CONSTELLATION ENERGY CORPORATION (CEG): what the price assumes

In the published model solve dated 2026-Q2, anchored at $277.07, CONSTELLATION ENERGY CORPORATION (CEG) is priced for +24.2% growth. boothcheck publishes no house fair value, target price, or buy/sell rating; individual model outputs and user-controlled scenarios are analytical inputs, not Boothcheck targets. Narrative composed 2026-07-25.

Generated: 2026-08-30 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/CEG

Headline

FieldValue
TickerCEG
CompanyCONSTELLATION ENERGY CORPORATION
Sector / IndustryUtilities
Current price$277.07/sh
CompositionMid-Atlantic 40% / Midwest 35% / New York 13% / ERCOT 12%

What The Price Assumes (Inversion)

The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.

FieldValue
Inversion basiswhole-company
Operating margin (value-band context)12.2%
Operating margin today14.7%
Margin compression (value-band)-2.5pp
Implied growth24.2%
Multiple paid27x operating income

The operating-margin figure is value-band context at year 12: derived from the framework's value band, a separate calculation — not part of the priced-in solve.

Solve inputs: computed at a 9.1% cost of capital with 4% terminal growth over a 5-year stage.

How unusual the bet is: elevated (limited comparison data)

ReferenceValue
vs own history-0.13σ
cohort percentile (of 70 peers)86

Valuation X-Ray

Asset, earnings-power and peer-multiple models all land far below the price; ONLY the growth-DCF reaches it. The bet is durable compounding the static frames structurally cannot price (a moat/durability premium).

How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.

FamilyMedian price/FVModelsReads
Asset2.41x4expensive
Earnings1.67x2expensive
Relative1.49x2expensive
Growth0.69x3justifies

Families that justify the price: Growth Families that call it expensive: Asset, Earnings

The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 7.6%); the inversion above states its own rate.

Per-Model Detail (n=11)

ModelFamilyFVPrice/FVApplicableMethodology
DCF Perpetual GrowthGrowth$586.560.47xyesFCF base $4.1B, growth 25% (input: historical growth), terminal g 4.0%, WACC 7.6%, 7yr projection
DCF Exit MultipleGrowth$400.660.69xyesExit EV/EBITDA: 22.2x / 24.2x / 26.2x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull), 7yr
Relative ValuationRelativenoP/E 20x (static sector reference · 2026-04), scenarios: 16.2x / 20.0x / 23.8x (bear / base = reference held flat / bull), EV/EBITDA 16.36x
Simple DDMGrowthno
Two-Stage DDMGrowthno
Simple Excess ReturnAsset$105.732.62xyesBV/sh $90.25, ROE (TTM) 10.8%, ke 9.3%
Two-Stage Excess ReturnAsset$114.102.43xyes5yr excess ROE then converge to ke=9.3%
Discounted Future Market CapGrowth$354.710.78xyesRev $31.3B, growth 25% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 2.5x / 3.1x / 3.7x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 12x)
Peter Lynch Fair ValueRelative$123.122.25xyesEPS $10.26, growth 2% (input: historical EPS growth), PEG=14.16 (Overvalued)
Margin TrajectoryGrowthno
Earnings Power ValueEarnings$12.3022.53xyesNormalized EBIT (5y avg op income, one-time charges added back) $2.69B × (1−21%) / WACC 7.6% → EPV (no growth) (excluded from median)
Residual IncomeAsset$115.692.39xyesBV $90.25 + 5yr PV of (ROE (TTM) 10.8% − Kₑ 9.3%) × BV; BV grows 7.0%/yr
Graham NumberAsset$144.341.92xyes√(22.5 × EPS $10.26 × BVPS $90.25) — Graham's conservative floor
EV/EBITDA RelativeRelativenoEBITDA $5.03B × sector EV/EBITDA 13.0x
FCF YieldEarnings$0.0127707.00xyesFCF $309.0M / Kₑ 9.3% — zero-growth perpetuity (excluded from median)
SBC-Adj FCF YieldEarningsno
Ben Graham FormulaEarnings$331.060.84xyesEPS $10.26 × (8.5 + 2×15.0%) × (4.4 / 5.3%)
ROIC-Justified P/BAsset$9.7928.30xyesBV $90.25 × (ROIC 0.8% / WACC 7.6%) (excluded from median)
P/Sales SectorRelativenoRevenue $31.27B × sector P/S 2.5x
PEG Fair ValueRelative$384.750.72xyesEPS $10.26 × (PEG 1.5 × growth 25.0% (input: historical EPS growth)) → PE 37.5x
Earnings YieldEarnings$110.922.50xyesEPS $10.26 / required return 9.3% (Rf 4.3% + ERP 5.0%)
Funds From Operations MultipleRelativeno
Clinical Phase NPVGrowthno
MertonAssetno
V5 Mechanicalno

