Timing note: Abbott is scheduled to report Thursday, July 16, 2026, before the U.S. market opens, followed by its earnings call at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. That is today, rather than tomorrow, based on the stated date.
Abbott enters the quarter with a depressed share price and a relatively skeptical investor base. The stock closed at $89.29 on July 15, down approximately 29% year to date, versus an approximately 11% gain for the S&P 500 ETF. At that price, ABT trades at roughly 16.3x the midpoint of management’s 2026 adjusted EPS guidance.
That creates an unusual setup: valuation and sentiment have reset substantially, but the operating bar is not necessarily low. Investors still need evidence that:
A result near consensus may stabilize the shares, but a meaningful rerating likely requires better second-half visibility—particularly in Nutrition, CGM and Exact Sciences.
| Metric | Current benchmark |
|---|---|
| Adjusted EPS | $1.28 Street estimate |
| Company Q2 adjusted EPS guidance | $1.25–$1.31 |
| Comparable/organic sales growth | Approximately 9.85% Street estimate |
| Rough revenue implied by that growth rate* | Approximately $13.1 billion |
| 2026 comparable sales-growth guidance | 6.5%–7.5% |
| 2026 adjusted EPS guidance | $5.38–$5.58 |
| Exact Sciences dilution included in guidance | Approximately $0.20 per share |
*A rough calculation applying the Street growth expectation to the combined Q2 2025 revenue base of Abbott and Exact Sciences. It is not a formal consensus-revenue figure.
The EPS consensus sits exactly at the midpoint of Abbott’s quarterly guidance. Therefore, the more important variables will probably be segment growth and any change to the full-year outlook, rather than a one- or two-cent EPS variance.
Abbott’s first-quarter results were broadly in line with management’s plan:
Management argued that Q1 represented the low point in Abbott’s growth cadence and reiterated expectations for acceleration through the remainder of 2026. Q2 is the first meaningful test of that assertion.
Nutrition is the most immediate execution problem.
Comparable Nutrition sales declined 9.1% in Q4 2025 and 7.7% in Q1 2026. The first-quarter weakness was broad:
Abbott cut prices selectively in late 2025 to improve affordability and stimulate volume. Management said Q1 data showed volume beginning to respond where lower prices had reached consumers, particularly for Ensure in the U.S. It also expects new products and expanded distribution to support improvement later in the year.
What investors need to see: The Nutrition segment does not necessarily have to return to growth in Q2, but its decline should narrow clearly. Another high-single-digit or double-digit contraction would undermine the expected second-half recovery and raise questions about pricing elasticity, competition and the segment’s strategic fit.
Key questions for the call:
Diabetes Care remains Abbott’s largest and most closely watched medical-device franchise. Q1 CGM sales reached approximately $2.0 billion, but comparable growth slowed to 7.6%, versus 19.6% organic growth in Q2 2025.
Management attributed Q1’s moderation to:
Abbott explicitly said it expected CGM growth to return to double digits in Q2. Failure to meet that commitment would be one of the report’s clearest negatives.
Longer term, management remains bullish because CGM penetration is still limited relative to the global diabetic population. Potential catalysts include broader coverage for non-insulin Type 2 diabetes, additional international reimbursement and new sensors, including a dual glucose-ketone product expected to receive approval in the second half of 2026.
The Q2 test: At least low-double-digit CGM growth, preferably accompanied by constructive commentary on U.S. prescription trends and international tender timing.
Abbott completed the approximately $20.6 billion acquisition of Exact Sciences on March 23, so Q2 will be the first full reporting period containing the acquired business.
Exact Sciences generated $811 million of revenue in Q2 2025, including:
The business was growing 16% at the time, led by Cologuard and Cologuard Plus. In Abbott’s Q1 comparable presentation, Cancer Diagnostics grew 13.4%, with Cologuard growing in the mid-teens.
Investors should focus on three things:
An Exact revenue result around $920 million–$940 million would represent roughly 13%–16% growth from the prior-year base and would likely be viewed as solid.
The call should also address the development and commercialization outlook for Cancerguard, Oncodetect and international cancer screening.
Medical Devices produced 8.5% comparable growth in Q1, led by:
The most important incremental catalyst is Electrophysiology. Abbott launched its Volt PFA catheter in the U.S. and TactiFlex Duo in Europe during Q1. Both began in limited-market release, with broader launches expected to drive acceleration.
Management believes the overall electrophysiology market is growing in the mid- to high teens and intends for Abbott to outgrow that market by year-end. Investors will look for evidence of:
Structural Heart is more mixed. International demand has been strong, but U.S. execution and increased competition in mitral products have pressured growth. Management continues to target high-single-digit full-year growth, making U.S. commercial progress another item to monitor.
Abbott’s existing 2026 outlook calls for:
The EPS range incorporates approximately $0.20 of dilution from Exact Sciences. At the Q1 call, management also assumed no recovery in respiratory-testing demand later in the year, making that portion of the forecast arguably conservative.
The problem is that the outlook depends on several businesses improving simultaneously:
A simple reiteration would be acceptable if Q2 operating trends are convincing. However, maintaining guidance while pushing the expected recovery further into Q4 would be less reassuring.
Core Lab grew 3.3% in Q1. U.S. growth was reportedly high single digits, Europe remained solid and China stabilized after severe pressure from volume-based procurement.
Management expects Core Lab growth to accelerate in the second half as China comparisons improve and U.S. share gains continue. Investors should look for growth approaching the mid-single digits and confirmation that China is no longer a material drag.
This business declined 9.6% in Q1 due to a weak respiratory season. Abbott did not assume that the shortfall would be recovered later in the year. The segment remains volatile and is unlikely to be the report’s primary value driver unless results materially miss expectations.
Established Pharmaceuticals grew 9.0% in Q1, with broad strength across Latin America and Asia-Pacific. This is one of Abbott’s more reliable businesses and should continue delivering high-single-digit growth. A meaningful slowdown would be unexpected and potentially signal macroeconomic or currency-related stress in emerging markets.
Q1’s adjusted gross margin was 56.3%, compared with 57.0% in Q2 2025. Abbott is balancing several moving pieces:
The acquisition also materially changed the balance sheet. Abbott funded most of the purchase with $20 billion of new long-term debt and intended to repay approximately $1.4 billion of remaining assumed Exact debt during 2026.
Investors should listen for:
Although Abbott still had $6.7 billion of authorization remaining under its buyback program at the end of Q1, deleveraging should logically take precedence in the near term.
This combination could support a meaningful rebound given ABT’s low valuation and severe year-to-date underperformance.
This would likely be sufficient to stabilize sentiment, although the size of any rally would depend heavily on management’s second-half commentary.
A miss centered on Nutrition or Libre would be more damaging than volatility in respiratory testing because those franchises are central to the long-term investment thesis.
The central question is not whether Abbott can meet the $1.28 EPS consensus. It is whether Q2 demonstrates that the company’s growth profile has genuinely begun to improve.
The most constructive combination would be:
With the stock down nearly 29% year to date, expectations around the long-term valuation have reset. But Q2 still needs to validate management’s promise of accelerating growth. The report is therefore best viewed as an execution and guidance event, rather than a simple quarterly EPS test.