Capital Clean Energy (NASDAQ:CCEC) reported third-quarter financial results on Friday. The transcript from the company’s third-quarter earnings call has been provided below.
This transcript is brought to you by Benzinga APIs. For real-time access to our entire catalog, please visit https://www.benzinga.com/apis/ for a consultation.
Access the full call at https://ccec.engagestream.euronext.com/2026-10-20-bokqxxkwl3/register
Summary
Capital Clean Energy reported a 52% increase in net income from continuing operations to $34.6 million, driven by an increase in fleet size.
The company declared a $0.50 per share dividend, marking the 78th consecutive quarterly dividend since their IPO in 2007.
Total revenue for Q3 2026 rose to $138.1 million, a 44% increase from the previous year, due to fleet expansion.
The LNG fleet’s Time Charter Equivalent (TCE) rates were just under $84,000 a day, while the gas fleet earned just under $41,000 a day.
Capital Clean Energy has a strong cash position with total cash of $287 million and a net leverage ratio of approximately 55%.
The company expects to fully fund its capex program through internally generated cash, asset monetizations, and debt financing.
The LNG market remains resilient with long-term charters insulating the company from spot market volatility.
The gas fleet achieved $40,987 per day in Q3, with newbuilds fixed into 2027, and strategic focus on flexibility to follow strong trades.
Management highlighted the strategic advantage of having a large order book, with 42 open newbuildings set to deliver around the market inflection point in 2028.
Future outlook includes navigating volatile shipping markets with index-linked deals to capture potential upside in freight rates.
Full Transcript
Brian (Investor Relations)
Our Chief Executive Nikos Kalo Patherakos, our CFO Nikos Tribadakis, our Chief Commercial Officer and head of LNG Commercial, and Jack Nealan, our Head of LPG Commercial. Before we start, please note that today’s presentation contains forward-looking statements and actual results may differ materially. Please refer to the notice on slide 2 and the risk factors in our 2025 annual report on Form 20-F. So let’s kick off looking at the key highlights from Q3 that we’ve just finished. In the third quarter we took delivery of three vessels: the LNG carrier Alkios 1, the dual-fuel MGC carrier Eridaeos in July, and the LCO2 multi-gas carrier Alkymos in September. During the quarter we also secured new employment for two LNG carriers and four gas carriers. The TCE for the quarter was just under $84,000 a day for our LNG fleet and just under $41,000 a day for our gas fleet.
Net income from continuing operations was 34.6 million, up 52% compared to the same period last year, and we declared a dividend of $0.15 per share—our 78th consecutive cash quarterly dividend. Contracted revenue stands at around $2.8 billion for the group, or $4.2 billion for the group including options. That gives you a sense of the highlights. I’ll now pass on to Nikos with regard to the financials.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Thank you, Brian. Before turning to the financials, I would like to touch on our dividend payout, which remains a core part of the company’s value proposition to our shareholders. As already announced on October 22, we declared the quarterly cash dividend of $0.50 per share. This is our 78th consecutive quarterly dividend since our IPO in 2007. The dividend will be paid on November 12 to shareholders of record as of November 3. Turning now to the income statement, revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2026 increased to 138.1 million from 95.6 million during the same period last year. The 44% increase primarily reflects the growth in the average number of vessels in our fleet to 19.7 vessels from 13 vessels during the same period last year, following the delivery of three handy gas carriers, two dual-fuel medium gas carriers, and three LNG carriers during 2026.
Voyage expenses for the third quarter of 2026 increased to 9 million from 2.2 million in the third quarter of 2025. The increase was mainly due to voyage expenses incurred by certain of our vessels during their delivery from the yard and the start of their employment, as well as ballast legs associated with certain of our vessels passing their five-year special survey. Vessel operating expenses and depreciation and amortization increased by 6.2 million and 8.6 million respectively compared to the same period in the previous year, mainly due to the increase in the average number of vessels in our fleet.
Interest expense and finance cost increased to 33.7 million from 25.5 million during the same period last year. The increase mainly reflects higher average indebtedness following the financing of the vessels delivered this year, partly offset by a decrease in the weighted average interest rate on our debt. Therefore, net income from continuing operations was 34.6 million for the quarter, or $0.57 per share, corresponding to an increase of 52% compared to the same period last year as this year’s deliveries start to contribute.
