Hawaiian Electric Industries Posts Higher Revenue, Operating Income, Net Income, and Diluted EPS Year-Over-Year

Bottom line

For the three-month period and the six-month year-to-date window covered by this filing, HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC INDUSTRIES INC (HE) reported higher revenue, higher operating income, and higher diluted earnings per share than the prior-year comparative periods. Net income attributable to the parent was also higher year-over-year on the six-month basis, with the current and prior periods both remaining in profit. All four headline metrics — revenue, operating income, net income, and diluted EPS — sit on the same direction (higher than the prior period) for both the quarter-over-quarter and, where reported, the year-to-date-over-year-to-date comparisons. That is the central takeaway before any driver discussion.

The reporting identity is the 10-Q filed for HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC INDUSTRIES INC under accession 0000354707-26-000054, with CIK 0000354707 and fiscal period period-ended-2026-06-30. The headline figures referenced above map to the following keys: Revenues for the three-month reporting period the three months ended June 30, 2026 and its prior-year comparative the three months ended June 30, 2025 are captured by $939,703,000 and $746,392,000, respectively; the same line for the six-month year-to-date period the six months ended June 30, 2026 and the comparative the six months ended June 30, 2025 is captured by $1,686,150,000 and $1,490,462,000. Operating Income (Loss) maps to $204,214,000, $53,747,000, $257,591,000, and $116,167,000. Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent maps to $153,650,000 and $53,702,000. Earnings Per Share, Diluted maps to $0.71 per diluted share, $0.15 per diluted share, $0.89 per diluted share, and $0.31 per diluted share.

Counter-evidence and unknowns: the filing evidence does not separately isolate a single quarter net-income figure in the FACT catalog for this section, so the quarter-over-quarter net-income direction cannot be asserted here — only the half-year net-income direction is supported by the catalog keys. The catalog also does not contain cash-flow statement values, segment-level breakdowns, share counts, or balance-sheet items for this section, so any claim about those dimensions is out of scope for this section's source. Likewise, peer or industry comparisons are not part of the filing evidence, so The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. applies for any reader asking how this stacks up against the broader utility sector or comparable Hawaii-regulated peers.

Management commentary included in the quoted filing material discusses forward-looking statements under cautionary-note language and defines glossary terms such as the Maui windstorm and wildfires and the renewable-procurement RFP stages, but those disclosures do not, on their own, attribute the year-over-year movement in revenue, operating income, net income, or diluted EPS to any single driver. Accordingly, The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. is the only causality statement appropriate for this section — the filing evidence does not attribute the change to any single cause. Analysts should treat the higher year-over-year headline numbers as a directional fact pending the release of management's full discussion of drivers in a subsequent section.

Source scope for this analysis is strictly the catalog keys listed above and the quoted filing text; any number that appears in the published version of this section is inserted by the machine from those keys, not typed here. Readers cross-checking the headline takeaway against the filing should rely on the line items mapped to the FACT keys in this section rather than on narrative extrapolation, and may wish to verify directional moves with a simple return-style tool such as the ROI Calculator.

Financial performance

- YOY — In the 10-Q filed by HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC INDUSTRIES INC (HE, CIK 0000354707, accession 0000354707-26-000054) for the six months ended June 30, 2026 versus the six months ended June 30, 2025, Revenues were $1,686,150,000 USD, higher than the prior-year comparative of $1,490,462,000 USD. Operating Income (Loss) was $257,591,000 USD, higher than the prior-year comparative of $116,167,000 USD. Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent was $153,650,000 USD, higher than the prior-year comparative of $53,702,000 USD.

31 per diluted share USD/SHARES. All four windows remained in profit on both sides of the comparison. The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.

- YOY — In the quarter, the three months ended June 30, 2026 versus the three months ended June 30, 2025, Revenues were $939,703,000 USD, higher than the prior-year comparative of $746,392,000 USD. Operating Income (Loss) was $204,214,000 USD, higher than the prior-year comparative of $53,747,000 USD. 15 per diluted share USD/SHARES.

Both periods again sat in profit territory. The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - QOQ — The filing evidence does not provide a sequentially-prior three-month window for the same fiscal year, so a quarter-versus-prior-quarter direction cannot be asserted here.

Readers modelling near-term momentum should use the ROI Calculator to stress-test scenarios built only from the year-over-year figures that the filing does disclose. - GUIDANCE — Management's cautionary note on forward-looking statements appears in the filing, but no quantified guidance, EPS range, revenue target, or capital-spending projection is supplied as a baseline in the cited evidence, so the machine cannot insert a numeric guidance anchor and none is asserted in prose. Forward-looking statements themselves are explicitly disclaimed as not guarantees of future performance.

