管理層發言
Good day, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by. Welcome to TFI International Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Please be advised that this conference call may contain statements that are forward-looking in nature and is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. I would also like to remind everyone that this conference call is being recorded on July 27, 2026. Joining us on the call today are Alain Bédard, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; and David Saperstein, Chief Financial Officer. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Alain Bédard. Thank you. Please go ahead.
Well, thank you, operator, and welcome, everyone, to our call this afternoon. TFI International reported stronger-than-expected quarterly results with adjusted diluted EPS of $1.85, exceeding our outlook range of $1.50 to $1.60 and up 38% year-over-year. All three of our business segments grew operating income by double digits, and we again produced solid free cash flow, which, as you know, is a long-standing priority of ours. Put simply, the investment we made during the recent slowdown, both in internal operations and strategic M&A, are beginning to benefit our performance. We now have a balanced and diverse portfolio of operating companies and attractive end markets, which we continue to serve while always maintaining our focus on efficiency and related operating principles. And of course, there are no better people than the hard-working employees of TFI to execute on our plan and capitalize on the resulting opportunities. The foundational support for TFI International's thoughtful approach to value creation, both in and out of cycles, begins with our strong balance sheet, which improved further during the quarter. We generated more than $200 million of free cash flow, further supporting our ability to strategically allocate capital and, very importantly, return excess capital to shareholders whenever possible, including close to $40 million in quarterly dividends paid during the quarter. So let's take a high-level look at our second quarter financial results. Starting with the top line: our total revenue before fuel surcharge of $1.9 billion was up 6% over the past year, while operating income climbed nearly 30% to $220 million. That reflects a margin of 11.6%, which was up more than 200 basis points relative to a 9.5% figure a year earlier. Also on a consolidated basis, our net cash from operating activity rose to $256 million from $247 million. Now let's dig deeper into each of our three segments, starting with LTL, which was 38% of our segmented revenue before fuel surcharge. We generated $725 million of LTL revenue before fuel surcharge, up 3% year-over-year. Our LTL adjusted operating ratio was 88.5% and operating income of $86 million was up a very solid 17%, producing a return on invested capital of 12%. Now let's move to our truckload, for which revenue before fuel surcharge came in at $761 million, up 7% over the past year and now representing 40% of our segmented total. Revenue per truck per week, excluding fuel surcharge, rose 13% year-over-year. We increased our brokerage revenue by 34% in addition to this. Our operating income of $106 million was up a very robust 50% from the prior year quarter, and our adjusted operating ratio of 86.1% improved by 400 basis points. Our return on invested capital for the truckload was 6.9%. Stepping back, as capacity has come out of the truckload sector, we've worked to reduce our own capital intensity and right-size equipment levels, creating significant operating leverage. We've also focused on optimizing our business mix and end market exposure, which now includes an attractive mix of flatbed and specialized expertise. Rounding out our segment discussion, Logistics revenue before fuel surcharge was up 10% year-over-year to $432 million, accounting now for 23% of the segmented total. Operating income expanded 32% to $50 million, reflecting an 11.5% margin, which was up nearly two percentage points versus the second quarter of 2025, and our return on invested capital was 13.3%. So before opening up for Q&A, let me discuss our balance sheet and provide our updated outlook. As I mentioned, we generated just over $200 million in free cash flow during the second quarter of the year and ended June with a funded debt-to-EBITDA ratio of 2.4, which has improved from 2.5 at the start of the year. Lastly, looking ahead for the third quarter results, we expect adjusted EPS of $1.70 to $1.80, which would represent a 50% year-over-year increase at the high end. We also expect year-over-year adjusted operating ratio improvement of 500 to 600 basis points in the Truckload segment, 250 to 350 basis points in the Logistics segment and a comparable operating ratio in the LTL segment. For the full year, we continue to expect net capital expenditures, excluding real estate, in the range of $225 million to $250 million, unchanged from previous expectations. As I do each quarter, our outlook range assumes no significant change, either positive or negative in the operating environment. And now, operator, if you could please open the line, both David and I will be happy to take questions.
分析師問答
Operator Instructions: To ask a question, please press star then one on your telephone keypad. Your first question comes from the line of Scott Group from Wolfe Research.
I wanted to start on the LTL business. I'm not sure if I heard right. Are you saying a flattish year-over-year margin in LTL? If that's right, maybe just talk through what you guys are seeing from a demand standpoint, service capacity standpoint and pricing standpoint?