So, moving on to our balance sheet, we maintain a solid cash position with total cash of 287 million, including restricted cash, and the net leverage ratio, adjusted for the fair market value of our vessels, at approximately 55%. Total assets grew to 4.9 billion, an increase of more than 20% from the beginning of 2026, as we took delivery of eight vessels this year. Shareholders’ equity rose by 87 million, or by 6%, to approximately 1.6 billion. As of quarter end, total debt stood at 3.2 billion.
Floating-rate debt, which makes up approximately 78% of our total debt, carried an average margin of 1.70%. Our fixed-rate debt, together with the 800 million of zero-cost interest rate collars entered into during the second and third quarters of this year, make approximately 47% of our total debt either fixed or hedged. So let me now turn to our capex program. Our newbuilding program is well funded. We have already paid a substantial portion of the capex from internally generated cash, asset monetizations, and attractive debt financing, including our bond issuance in February. Assuming 70% debt financing for the vessels that do not yet have facilities in place, and excluding future operating cash flows and net proceeds from the sale of Amore Mio to the previously announced LNG joint venture, we expect to fully fund the remaining capex while also releasing significant liquidity to the company.
So let me now hand over to Nico Tripodakis, our Head of LNG Commercial, for an update on our LNG fleet and the market. Nico.
OPERATOR
Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press key 5 on your telephone keypad. Our first question is from Alexander Bidwell from Weber Research and Advisory. Please go ahead.
Alexander Bidwell (Analyst at Weber Research and Advisory)
Good afternoon. How are you guys doing?
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Good, thanks. Good to see you.
Alexander Bidwell (Analyst at Weber Research and Advisory)
So wanted to actually follow up on a question from last quarter. So the global gas market seems to be pricing in some can you degree of supply constraints into the second half of 2027 which implies some degree of risk to the right on a Middle East restart. Can you give us a sense of where charter sentiment sits around the timing of a conflict resolution and how any quarter over quarter changes to that sentiment have impacted charter.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Hi, Alex. So obviously when we try to, you know, give a view on how long this conflict will last, we’re obviously expressing our opinion. The best indication that would help you with your question would be how long are the Qataris chartering out their own fleet, right. This is a concrete indication of their view of how long this will last. And I can tell you that as of now, we’re looking at at least four to five months time frame based on that piece of information, which is usually pretty reflective of their view on outages.
And usually that’s the case with outages. When you see the producer chartering out their own fleet for an X period of time, it’s a clear indication that they expect that they will not need that fleet for that amount of time. Now, in any time frame in situations like this beyond that, we would be guessing, but our view is that this situation will continue for at least the first half of 2027.
Alexander Bidwell (Analyst at Weber Research and Advisory)
All right, thank you for the color there. And then to follow up, just looking a little bit longer term, we’re seeing the conflict driving some LNG buyers to diversify their supply portfolios with some of the recent SPAs likely being driven by that diversification. Based on your recent commercial discussions, have you seen that diversification push start to impact LNG shipping demand in the back half of the decade?
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Yes, in a positive way. I mean, who would have expected that the Qataris would be buying multiple million tons from a U.S. project, right. Crazy times we’re going through. But all in all, this is very positive for LNG shipping for two reasons. One, more FIDs, which, you know, regardless of where it comes from, the world requires shipping, and also because of ton miles. So U.S., as we have explained multiple times in the past, has potentially one of the best multipliers for LNG freight demand, especially if there is an open arbitrage to Asia.
One MTPA from Qatar to Asia would require one ship. One MTPA from the U.S. to Asia would require three ships. So it’s a double bubble in a sense for LNG shipping. More, if more U.S. projects go ahead, and this situation clearly helps this out.
Alexander Bidwell (Analyst at Weber Research and Advisory)
All right, thank you very much. I’ll turn it back over. Thank you.
OPERATOR
Our next question is from Greg Lewis from BTIG. Please go ahead.
Greg Lewis (Analyst at BTIG)
Hi. Thank you. Good afternoon and thanks for taking my questions. I was hoping you could give a little bit of an overview of the state of the build order book. Really appreciate, you know, you have a handful of ships on the LNG side, LNGC side, that are coming delivered. But just kind of, you know, how does that stand versus kind of the overall order book that you highlighted earlier in the slide presentation.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Just to make sure that I understand your question, what would you like us to expand on, on top of the slide with the fleet, like what our order book looks like and
Greg Lewis (Analyst at BTIG)
versus versus the industry?
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Okay, well, the most important point on this is that we hold the biggest open order book of any of our competitors. If I’m not mistaken, right now we have 42 open newbuildings in an order book of 287 ships. And of those we control five, where our, the second biggest competitor has four. So we hold the lion’s share of open newbuildings and the majority of those are delivering in line with where we see the inflection point in the market from 2028 onwards.