- EXPECTATIONS — The cited note (Note 2) provides a total-expense reconciliation context but does not include an analyst expectations table. The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. Reporting against Item sequences Item 1, Item 1A, Item 2, Item 3, Item 4, Item 5 and Item 6 covers Legal Proceedings, Risk Factors, unregistered equity sales, market-risk disclosures, controls and procedures, other information and exhibits, but none of those Items anchors a quantified comparison baseline, so the only comparison baseline this section can defensibly report is the year-over-year set above.

Operating drivers and segments

For the three-month reporting period, Revenues were $939,703,000 USD and Operating Income (Loss) was $204,214,000 USD. For the prior-year comparative three-month window, Revenues were $746,392,000 USD and Operating Income (Loss) was $53,747,000 USD. The authorized year-over-year direction for Revenues on the three-month comparison is an increase; the authorized year-over-year direction for Operating Income (Loss) on the three-month comparison is also an increase. For the six-month year-to-date period, Revenues were $1,686,150,000 USD and Operating Income (Loss) was $257,591,000 USD, against Revenues of $1,490,462,000 USD and Operating Income (Loss) of $116,167,000 USD in the prior-year six-month window. The authorized year-over-year direction for Revenues on the six-month comparison is an increase; the authorized year-over-year direction for Operating Income (Loss) on the six-month comparison is an increase. The comparison windows are anchored to the three months ended June 30, 2026, the three months ended June 30, 2025, the six months ended June 30, 2026, and the six months ended June 30, 2025. The cited note in the filing groups together Other expense items that flow through the operating line, and the segment-level disclosure surrounding it does not separate the contribution of each line item in a way that would let an outside reader rebuild an operating-margin bridge.

Management's discussion of operating drivers in this filing is framed almost entirely around risk-factor language rather than around a discrete quarter narrative. The quoted source narrative enumerates exposures — federal and state policy shifts on immigration and trade, citizen activism, sustainability priorities spanning safety, reliability and resilience, wildfires and extreme weather, decarbonization, economic health and affordability, secure digitalization, human capital management and climate-related risks, and the actions or inaction of the U.S. government — but it does not translate any of these into a quantified segment-level driver for the current quarter or half. The Maui windstorm and wildfires of August are referenced as a defining event that continues to shape the risk register, and Hawaiian Electric's sustainability priority areas are described in broad terms. No management comment in the quoted evidence isolates which of these threads moved the three-month or six-month revenue line or the operating-income line on a year-over-year basis, and no segment is broken out by management contribution margin. Readers looking for a clean segment narrative will not find one in this portion of the filing.

The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause.

Cash flow and capital

- Operating cash flow shifted to a use of cash rather than the prior-year source for the six-month year-to-date window, a swing in sign that stands out against the otherwise stable profile of the statement. - Investing cash flow remained a use of cash in both periods, with the latest year-to-date outflow larger than the comparable year-ago outflow. - Financing cash flow stayed a use of cash in both windows, while the latest year-to-date use was smaller than the prior-year use.

- Capital spending on property, plant and equipment was higher in the current year-to-date window than in the prior-year comparative, consistent with continued utility-scale investment. - The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - On the balance sheet as of the period-end date, cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable net of the allowance for credit loss, and accounts payable each stand as reported line items; their directional posture and qualitative comparison to prior periods is not supplied by the filing excerpt.

- The combination of a use of cash from operations, a larger use of cash for investing, and a smaller use of cash from financing points to funding the elevated capital program with external financing rather than internally generated cash during the half year. - Because financing outflows declined while investing outflows widened, the reported pattern suggests net borrowing or new capital raised during the period, with the exact mix not addressed in the quoted evidence. - The statement of cash flows therefore reflects a rebuild phase: the utility is reinvesting heavily while relying on the capital markets and balance-sheet liquidity to bridge the operating cash gap.

- Readers weighing the trade-off between growth investment and near-term cash strain can frame the question with ROI Calculator, keeping in mind that the catalog supplies values but not the cause behind the operating-cash swing. - The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - No management commentary in the supplied excerpt attributes the operating-cash shift to a single driver, and no peer or industry comparison is included in the filing evidence; the cited note on Maui storm and wildfire references is qualitative context rather than a quantified cash-flow driver.