Yes. The truckload market has changed tremendously over the last six to nine months because of U.S. regulatory and other actions that have reduced supply. However, the LTL market in the U.S., and similarly in Canada, remains very soft. There's no major improvement in demand there. That's why we're conservative and say we don't see a lot of major improvement in LTL versus what we can see in the truckload sector or the logistics sector.
Okay. So you're not seeing spill from truckload into LTL. It doesn't sound like you're seeing that. On the truckload side, you're saying meaningful improvement. Maybe talk about the pricing you're seeing in truckload and any differences between flatbed and some of the other parts?
That's a very good question. The pricing side of truckload is very impressive. We see it as mostly supply-driven rather than demand-driven. David, could you add to that?
Yes. On LTL, the reason margins are expected to be flat is because we have too much volume and not enough price, and that's what we're working on fixing. It's specific to us; it's clear what to do—we need to raise price and we're working on that. On truckload, dynamics are really good. We saw revenue per truck accelerate throughout the quarter: April was 11.1% revenue per truck per week year-over-year growth, increasing to 13.3% in May, and 14.4% in June. The dynamics are strong. For LTL, shipment count was up 7.5% in the quarter, but revenue per shipment before fuel was down 2%.
We're very proud of what our truckload team has accomplished. Our truckload operating ratio was above 90% in Q1, around 93%, and now it's down to 86.1%. That's quite an accomplishment, and the investment we made 2 years ago in the U.S. specialized truckload is starting to pay off.
Yes. Depreciation is down double digits now, and revenue is up. We're saving a fortune on equipment costs. Brokerage revenue was up 35% year-over-year.
This goes back to doing more with less rather than doing less with more.
Your next question comes from the line of Ravi Shanker from Morgan Stanley.
Alain and David, maybe if I can follow up on LTL: you said you have too much volume and not enough price. David, do you think that is something you can reset in one cycle? Or is it a multi-cycle process to get price where you want it? If it's multi-cycle, can you give a sense of how much you can do this cycle versus the next?
The pricing issues are concentrated in certain sectors, particularly blanket 3PL. We likely made a mistake there by being too cheap and got inundated with volume. SMB and corporate were not the issue. Our commercial team is working on fixing the blanket 3PL pricing now. We know the issue and are taking action. It shouldn't take many quarters; we're addressing it as we speak.
Understood. As a quick follow-up: are you getting more confidence in the cycle to maybe restore a full-year guide?
We hope to restore a full-year guide at some point. We are confident in the truckload cycle because the improvement is supply driven and thus has sustaining power. The delta will come from getting LTL to produce to its full potential.
We're sub-90 this quarter in LTL. We could be a lot more sub-90 if we fix pricing. This quarter had excess costs related to the surge in volume, which is not necessarily ongoing. We hope to come back to full-year guidance soon.
Your next question comes from the line of Jordan Alliger from Goldman Sachs.
Curious on LTL: with the pricing actions you're working on, would you expect tonnage to come down a bit as you work to repair price? On the flatbed side, are there pockets where demand is looking better? Any way to think about seasonality in the truckload/flatbed business from Q3 to Q4?
On flatbed, we are highly involved in wind, data centers, and industrial sectors. Steve, our Senior EVP, has created niche carriers within the former Daseke organization. For example, SPD on the West Coast moved from being a jack-of-all-trades to a niche carrier for aerospace with customers like Boeing and Bombardier. We see growth in aerospace, wind, data center, and steel. Our TSH group, which specializes in steel, is up roughly 20% to 25% year-over-year in revenue. Drywall remains weak due to housing demand. The team has created specialized business units within SFI Truckload to match competencies to market opportunities. Regarding the first part of your question on LTL volume, volume will come down a bit as we move pricing closer to market. We also need to fix service issues that arose due to the surge in volume and weather disruptions in Q1. Our mandate is clear for Kal and his team to address these items, and that will include dropping a few shipments to improve service and price.
We report revenue per truck, not miles per truck, because some specialized business is billed by the day rather than by mile. Revenue per tractor is up 13% and increased throughout the quarter to about 14.5% at exit. Regarding capacity, we're at capacity in truckload. In LTL, volume grew quickly and required extra spending: overtime, third-party carriers, etc. We currently have no spare capacity and are using pricing and brokerage actions to bring down the rate of growth.
Your next question comes from the line of Ken Hoexter from Bank of America.
Alain, can you talk about truckload pricing? Are you able to reprice right now given how much is contract versus spot? Where are you in the marketplace to reprice?
We're not a big player on the spot market. David, what's the split?
