What do Q2 2026 earnings calls from Kadant, Koppers, and Kinetik reveal about how industrial, chemicals, and midstream e

The short version

One size does not fit all. Kadant, Koppers, and Kinetik all faced cost pressure, but their full-year 2026 guidance moved in different directions. Kadant raised its revenue and profit targets [11][12]. Koppers narrowed its profit targets lower [57][58]. Kinetik raised both its profit guidance and its capital spending guidance [67][70]. The “delayed capital spending” theme mainly showed up in customer behavior: Kadant’s customers postponed large projects, Kinetik saw some 2026 producer activity deferred before it pulled forward again, and Koppers kept its own capital spending plan steady [13][29][77][78][79][60].

Kadant: a cautious raise

• Kadant’s Q2 2026 period ended July 4, 2026, and the earnings call followed on August 5, 2026 [1][2]. Revenue rose 23% to a record $313 million, bookings rose 16% to $312 million, and acquisitions plus record parts and consumables demand drove much of that growth [3][24]. Organic revenue grew 8%, while acquisitions added 13% [34].
• Kadant raised full-year 2026 revenue guidance to $1.190-$1.210 billion from $1.178-$1.203 billion [4][11] and adjusted EPS guidance to $12.43-$12.68 from $12.33-$12.68 [5][12]. The company also expected 2026 bookings to exceed 2025 bookings [28].
• The “but” was capital spending. Management said global capital equipment markets stayed soft, customers remained cautious, and quote-to-order times became longer because of trade policy, inflation, geopolitical conflicts, and input costs [7][9][14][26]. Large capital project releases were delayed, and capital equipment bookings fell 3% year over year [13][25]. Customers kept prioritizing maintenance and smaller incremental investments over big expansion projects [29][31]. Even so, quote activity stayed healthy, though the timing of large capital orders remained uncertain [36].
• Kadant’s own costs also pressed on margins. Gross margin fell 210 basis points to 43.8%, partly because of a higher mix of capital equipment revenue and acquisition-related inventory amortization [3][17][35]. Management expected that margin pressure to continue through 2026 [16]. Interest expense was expected to stay higher for the rest of 2026 because of borrowings used for the Kadant Profil acquisition [32]. Europe was another weak spot, with management describing stiff economic headwinds and weaker manufacturing that dampened Flow Control results [22].
• Kadant still treated the demand slowdown as a deferral rather than a loss [15][18]. Management described a 2.5-year “capital equipment investment recession,” but it expected improving capital spending in the second half of 2026 and into 2027 [19][21][23]. It expected stronger capital bookings in the second half, supported by large capital orders in the pipeline [27][30]. For its own spending, Kadant planned roughly $12 million to $16 million of property, plant, and equipment expenditures for the rest of 2026 [33].

Koppers: cost pressure pulled profit guidance lower

• Koppers’ initial 2026 guidance was net sales of $1.9-$2.0 billion, adjusted EBITDA of $250-$270 million, adjusted EPS of $4.20-$5.00, operating cash flow of $150-$170 million, and capital expenditures of $55 million [47][48][49][50].
• In the first quarter, Koppers revised that guidance because higher oil prices were expected to reduce profitability by up to $10 million, with competitive pressures and higher raw material costs also making things harder [37][43]. Adjusted EBITDA guidance became $240-$260 million, adjusted EPS became $3.80-$4.60, and operating cash flow guidance rose to $165-$185 million [38][39][42]. Net sales and capital expenditures stayed at $1.9-$2.0 billion and $55 million [40][41].
• In the second quarter, Koppers narrowed the ranges again: adjusted EBITDA to $240-$250 million and adjusted EPS to $3.80-$4.20 [57][58]. Net sales and capital expenditures were unchanged [59][60]. Management said the challenging margin environment would likely persist through 2026, input costs and freight would remain headwinds, and full-year profitability would probably land near the lower end of prior guidance [56].
• The problem was mainly cost, not demand volume. Q2 net sales rose 3.0% year over year [65], but adjusted EBITDA fell 7.9% to $71.0 million because of higher raw material costs, unfavorable pricing in the Railroad and Utility Products and Services business, higher freight and legal costs, and the impact of 2025 divestitures [62]. The Carbon Materials and Chemicals segment had already felt pressure from lower sales prices and higher operating and raw material costs in Q1 [44].
• Koppers leaned on its Catalyst cost program, which generated about $46 million in benefits in 2025 and was expected to offset market and cost headwinds [52][55]. It idled plants in Vance, Alabama and Florence, South Carolina, and accelerated the closure of the Stickney, Illinois plant [53][54][63]. Working capital and inventory initiatives were expected to support cash flow guidance [45][61]. Koppers also reported record year-to-date operating and free cash flow, which it used to reduce debt and return cash to shareholders [64].
• Koppers did not cut its capital spending plan in these updates. Capital expenditure guidance stayed at $55 million [41][60], and Q1 capital expenditures were $11.4 million versus $10.0 million a year earlier [46]. The broader 2026 strategy still called for normalized capital expenditures and record free cash flow [51][66].