- Counterpoint within the filing itself: financing outflows were smaller year over year, which could partially offset the operating and investing pressure on liquidity, but the excerpt does not quantify the offset. - Unknowns left open by the filing evidence include the period-end change in receivables and payables versus the prior balance sheet date, the composition of the financing outflow (debt repayment versus equity distributions versus dividends), and whether any one segment of Hawaiian Electric Industries drove the operating-cash swing.

- The filing's reference items covering legal proceedings, risk factors, and controls do not, on the face of the supplied excerpt, contain cash-flow commentary, leaving the statement of cash flows as the primary disclosure for this section.

Peer and historical context

- The filing offers two comparable windows, the three-month reporting period and the six-month year-to-date period, each with a prior-year counterpart, enabling a like-for-like historical read on revenues, operating income, net income, and operating cash flow without any external benchmark. - Across both windows, the authorized directional read on Revenues, Operating Income, and Net Income is upward against the prior comparative, consistent with a recovery-style trajectory on the reported income-statement lines. - The single line where the directional read diverges is the six-month Operating Cash Flow comparison, where the authorized direction is downward and the transition moves from a positive prior-year figure to a negative current-year figure, marking the most material break in the year-over-year set. - Peer commentary is intentionally omitted: no external peer or industry dataset is included in the filing evidence, so any relative ranking against utility peers would be invented rather than sourced.

- The six-month Operating Cash Flow swing is the clearest counterweight to the otherwise upward year-over-year read, since the same window that shows higher revenues, higher operating income, and higher net income also shows a cash-use figure where the prior year reported a cash-source figure. - If a reader weights cash conversion more heavily than accrual earnings, the six-month picture is not uniformly improving despite the authorized higher direction on every income-statement comparison. - The cited note referenced in the filing's expense detail is an expense breakdown rather than a peer or historical benchmark, so it does not weaken or strengthen the year-over-year directional read on its own. - The legal-proceedings and risk-factor items in the filing discuss forward-looking risks including going-concern conditions tied to Maui wildfire settlement funding and potential further dilution, which sit outside the peer-and-history scope but would normally temper any optimistic read on the year-over-year numbers if extended into a forward outlook. - No counter-evidence in the data contradicts the authorized higher direction on revenues, operating income, or net income across either reported window.

Peer and historical comparison sits squarely on the company's own prior-year windows in this filing, because the filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. The historical lens therefore compares each three-month and six-month line against its own prior-year counterpart.

For Revenues, both the three-month period and the six-month year-to-date period show an authorized higher direction against the prior-year comparative, with the current period reporting a positive figure in each case. For Operating Income, the authorized higher direction holds in both the quarter and the half-year views, and the transition is profit-to-profit in each case, indicating a wider operating margin contribution in the current window than in the prior comparative. For Net Income Attributable to Parent, the six-month view also carries an authorized higher direction with a profit-to-profit transition, reinforcing the operating-income read at the parent-attributable level.

The offsetting item is the six-month Operating Cash Flow, which carries an authorized lower direction against the prior-year comparative and a transition from a positive prior-year figure to a negative current-year figure, even though every income-statement comparison in the same half-year window is authorized as higher. That split between accrual earnings and operating cash is the central tension in the year-over-year read.

The forward-looking cautionary language in the filing references potential further dilution, financing-plan execution risk tied to going-concern conditions, and the risk of further credit-rating actions, none of which the filing evidence attributes to a single cause for the historical cash-flow reversal.

For any reader translating these year-over-year comparisons into a return-on-capital lens, an ROI Calculator can be used to frame the income-statement lines against the cash-flow line, but the filing itself does not provide a peer benchmark, so this section deliberately stops at the company's own prior-year windows.

The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison.

Scenario analysis

- Both reported windows show profits higher than the prior-year comparatives, anchoring a central case in which current-period operating performance is sustained. Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent for the six months ended June 30, 2026 is reported at $153,650,000 USD, above the $53,702,000 USD figure recorded for the six months ended June 30, 2025. - Revenues are reported at $1,686,150,000 USD for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and at $939,703,000 USD for the three months ended June 30, 2026, both above the prior-year comparatives of $1,490,462,000 USD and $746,392,000 USD respectively. The combination of higher revenue alongside higher earnings supports a base case in which the trailing trajectory carries into the near term without dramatic swings.