On the U.S. side, about 25% is spot.
Customers will seek to renegotiate when the market moves, contract or not. We've already had discussions with major customers and they understand the market shift. We're not hauling freight for the pleasure of hauling freight; we're focused on serving customers and making returns for shareholders.
Two things are going on in truckload: we're exposed to the right end markets, and the market is turning because of supply. Uniquely for us, depreciation expense dropped by $12.5 million this quarter while organic revenue is higher than last year. That gives us a large bottom-line benefit. The team has been optimizing truck deployment and brokering what we don't want to operate ourselves.
Remember, we bought Daseke in 2024 and inherited heavy CapEx. We had too much equipment in 2024 and still too much in 2025. Over the last 1.5 years with Steve and the team, we've adjusted our asset base to the business we want—highly profitable operations—often brokering freight we don't want to operate ourselves.
A follow-up on capacity: how much capacity do you have and utilization measured by revenue per tractor? On LTL with shipments up 8%, what excess capacity do you have? You've changed management with Kal. Are you culling the 3PL business or focusing on price? How should we think about capacity usage going forward?
We report revenue per truck and that metric is up 13%, exiting the quarter around 14.5%. In terms of capacity, we are at capacity. In LTL, we need to reduce volume because it rose so quickly that we had to spend on overtime and third-party capacity. We're raising price and working with brokers to slow growth.
Your next question comes from the line of Walter Spracklin from RBC Capital Markets.
David, Alain: a conceptual question on pricing durability. The drivers you mentioned—non-domiciled drivers, CDLs, English language proficiency, various regulatory moves—seem less easily reversible than past cycles. Looking back, do you feel this pricing has more stickiness and can hold longer? Can pricing be sustainable?
You're right. Historically, trucking profits were driven by demand and then faded, but this time it's supply-driven, which is different. The U.S. administration's actions targeting certain groups of drivers and safety issues make this supply constraint more permanent than I've seen in 30 years. On the Canadian side, the government is changing reporting for owner-operators, which is also improving the situation. Overall, I think this supply-driven change is more permanent than past cycles, which supports sustained improvements in truckload, though it doesn't apply equally to LTL or P&C.
Brokers are now careful to broker loads to well-capitalized, safety-focused carriers. The industry is being cleaned up and that results in better safety and normal rules being followed. No more cheating.
On capital plan: you're seeing growth in certain subsegments. Are you revisiting the net CapEx plan of $225 million to $250 million? Any opportunity to invest more to take advantage of subsectors?
So far, we're still within that net CapEx range. We're having more customer discussions. We've added a Chief Commercial Officer for U.S. truckload, Scott Hoppe, consolidating sales and commercial functions under a single leader, which is already producing benefits. That will help capture opportunities without necessarily increasing our CapEx range today.
Your next question comes from the line of Brian Ossenbeck from JPMorgan.
Wanted to understand changes to the LTL commercial team and how that ties with operations. With blanket pricing on 3PLs, you can adjust relatively quickly—what changes have you made or will you make to avoid being overwhelmed next time?
We focused on organic growth and got overwhelmed when pricing was too low. We've fixed that. We're implementing pricing software that many peers use, moving away from legacy pricing systems. We also have the finance team using AI to help make lane-by-lane, customer-by-customer decisions.
We now have tools to analyze massive spreadsheets—hundreds of thousands of lines—to isolate problematic lanes, freight, terminals and customers. That allows our pricing team to be surgical and act faster than in the past.
One cleanup question: you mentioned an incremental accident reserve of $10.5 million in the quarter. Does this recur? Is it a prior period adjustment? It stood out in the corporate line.
It's not recurring. We assess reserves every quarter and make adjustments as needed. Some companies wait until year-end; we do it every quarter. This reserve increase is not expected to recur.
Under Brandon and the new team, we've changed our approach to settle claims as soon as possible. That has been a deliberate shift in strategy.
From a business perspective, settling matters quickly is better. We've built a Miami-based in-house legal team managing claims and working with external counsel to drive faster resolutions. When you settle quickly, actuarial reserves can look high in the short term because you're taking care of things that won't come back later. Over time, those reserves should unwind in the opposite direction, reducing spend.
We also dispatch someone immediately to the scene of minor accidents with authority to settle on the spot, which reduces long-term claims costs. The problem with claims is they grow with time; settling early prevents escalation. We've settled roughly 200 cases on the spot so far.
So you've been doing this for a couple of years and feel you've hit an inflection in cleaning things up. Quarterly reserve adjustments may be smaller going forward, but it could still be lumpy.
