Timing clarification: Mondelēz is scheduled to release Q2 results today, Tuesday, July 28, 2026, at 4:05 p.m. ET, followed by its earnings call at 5:00 p.m. ET—not tomorrow. (ir.mondelezinternational.com)
The central question going into the report is whether Mondelēz’s business is progressing from price-led growth and heavy cocoa pressure toward better volume trends and earnings recovery.
Q1 was encouraging operationally: organic revenue grew 3.0%, emerging markets remained strong, and developed-market trends improved. But adjusted EPS fell 14.9% in constant currency as input inflation, unfavorable mix and increased brand investment compressed margins. Management maintained its full-year targets, citing geopolitical and energy-related costs while signaling that potential upside would probably be reinvested. (ir.mondelezinternational.com)
For Q2, investors appear prepared for modest organic growth and another year-over-year EPS decline. Consequently, the stock’s reaction should depend less on a small headline beat and more on:
| Metric | Q2 2026 expectation | Q2 2025 comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Adjusted EPS | $0.68 | $0.73 |
| Organic net revenue growth | ~1.0% | 5.6% |
| Latin America organic growth | Above 4% | 5.4% |
| AMEA organic growth | Above 4% | 8.6% |
| Europe organic growth | ~(1.6%) | 12.5% |
| North America organic growth | ~0.4% | (3.4%) |
The EPS estimate implies a decline of roughly 7%, an improvement from Q1’s 14.9% constant-currency contraction. Organic growth of approximately 1% would sit at the midpoint of management’s full-year 0%–2% range.
The regional comparisons are unusually important. Europe is lapping last year’s 12.5% price-heavy growth, while North America is facing a much easier comparison after declining 3.4% in Q2 2025.
Q1 organic growth consisted of 3.5 points of pricing and negative 0.5% volume/mix. That was better than the 1.5% volume/mix decline recorded in Q2 2025, but it still left MDLZ dependent on pricing.
Management entered Q2 expecting:
A good result would therefore be more than 1% organic growth. Investors will want to see that growth supported by stable or improving volume/mix, particularly in developed markets.
A result driven primarily by another round of pricing, with volumes weakening again, would be lower quality—even if reported revenue beats expectations.
Europe is likely to be the report’s most closely watched segment. Q1 organic sales declined 0.6%, with pricing of 2.6% offset by a 3.2% volume/mix decline. Management nevertheless said retailer negotiations were largely completed, Easter execution was strong and chocolate share trends had begun improving.
The Street expects Q2 organic sales to decline around 1.6%, reflecting a very difficult comparison against last year’s cocoa-related pricing.
The key questions are:
A modest European sales decline accompanied by better volumes and shares could be received positively. A deeper decline caused by elasticity or weaker category demand would challenge management’s recovery narrative.
North America grew only 0.5% organically in Q1, with volume/mix down 0.4%. Management expects improvement despite subdued U.S. snack categories, arguing that MDLZ can gain share through:
Consensus calls for approximately 0.4% Q2 growth. That is not a demanding absolute target, although it represents a meaningful improvement from the 3.4% decline a year ago.
Investors should focus on whether the business has turned positive without relying on aggressive promotions. Commentary on Oreo will also matter because management acknowledged that its first-quarter limited-time offer underperformed the prior-year launch.
Emerging markets account for roughly 40% of the company and grew 6.3% organically in Q1, including positive volume/mix. Performance was especially strong in China, India and Brazil, while Mexico was softer.
The Street expects Latin America and AMEA each to grow more than 4% in Q2. Important indicators include:
Strong emerging-market results could offset developed-market softness, but investors will distinguish between sustainable volume/distribution gains and inflation-driven pricing in highly inflationary markets.
Q1 adjusted gross margin fell 270 basis points to 30.7%, while adjusted operating margin declined 310 basis points to 11.7%. Higher input costs, negative mix, increased advertising and higher overhead more than offset pricing and productivity.
Q2 2025 provides an easier but still demanding comparison:
The main issue is the lag between cocoa costs and pricing. Even though spot cocoa has eased substantially from prior highs, MDLZ’s reported costs reflect prior hedging and inventory positions. Management said in April that the industry had extended cocoa coverage and that MDLZ remained protected on several other inputs. Lower cocoa prices are therefore more relevant to 2027 earnings potential than to an immediate Q2 windfall.
A constructive report would show:
Investors should be cautious about GAAP margin and EPS volatility because mark-to-market changes in commodity and currency hedges can produce large reported adjustments. Adjusted results remain the better measure of underlying performance.
Current 2026 guidance is:
| Metric | 2026 outlook |
|---|---|
| Organic net revenue growth | 0%–2% |
| Adjusted EPS growth, constant currency | 0%–5% |
| Free cash flow | Approximately $3 billion |
| Estimated currency benefit at Q1 rates | ~2 points to revenue; $0.06 to EPS |
Management said Q1 came in ahead of its expectations but retained guidance because of geopolitical costs and its desire to reinvest upside in brands and growth initiatives. That makes an outright guidance increase less likely unless Q2 is particularly strong.
The quality and confidence level behind a guidance reaffirmation may matter more than whether management changes the numerical ranges.
Amit Banati became CFO on July 1, succeeding Luca Zaramella, who remains with the company as COO and now focuses on commercial operations, sales, marketing and supply chain.
The transition should provide continuity, but investors will listen for Banati’s initial views on:
This is unlikely to change the quarter’s fundamentals, but it could influence how investors assess management’s longer-term financial framework.
Through July 27, MDLZ had gained approximately 13% year to date, compared with roughly 10% for the Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR and 8% for the S&P 500. The shares were also about 4% above their April 28 pre-Q1-report close.
That relative strength suggests investors already give MDLZ some credit for improving volumes, lower future cocoa costs and stronger 2027 earnings. The setup is not excessively bullish, given weak sentiment toward packaged food generally, but the stock may require more than a narrow EPS beat to move materially higher.
In this scenario, the call’s discussion of margins and 2027 would probably determine the stock reaction.
The headline bar—approximately $0.68 of adjusted EPS and 1% organic growth—is manageable. But the more consequential test is whether MDLZ can demonstrate that developed-market volumes are turning while margin pressure begins to moderate.
The strongest report would combine resilient emerging markets with real North American and European volume improvement, allowing investors to look through another year-over-year EPS decline toward a more convincing 2027 recovery. Conversely, another quarter dominated by pricing, negative volumes and heavy margin compression would weaken the thesis that the worst of the cocoa shock is moving into the rearview mirror.