- A constructive read would treat the higher revenue and higher net-income prints as evidence of upside leverage if the forward-looking tailwinds identified by management — including the cited decarbonization, resilience and RPS-related programs — translate into incremental rate-base growth and operating-margin expansion. - Under that path, $939,703,000 USD against $746,392,000 USD reflects demand strength that could persist into subsequent quarters, while the $153,650,000 USD figure, building on the $53,702,000 USD prior baseline, demonstrates margin resilience worth carrying forward. The fact that both reported windows print year-over-year gains is the central quantitative anchor for an upside read. - Investors exploring what such leveraged upside can mean for a single dollar invested may find perspective through a tool such as the ROI Calculator.

- A cautious read is supported by the extensive forward-looking risk language reproduced in this filing. Management specifically flags the potential for further trade policy changes to disrupt supply chains and raise capital-goods costs for the Utilities and IPPs, which could threaten project viability and the achievement of RPS goals. - Management also flags liabilities and regulatory penalties linked to the Maui windstorm and wildfires, the possibility that insurance premiums cannot be fully recovered through rates, and the capacity of the Company and the Utilities to fund the Maui wildfire tort litigation settlement on reasonable terms — conditions that could raise substantial doubt about the going-concern assessment. - Additional cited downside catalysts include further credit-rating downgrades, potential further dilution from any additional equity or equity-linked issuance to fund the settlement, the inability to execute financing plans leading to potential default and acceleration of debt, and extreme weather events that could damage equipment or contribute to additional wildfires. - Against that backdrop, the half-year revenue move from $1,490,462,000 USD to $1,686,150,000 USD and the net-income move from the prior-year baseline to $153,650,000 USD could be vulnerable to reversal if any of the identified risks crystallize. The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - Management also flags the potential fiscal effect of federal government shutdowns on customers' ability to pay bills and on the State of Hawaii economy, which would weigh on the Utilities' collections environment — a counterweight to the otherwise constructive year-over-year direction in the headline figures. - The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison.

Risks and what to watch

- The forward-looking statements enumerated in the cited note catalogue a dense cluster of macro, policy, and operating risks that could overwhelm any near-term improvement in headline metrics. Wildfire and extreme-weather exposure remains central: the filing flags wildfires as a sustainability priority and ties ongoing Maui windstorm and wildfire cost uncertainties to capital-market access and potential higher financing costs. - Capital and credit-market access is itself called out as a standalone bullet, and the filing ties that access to the Utilities' ability to fund capital expenditures under volatile market conditions.

Investors tracking the next period should monitor whether the Utilities continue to roll lines of credit and access long-term debt without material spread widening attributable to Maui-related developments. - Regulatory risk through the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Hawaii is flagged repeatedly, including potential delays or disapproval of rate rebasing, performance-based regulation, wildfire safety, renewable energy, and grid-resiliency proposals, and the potential penalties for delays in commercial operations of renewable energy projects.

The Integrated Grid Plan was accepted by the PUC during the cited period, and subsequent orders on the Future of Energy in Hawaii and related executive orders are expected to shape cost recovery and the timing of RPS-related investments. - Counter-evidence to the bearish read on risk is the authorized direction for Revenues and Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent, both higher than the prior period on a year-to-date basis, with Revenues also higher than the prior period on the three-month reporting period. The filing also authorizes higher Operating Income (Loss) and Earnings Per Share, Diluted on both a half-year and quarter-over-quarter basis, which points to operating improvement despite the elevated regulatory and wildfire overhang.

- The filing evidence contains no peer or industry comparison. - Key unknowns that the cited evidence does not resolve include the magnitude of any incremental Maui-related accruals, the trajectory of pension and other retirement plan asset and liability remeasurement (flagged as a discrete risk), and the timing of PUC decisions on pending dockets. S.

policy on immigration and trade, both of which are cited generically as risk drivers. S. debt ceiling, monetary policy, energy and environmental policy, and other regulatory shifts proposed by the current administration, as well as interest-rate path and yield-curve shape risks that could raise borrowing costs.

The filing evidence does not attribute this change to any single cause. - Authorised comparisons for this section: Revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2026 of $1,686,150,000 USD is higher than the prior period's $1,490,462,000 USD; Revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2026 of $939,703,000 USD is higher than the prior period's $746,392,000 USD; Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Parent for the six months ended June 30, 2026 of $153,650,000 USD is higher than the prior period's $53,702,000 USD, with all such year-over-year improvements presenting a profit-to-profit transition.

- Metrics to watch next period: any change in PUC posture on rate rebasing and PBR; updated wildfire-mitigation spend versus plan; the trajectory of authorized revenue and net income direction; and pension remeasurement outcomes, given the cited note flags stock-market, interest-rate, and mortality drivers as live risks. Readers may want to verify return assumptions behind forward projections using ROI Calculator before acting.