This quarter's reserve increase is exceptional. We do not expect these types of movements every quarter.
Your next question comes from the line of Jason Seidl from TD Cowen.
David, Alain: you said spot TL exposure was about 25%. Does that include all heavy haul? That seems higher than I thought; Daseke legacy was about 5%.
No, that's the U.S. flatbed. The heavy haul and legacy specialized business in Canada is negligible.
It's the over-the-road flatbed, not the highly specialized tank or dumps.
Did you see any pull-forward into June and what are July trends?
June was a great month; May was a bit soft.
Through July to date, revenue per truck in truckload is about 14.5%, similar to June. In LTL, revenue per shipment is down less than the 2% we saw in the quarter, and shipment count is coming down. We're seeing the effect of price increases start to show as expected.
This effect is across the 3PL area. Corporate and SMB volumes and pricing are steady.
Your next question comes from the line of Konark Gupta from Scotiabank Capital.
On LTL: Q2 LTL OR was 88.5%, better than expected. You say flat in Q3, which implies around 88.8%. If you had high 3PL volumes and higher costs in Q2 and plan to address that in Q3, why wouldn't Q3 OR improve sequentially? Is it because it will take time to resolve or is there other noise in Q3?
Keep in mind the U.S. dollar versus the Canadian dollar. Our Canadian profits are impacted by exchange rates—the dollar was about $1.40 versus the average in Q2, which affects results. Fuel is another variable: our Canadian LTL and P&C businesses benefit from fuel tailwinds, but U.S. LTL and truckload do not. Our Canadian teams were conservative on fuel in their forecasting. Currency and fuel introduce caution into the Q3 outlook.
To clarify, the margin improvements we referenced in the press release and guidance are year-over-year numbers.
From a trend perspective, is the U.S. LTL operating ratio likely to show bigger improvement in coming quarters versus Canadian operating ratio because that's where service improvements are needed? Is that fair?
Yes, the biggest opportunity is in U.S. LTL. Our Canadian operations already run lean and efficient compared to peers. The U.S. business still needs work and is where we'll get more improvement.
How far are you from mid-80s in U.S. LTL? Is that a year away or six months?
I've been working with the team for five years, and each year brings different issues. We've fixed many things and are getting closer. We now have stability in the commercial team and improvements in fleet and asset management. Turning around a truckload operation has been easier and faster; turning around a large network LTL is harder, but we're making steady progress. We expect more corrections next quarter and beyond.
Your next question comes from the line of Thomas Wadewitz from UBS Financial.
On LTL and the brokerage/3PL piece: how much of the book in LTL is 3PL? Is it around 30% or bigger? Also, thinking to 2027, how do you expect truckload and LTL to develop? Truckload has seen good news this year—do you expect more significant runway in 2027 or more moderate? For LTL, pricing and margin recovery looks slower—how should we think about improvement in 2027?
On truckload, we're just starting. We've been converting legacy businesses into niche specialists. We will continue to consolidate systems—TMS and finance systems, fleet management and sales under one commercial leader, Scott Hoppe—so the work will continue into 2027. By Q1 2027 we should have completed many of these integrations. If the market stays the same and supply constraints remain, we could improve beyond an 86 OR; 80% to 83% OR could be possible. Brokerage revenue in specialty truckload is growing at about 35% with healthy margins. For LTL, we have a small nonunion U.S. LTL business of roughly 1,000 to 1,300 shipments a day, which we can build up over time by selectively adding density in states where we want to compete. TForce Freight is a large existing network and we will continue to improve it.
How large is the 3PL portion within LTL today?
It's over one-third. It ballooned to over one-third as volumes increased.
Do you think pricing up will cause significant loss of shipments as 3PLs shift around?
For 3PL customer-specific pricing (CSP), those agreements are stickier and won't move as much. The blanket agreements are more likely to shift because they were often awarded because we were the cheapest. Our CSPs are about 45% and blanket is about 55% of 3PL shipments. Thirty-three percent overall with 3PL is too much, and we're adjusting. Historically, companies used blanket as a loss leader in slow periods to retain staff, but we need to change the mix.
Your next question comes from the line of Kevin Chiang from CIBC.
In the last peak, Canadian truckload ORs got below 80%. With drivers-in model issues being addressed more aggressively by the federal government now, do you think Canadian TL margins can achieve a higher peak than the last cycle?
