in a growth mode after underinvestment, and we're well-positioned to serve both sides of the grid and generation needs.
Your next question will come from Andy Kaplowitz with Citigroup.
Duke, you just added like 10% more employees to the Quanta family again in one quarter through acquisitions. Do you worry at some point about the acquisition flywheel moving too fast and maybe it could hurt underlying performance? Or can you keep the recent acquisition trajectory up?
We're buying great companies, many of them long-established family businesses with strong management and culture. Cultural fit is the most important criterion for us, and we only do deals that align with our culture and strategy. Some discussions take years; others close when timing aligns. Last quarter we did zero acquisitions; this quarter we did four. There's no shortage of owners wanting to join Quanta because of the opportunities we can provide. We're focused on integration, protecting legacies, keeping management teams, creating opportunities for craft employees and ensuring cultural alignment. We remain disciplined and selective.
Your next question will come from Chris Tsung with Wolfe Research.
On the acquisitions, can you give us the annualized EBITDA run rate? Are both purchase multiples you underwrote — the $120 million to $140 million contribution seems like it's just a partial year, and I just want to make sure we're comparing it correctly with the purchase price.
You can annualize the contribution. The figures we gave reflect roughly six to seven months of contribution. Annualizing that will give you a sense of the run rate.
Our last question comes from Alexa Petrick Breno from Goldman Sachs.
The guidance revision this quarter was notable. Can you talk more about the drivers of that revision? What are you seeing in the market and in your backlog that gives you confidence in this new guide?
The revision was driven by broad-based strength across the business. Headcount is moving up, and both electric and gas are contributing. We are seeing synergies and more balance-of-plant work on the technology side, not just data centers but manufacturing and semiconductor plants and onshoring. T&D is growing nicely. Renewables set records and are performing well. The guide reflects broad-based improvement across segments. Larger generation and large transmission work will stack over time, and while that stacking hasn't fully started, you will start to see meaningful field activity in late 2027 and beyond. We're comfortable with the revised guide because it's based on visible demand, improved contracting terms and the strong execution we're delivering.
We have no more questions at this time. I will pass it back to the Quanta team for closing remarks.
Thank you. I want to again thank the 85,000-plus men and women in the field. Their sacrifices to build the infrastructure of tomorrow are noted, and we thank them. I also want to thank you for participating in our conference call. We appreciate your questions and ongoing interest in Quanta Services. Thank you. This concludes our call.