NEM · Q1 2026 Earnings

Q2 "Rationalization complete, pivot to buybacks" → Q3 "Cost-out flows to bottom line" → Q4 "Trough year, capital returns through the cycle" → Q1 "Trough confirmed, costs build through the year, hope on Nevada"

The "structural cost reduction" framing of Q4 has quietly mutated into a "manage the build" posture. Last quarter management argued the $1,358 FY25 AISC step to $1,680 FY26 was about defending a new baseline against royalty and production-tax pressure; this quarter, with a $1,029 Q1 print in hand, the language is "unit costs are expected to be notably higher than the first quarter due to higher sustaining capital spend, lower silver production, and higher costs applicable to sales at Boddington, Tanami, Lihir and Peñasquito." That is four named operations contributing cost pressure simultaneously — the diversified-cost-discipline story is being replaced by an asset-level walk-up. The signal: the FY $1,680 guide is being defended as a ceiling, not a target.

Nevada Gold Mines has shifted from "formal escalation" to "iterative process with no timeline." In Q4, the notice of default was new and disclosed in legalistic, confidentiality-bounded language; this quarter the framing is "The period of the notice of default is open ended and we're working with them...it's more of an iterative process between the two companies...There's no set timeline for bringing it to resolution." Hope-language ("we hope to do so in the near term") replaces the prior structural-action language. For an asset representing 38.5% attributable production, the absence of a resolution timeline is itself the disclosure.

The 2026-as-trough framing has been operationally pressure-tested rather than retreated from. Management explicitly said "in 2026 we're in a trough and those are the big movers that will start to build up on the other side of the trough," repeating Q4's language but now with Q1 production -3.1% YoY on a like-for-like basis as evidence. The Q4 promise of "better guidance towards the end of this year" on 2027 has not been advanced; the floor remains verbal.

Two new risk vectors entered the tone register that were not on the Q4 list. Ghana's sliding-scale royalty is quantified at "approximately $25 per ounce cost headwind in 2026" with active presidential-level engagement on the contractor-mining transition — a regulatory file that did not exist in prior quarters. Energy cost sensitivity is also newly quantified: "approximately $60 million per $10/barrel" of oil price move, with management noting "higher fuel prices began to materialize in March." Neither is large enough alone to move the FY guide, but stacked with the four named operational cost contributors, they are why "notably higher" is the chosen Q2 language rather than a numeric range.

Cadia is being framed with concrete recovery sequencing rather than ambiguous damage assessment: "we are currently processing surface stockpiles and expect underground rehabilitation to be completed in the next five weeks, enabling return to 80% operating capacity, with full recovery expected by the end of the second quarter." That is the most specific operational commitment in the call — a tonal counterweight to the cost-build narrative, and a checkable promise for the Q2 print.