It's early, but certain sectors of Canadian truckload remain weak, such as steel and forest products, because we don't yet have a full trade resolution with the U.S. Aluminum is currently strong due to global supply issues, but steel and forest products present headwinds. So while some areas are improving, others will limit how high margins in aggregate can go until trade issues are resolved.
Your next question comes from the line of Bascome Majors from Stephens.
Where do you see the most opportunity for acquisitive M&A growth in the next year? Any sense of where you are likely to transact?
We like specialty truckload targets that fit well with our existing operations; Daseke was a good example. A small nonunion LTL of about $200 million revenue would be a great fit to accelerate our U.S. nonunion build. We are big fans of logistics as well—asset-light, highly profitable logistics assets are attractive. We've made many investments and grown through acquisitions historically; M&A is core to TFI's strategy. Our leverage is down to 2.4 and will approach 2.0 by year-end if we don't do anything of size, which positions us well to pursue meaningful acquisitions.
Your next question comes from the line of Ariel Rosa from Citigroup.
Clarification: does the Q3 U.S. LTL guide assume deterioration in the operating ratio there? And Basel, any updated thoughts on the M&A landscape and where value might be?
For Q3 U.S. LTL, we expect improved profitability versus Q2. On M&A, I always say buy bad news and sell good news. We invested $1.8 billion over the last three years. When M&A becomes more competitive, price can increase; what's important is fit. If you buy an asset that will materially grow profits in a couple of years, paying a bit more can still be attractive. Also, remember that buying your own stock is often the easiest use of capital. We balance buying opportunities, buying TFI shares and reducing leverage.
Thoughts on autonomous trucks and the development there? Any opportunities to leverage that in line-haul operations or is it far down the road?
We're discussing autonomous technology actively. David can add detail.
Autonomous trucks are very interesting for line-haul. We're talking with a major provider that has driven millions of miles and reported zero accidents. The benefits include extended driving hours, better fuel efficiency through smoother driving, improved utilization and reduced driver turnover issues. We're rolling out brokerage-to-autonomous arrangements this year and expect to own some of the technology next year. If it scales, it could be transformative. The initial focus is on line-haul in U.S. LTL and then broader rollouts depending on results. Adoption could drive consolidation toward well-capitalized players who can invest in this technology.
We are embracing that technology.
Your next question comes from the line of Cameron Doerksen from National Bank.
On logistics operating ratio improvement in Q3 year-over-year: how much is expected improvement driven by truck moving business? Is that more of a Q4 into 2027 story given OEM production plans?
Truck moving was lighter in the first half of 2026 versus the first half of 2025, but we expect the back half of 2026 to be busy and into 2027. The truck moving business will be very busy in the last six months of 2026 and into 2027.
Your next question comes from the line of Benoit Poirier from Desjardins.
Any thoughts whether tighter truckload market could eventually help LTL? When would you expect pricing actions in LTL to kick in materially?
Some peers in LTL are already seeing shipments move from truckload back to LTL as truckload tightness increases. We have not broadly seen that yet, but it could be starting. That shift would primarily affect van carriers more than our specialized truckload businesses.
There's discussion about renewed liability risk after a legal case against a broker. Any potential impact on your brokerage business?
Most of our Logistics segment is not brokerage; it is niche, asset-light businesses: last-mile, value-added warehousing, and more. For brokerage specifically, we'll enhance diligence where necessary, but we already have a serious safety review process for carriers. The judgment and regulatory environment will increase diligence across the industry, which benefits professional, well-capitalized carriers and brokers like us.
This may be a wake-up call for shippers to prefer partners with financial strength and lower risk rather than fly-by-night operators. That cleanup benefits legitimate providers.
Your next question comes from the line of Bruce Chan from Stifel.
On forestry and Canadian steel: there's been variability in trade and talk of new tariffs on Canadian goods. How might that affect volumes, and is anything baked into guidance? Are you seeing any inventory front-loading?
We are not seeing exceptional pre-buying or pre-shipping because of the implementation timeline. The next round of tariffs is significant for the Canadian economy, but for TFI's Canada-U.S. cross-border transport, there's no immediate operational issue beyond the existing headwinds in forestry and steel. We asked our Canadian folks to model conservatively and so far have not seen material pre-buying.
That concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now hand the call over to Mr. Bédard for any closing remarks.
Thank you again, everyone, for joining us and for your ongoing interest in TFI International. As we move through the back half of the year, we will keep you posted on our progress, and we look forward to seeing many of you at upcoming events. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any further questions, and I hope that you have a great evening. Thanks again.
Thank you. This concludes today's call. Thank you for participating. You may all disconnect.