Economic-Unit Decomposition (Sum Of The Parts)

One or more material disclosed units has unresolved economics. Unknown/general is not evidence of homogeneity: segment SOTP is primary but incomplete, consolidated cash flow may remain only a secondary cross-check when every unit shares an enterprise basis, and one sector multiple or target margin is withheld.

UnitRoleValuation basisRevenueReported profitValue evidenceStatus
Mid-Atlanticoperatingenterprise$6.5bwithheldunresolved no unit value
New Yorkoperatingenterprise$2.2bwithheldunresolved no unit value
ERCOToperatingenterprise$1.9bwithheldunresolved no unit value
Other Power Regionsoperatingenterprise$5.6bwithheldunresolved no unit value

No total common-equity value is stated. One or more material units lack a supported unit value. The displayed values are an indicative subtotal; consolidated debt and cash cannot be applied to a fraction of the company.

Solvency

FieldValue
Net debt$24.0b
Net debt / NOPAT (after-tax)6.61x
Net debt / operating income (pre-tax)5.22x
Interest coverage5.9x
Share count CAGR (dilution)2.4%
Burning cashno

Bullet Takeaways

Bull Case

Most electricity companies are valued by reading a regulator. You work out the rate base, apply the allowed return, adjust for the lag between spending and recovery, and the answer falls out with a predictability that makes utility analysis its own quiet discipline. Constellation does not work that way. It owns generation and sells the output into competitive markets, so there is no allowed return, no rate case, and no regulator setting the price of what it produces. The 10-K describes a fleet whose "capacity includes primarily nuclear, wind, solar, natural gas, and hydroelectric assets" selling "electricity, natural gas, and other energy-related products and sustainable solutions" to distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives and industrial customers. The value of that is the value of the electrons and the length of the contracts behind them.

Which is why the customer mix changing matters more here than a capacity number would. In June the company signed a long-term nuclear power purchase agreement with Walmart supplying its Dresden plant in Illinois. A retailer contracting directly for a specific reactor's output over a long horizon is a different creature from a wholesale market clearing hour by hour, and it converts merchant exposure into contracted revenue at a known price. That is the mechanism the bull case rests on: not higher power prices, but longer contracts at acceptable ones.

The Calpine acquisition, closed on January 7, 2026, changes the shape of the fleet in a way that fits the same argument, and the Q1 filing puts the purchase price at approximately 21.8 billion dollars settled with "50 million newly issued shares of our common stock, no par value, and approximately $4.5 billion in cash on hand". What that buys is dispatchable gas capacity to sit alongside baseload nuclear. Nuclear runs flat out or not at all; gas turns up and down. A customer that wants firm round-the-clock supply needs both, and a seller that owns both can write that contract without buying the shape from someone else.

The asset base is also being extended rather than run down. In June the company filed license renewal applications for the Ginna and Nine Mile Point Unit 1 reactors, seeking operation through 2049. Nuclear plants have a peculiar economic profile: enormous sunk construction cost, low marginal running cost, and a licence that can be extended for decades at a fraction of the cost of building anything new. A twenty-year licence extension is close to the cheapest generating capacity available to anyone.