Kinetik: guidance and capex moved up

• Kinetik originally guided 2026 adjusted EBITDA to $950 million-$1.05 billion and capital expenditures, including maintenance, to $450-$510 million [80][85]. In Q1, it affirmed both ranges [75][76].
• During Q1, however, Kinetik also raised its estimate of Waha price-related processed gas curtailments to about 220 Mmcf/d from an original assumption of about 100 Mmcf/d [77]. Gas price-sensitive customers had deferred some 2026 activity in response to negative Waha pricing, even though oil-weighted customers remained supported [78]. Some customers were pulling activity forward to early 2027, which Kinetik linked to new Permian egress capacity coming online [79].
• By Q2, Kinetik raised full-year 2026 adjusted EBITDA guidance to $1.04 billion-$1.1 billion [67]. The revised midpoint was about 7% above the original February 2026 guidance and roughly 15% above 2025 on a pro forma basis, meaning adjusted for the EPIC Crude divestiture [68]. Kinetik said the increase reflected first-half outperformance and higher expectations for the rest of the year [69].
• Kinetik also raised 2026 capital expenditure guidance, including maintenance, to approximately $560 million [70][71][86]. The drivers included the KLII project, accelerated producer development into late 2026 and early 2027, optimization projects, long-lead equipment procurement, and right-of-way procurement for an ECCC Pipeline expansion [71]. KLII was expected to cost about $260 million and complete in mid-2028, earlier than previously communicated [72]. The board also authorized long-lead equipment procurement for the next processing expansion beyond KLII [73].
• Kinetik said curtailments had eased and customer activity was pulling forward [74]. The ECCC Pipeline project remained on track for in-service during the second quarter of 2026 [84].
• Kinetik still flagged commodity price pressure and rising operating costs, along with producer development delays or accelerations and strategic project timing, as factors that could create variability in its guidance [81][82]. It expected continued volatility for much of 2026 but anticipated improving Waha Hub gas fundamentals as about 5 Bcf/d of new Permian natural gas takeaway capacity came online by early 2027 [83].

What the three updates show together

• Cost pressure was common to all three companies. Kadant saw margin and interest expense pressure [16][32], Koppers blamed raw materials, freight, and oil-driven costs [37][56][62], and Kinetik cited rising operating costs and commodity price pressure [81][82].
• Guidance responses were not uniform. Kadant’s aftermarket and acquisition strength allowed it to raise guidance [6][11][12]. Koppers’ cost pressure forced it to narrow profit guidance downward [37][57][58]. Kinetik’s strong operating performance allowed it to raise guidance and invest more [67][69][70].
• “Delayed capital spending” was not a one-size-fits-all story. Kadant’s customers delayed large purchases and favored maintenance [8][10][29]. Kinetik saw some 2026 activity deferred, then pulled forward into 2027 [77][78][79]. Koppers kept its own $55 million capital expenditure plan unchanged [41][60]. The same broad economic pressures therefore produced very different full-year guidance decisions depending on each company’s demand mix and customer behavior.