Does this answer your question or do you want to
Greg Lewis (Analyst at BTIG)
Perfect. And then just as we think about the opportunity to recontract the vessels, as we think about just fixed rate versus index versus index with floors and ceilings, I guess, how is that evolving? Right, and does that end up, I mean, I’m clear that’s in the negotiation process, but as we think about Capital Clean Energy positioning its fleet, should we kind of think about a mix of all three or I guess given where we are in the cycle right now, I mean, hey, the Qataris have been putting some of their tonnage in the market.
Rates seasonally weak are maybe holding up better than some would think. Is that kind of helping, you know, pave the way for higher, higher floors and higher ceilings and maybe some of this index-linked charters.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
I think the best way to think about this is that the market is undersupplied from ’28 onwards. The problem is that the front, let’s say 2026 and the first half of 2027, is contaminating the long-term rates. So what would be 90,000 a year and a half ago has now become, let’s say, 80,000. What we’re trying to do at Capital Clean Energy is make sure we don’t commit into a long-term fixed rate at the point in time where we see being the lowest, that is now.
These index deals are giving us the opportunity to navigate this first part of the curve, 2027, with a market-link deal which currently right now is the same as the fixed price bid for one year, while at the same time we keep the upside, right. We’re entering a winter where, as we mentioned, we have $35 per MMBtu gas prices. If there is any sort of change in demand from Asia and the arb towards Asia opens, then freight rates will skyrocket and we keep that upside.
Right now there’s no point committing to fixed-term rates, either long-term or short-term, in this market. We feel there is a lot of upside if we wait or do this floating for the Cal 27.
Greg Lewis (Analyst at BTIG)
All right, super helpful. Have a good weekend. Thank you.
OPERATOR
The next question is from Liam Burke from B. Riley Securities. Please go ahead.
Liam Burke (Analyst at B. Riley Securities)
Good afternoon. How are you today? I am. I just had a couple questions on the macro. In the prepared comments you talked about the steam propulsion LNG vessels being part of the fleet. Only seven have been scrapped this year. It’s a much larger percent of the fleet. I would think that the reason they’re still there is they’re still under contract and as these contracts get released, global capacity will shrink pretty rapidly.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
That’s a very fair point and yes that is the case. However, we should have seen more scrapping this year because there were redeliveries from charters that took place this year. However, there was a Hail Mary being thrown to these vessels. With the situation in the Middle East, where the insurance risk premium is much lower for vessels like those compared to ours, they are still being employed for intra–Middle East Gulf business at healthy rates right now.
So those vessels have been given a lifeline and an extension for, to the extent they can actually do this business. And we feel that once the Middle East situation calms down and is resolved, as you said, there will be an accelerated scrapping of those vessels.
Liam Burke (Analyst at B. Riley Securities)
Great. And when we were looking at a post-normalization LNG market, I guess referring to Slide 13, if that when and if that occurs, are you comfortable that the LNG production will continue to grow even after the conflict resolution, whenever that occurs, normalizes the LNG industry?
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Absolutely. I mean, first of all, Slide 13 does not really rely on the current conflict. Most of those volumes and projects have contracted capacity for a long time now and have reached final investment decisions without the conflict. What this conflict has done—and we haven’t actually seen so many contracts being signed since the war started—but it has changed the appetite of buyers to switch from Middle East towards the US for security of supply.
And that includes a lot of Asian buyers, even the Qataris themselves. So back to your original question. The macro remains very strong for US projects and US capacity and, in general, obviously we’re very bullish. LNG as a fuel replacing coal and, you know, the green transition and all of these arguments are still in place. It’s just more of a reallocation within the LNG product, heavily skewed towards the US now.
OPERATOR
Our next question is from Omar Nokhta from Clarksons. Please go ahead.
Omar Nokhta (Analyst at Clarksons)
Thank you. Hey guys, good afternoon or good evening. I do have a couple questions, market-related and kind of sticking with the point that you were talking about on Slide 12 with the low natural gas inventories in Europe. I just wanted to get a sense or perspective from you. Clearly right now, when we look at LNG prices, as you were saying, they’re up to $35, which is the high for the year, really a multi-year high, and yet inventories are low. Spot rates are also very low for ships.