The numbers behind the story are not speculative. Operating profit ran 4.82 billion dollars over the trailing year on a 15.8% operating margin, and interest was covered about 7.4 times over. Book value is $94.58 a share and the trailing return on equity was 11.3%. Among the competitive generators it actually competes with, that margin is at the better end: VISTRA (VST) runs 18.4% on 19.1 billion dollars of revenue, TALEN (TLN) 6.5%, and NRG ENERGY (NRG) 3.2% on the largest revenue base of the group. Constellation is not the cheapest way to own generation. It is the one selling the product that a data centre developer with a carbon commitment can actually buy.

Bear Case

Not all of last year's improvement came from selling electricity. The first-quarter 2026 filing attributes a large piece of the year-over-year gain to hedge accounting, reporting (in millions) "gains on economic hedging activities of $1,315 in 2026 compared to losses of $287 in 2025, inclusive of Calpine". That is a swing of roughly 1.6 billion dollars in unrealized marks, not in cash collected from customers. Marks reverse. When a bear case asks whether trailing earnings are sustainable earnings, this is the specific thing it is asking about.

The hedging itself has a horizon, and the horizon is short relative to the bet. The company states that portfolio hedging "activities are generally concentrated in the prompt three years, when customer demand and market liquidity enable effective price risk mitigation", and that it expects "the settlement of the majority of our economic hedges will occur during 2026 through 2028". So the visible, locked-in portion of the revenue runs to roughly 2028. The price is underwriting a growth path stretching well past that, into years where the output is sold at whatever power markets pay.

That matters because power markets are not a gently rising line. The 10-K is blunt about the downside for exactly the kind of plant Constellation owns most of: in some markets, "the supply of electricity can exceed demand during some hours of the day, resulting in lower market prices, including periods of negative pricing, and loss of revenue for baseload generating plants such as our nuclear plants". A reactor cannot throttle economically. When prices go negative it keeps producing, and the loss is structural rather than a decision.

The cycle position deserves naming plainly. Power prices in the eastern markets have been rising, capacity has been tightening, and the demand story attached to data centres has repriced the entire competitive generation sector. Every producer in that sector is now planning additions. Gas turbine order books lengthen, capacity auctions clear high enough to attract new entry, and the entry arrives three to four years later. That is how this industry has always resolved a shortage. The current earnings level embeds a scarcity that a capacity response eventually removes, and the price embeds that earnings level continuing to compound.

What the price requires is where the two threads meet. At $274.39, operating profit has to compound at roughly 24.6% a year for five years to justify the quote. That is not an impossible rate; the company has recently delivered comparable growth, some of it purchased. It is an unusual rate to keep going: only about 36% of comparable fast-growers held that pace even five years. The arithmetic is fragile in the ordinary way too, since each additional percentage point of cost of capital raises the required growth by roughly 7.7 percentage points. What the price is really buying, then, is persistence.

Meanwhile the static approaches are nowhere near the price. Only the forward cash-flow methods reach it. The price sits at roughly 2.15 times where the asset-value methods land, about 47% above the earnings-power methods, and about 30% above the peer-multiple methods. That is a durability premium, and durability premiums in commodity generation have historically been paid at the wrong point in the cycle. The dilution is the last item: 50 million shares went out the door to buy Calpine, and the share count has risen about 1.9% a year over the four years to March 2026. Growth bought with stock has to clear a higher bar than growth that pays for itself.

Valuation

What the price asks for is legible and large. At $274.39 the shares carry about 25 times operating profit, and inverting that says the market is paying for operating income to compound at roughly 24.6% a year over five years. For a business whose product is a commodity delivered on a wire, that is an aggressive shape. The engine's own read of how unusual it is comes back within range, because Constellation has recently delivered growth at that order, though much of the recent step came from an acquisition rather than from the existing fleet.

The base rate is the useful discipline against enthusiasm. Among companies that have grown at comparable rates, only about 36% sustained the pace for roughly five years. The calculation is also sensitive in a way worth stating: each additional percentage point of cost of capital raises the implied growth requirement by roughly 7.7 percentage points, so treat the figure as a scale rather than a measurement. Against the sector the multiple sits in the upper half of the peer range.

The methods disagree with unusual clarity here. Only the forward cash-flow methods reach this price. The asset-value methods land far under it, with the price at roughly 2.15 times where they sit. The price stands about 47% above the earnings-power methods and about 30% above the peer-multiple methods. Two of the forward methods get there by different routes, one by projecting free cash flow forward for seven years at the recent growth rate, the other by valuing the terminal year on the cash-profit multiple the shares carry now. Neither is unreasonable. Both depend entirely on the growth continuing, and neither offers a floor if it does not.

The trailing economics are real, and they are the thing being extrapolated. Operating profit of 4.82 billion dollars on a 15.8% margin, net income of 3.79 billion dollars, and $11.51 of earnings a share are all solid figures. Book value is $94.58 a share, so the market is paying close to three times what the balance sheet carries, for a company whose assets are physical plants with published operating lives.

Cohort position is where the merchant framing earns its keep. Among the competitive generators, VISTRA (VST) earns an 18.4% operating margin on 19.1 billion dollars of revenue with 4.4% growth, TALEN (TLN) 6.5% on a much smaller base, and NRG ENERGY (NRG) 3.2%. Constellation's 15.8% sits in the upper part of that range. What it does not do is explain a multiple this far above where the peer approaches land, which means the premium is being paid for the contracted, long-dated nuclear position rather than for current profitability.

Two things bound the downside and one qualifies everything above. Interest was covered about 7.4 times over the trailing year, which is comfortable, and the Calpine purchase was settled partly in cash the company already held rather than entirely with new borrowing, per the Q1 filing's description of "approximately $4.5 billion in cash on hand". The qualification is that these trailing figures cover a period in which Calpine was owned for part of the time, so the operating history above is a bridge between two companies rather than the record of one.

Catalysts

The next scheduled event is second-quarter reporting on August 6, 2026. It is the second period to include Calpine, which closed on January 7, 2026, and the line worth separating is contracted revenue from unrealized hedge marks; the first-quarter filing showed how large the second can be.

Contracting is where the operating news has been. On June 23, 2026 the company announced a long-term nuclear power purchase agreement with Walmart for output from the Dresden Clean Energy Center in Illinois. On June 26, 2026 it filed licence renewal applications for the Ginna and Nine Mile Point Unit 1 reactors, seeking operation through 2049, which extends the asset life underneath any long-dated contract it signs. Further out, the venture arm took a strategic equity stake in Blue Energy on July 16, 2026 for small modular reactor development, a placement rather than a commitment of scale.

Sell-side opinion has separated rather than converged, which is itself informative about how contested the growth assumption is. Morgan Stanley raised its target to $366 from $364 on July 24, 2026 with an Overweight rating; Citi cut to $297 from $348 on July 1, 2026 while staying Neutral; and on June 19, 2026 Goldman Sachs started at Neutral with $305 and Bernstein at Outperform with $296. The spread between the high and the low is the same question this report frames from a different direction: how long the current earnings power lasts, and how much of it is contracted rather than marked.

Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)

Mid-Atlantic / New York +2 more (reported)

Methodology Note

Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.

Sources

company earnings calendar · company announcement, June 23, 2026 · company announcement, June 26, 2026 · Q1 2026 Form 10-Q · company announcement, July 16, 2026 · Morgan Stanley research note, July 24, 2026 · Citi research note, July 1, 2026 · broker initiations, June 19, 2026

View the full interactive CEG report on boothcheck