And just trying to get a sense of, do you get a sense that the natural buyers in Europe are just maybe comfortable with the slower level of inventory, or is it more that there just isn’t enough LNG flowing and that’s why we’re at these low levels of stockpiles? And then, I guess as we think about that, it seems like something has to give as we get closer and closer to winter, as consumption starts to ramp up and inventories are low. Does that drive rates higher? Is there enough LNG flow—rates higher in an environment where you have a normal seasonal winter in Europe and the squeeze starts to show up as it gets colder? Just trying to get a sense basically: is there a lot of activity in the spot market or is it very quiet?
I guess is ultimately the question.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
All of these are very fair points. To start with the beginning of your question, if the buyers are feeling comfortable around this, I think the clear answer is, you know, depicted in the prices and the answer is no. Nobody’s feeling comfortable at $35 per MMBtu, where Asia keeps buying at those levels and Asian prices are 33. Now, how does this relate to low charter rates? I think it has to do with the fact that the arbitrage to Asia is shut, and it has been shut since, let’s say, end of August.
So for the past two months the shipping supply side is taking over, and just because there are too many vessels in the Atlantic, the rates are inevitably held at a low level. The key point here, though, is to realize that if anything changes—and you know, there are so many different factors that could lead to reversing this spread between European and Asian prices—then we are in for a very, very bullish winter in terms of who will secure the limited amount of vessels that are available in the Atlantic right now. So looking at the curve and pricing the curve, yes, the arb will remain shut for the next two or three months, and freight rates and the forward curve on freight rates and FFAs are at 60, 70,000 for December.
However, this situation is very volatile, and if anything changes, we can see those 60 and 70,000 becoming 150 to 100,000. And we have seen that multiple times in the past. So I don’t think anybody’s comfortable right now. It’s just that nobody wants to pay more than they can on the spot market. But the second that the arb reverses, you will start seeing vessels being fixed for multi-month and even longer at significant premium to where they’re trading right now.
Omar Nokhta (Analyst at Clarksons)
Thank you. It does seem like the setup seems very similar from five years ago, where we saw what was happening in terms of low inventories, high prices. But it basically took until we got to winter for there to be that scream and rates shot up to 200,000 plus.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Yeah, I… guess maybe. And then. Just a second, sorry, please continue. Yeah, go ahead. No, another point that we haven’t mentioned so far is that, you know, at, let’s say, $50,000 a day, the freight cost in this cargo economics is minuscule. It means nothing. Like, you know, you have $35 per MMBtu sale price in Europe and a freight cost of $1. So you can realize how much freight can increase the second people start seriously competing about vessels to transfer cargoes that are making $25 profit.
Omar Nokhta (Analyst at Clarksons)
Yeah, certainly. And maybe just on that point then, wanted to ask: obviously in the crude oil market there’s been a lot of shuttling through Hormuz and ship-to-ship transfer to get that crude out into the marketplace. Obviously in LNG it’s a lot more complicated. There have been some reports recently indicating that there’s been some small scale of that. Are you able to give a sense or any perspective on what that looks like today? I know it’s clearly very complicated, but any thoughts you have, you know, ship-to-ship transfer and shuttling through Hormuz as a viable option in the LNG market?
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
It is taking place. However, what makes this prohibitive—so far it has been done on modern vessels—is the insurance risk premium, which is north of $10 million right now. Whereas when you can do the same business with a 145 steamer, you would be looking at a $2 to $3 million cost in terms of insurance. So the preference has been those older, smaller ships, even though the boil-off, of course, is significant because the voyage duration is very small.
We’re talking about five-, six-day voyages. And that is why, back to the point we discussed a bit earlier, those vessels have been given sort of a lifeline this year and are trying to compete for business that is making decent returns for them.
Omar Nokhta (Analyst at Clarksons)
Okay. All right. Thank you. I’ll pass it back.
Nikos Tribadakis (Chief Financial Officer)
Thank you.
OPERATOR
Just a reminder, if you want to ask a question, you can press key 5 on your telephone keypad. This concludes our Q and A session. I’d like to give it back to our hosts.
Brian (Investor Relations)
Okay, thank you, everybody. Thanks for taking the time to join our call today, and speak to you going forward. Thank you.
OPERATOR
Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s presentation. Thank you for joining us. You may now disconnect your line. Have a great day.
Disclaimer: This transcript is provided for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, there may be errors or omissions in this automated transcription. For official company statements and financial information, please refer to the company’s SEC filings and official press releases. Corporate participants’ and analysts’ statements reflect their views as of the date of this call and are subject to change without notice.
Recent Comments