Eli Lilly reported Q2 2026 before the open on August 5. Revenue was $22.97B, up 47.6% year over year. Adjusted EPS was $8.38 against a $6.55 consensus. GAAP EPS was $7.94. The stock rose about 4%.
This morning we published a preview making one argument: the consensus of $6.55 had fallen 25.7% in thirty days and spanned $5.28 to $9.08 across 21 analysts, and a $3.80 range on a company this large is not a disagreement about the business — it is a disagreement about how one accounting line gets treated. The print settles it.
The call, graded
| What we said | What the print says |
|---|---|
| The $3.80 range is about an accounting line, not the business | Confirmed. Adjusted EPS $8.38 landed near the top of the range; GAAP EPS $7.94 is $0.44 below it. The business number and the accounting number differ by exactly the kind of gap the spread was pricing. |
| The consensus midpoint had fallen 25.7% in thirty days | The fall was wrong. $8.38 beat the $6.55 midpoint by 27.9% — almost precisely reversing the cut. |
| Revenue growth is the durable half of the score | Held. +47.6%, the fifth straight quarter above 40%. |
An analyst panel that cuts a number 25.7% in thirty days and is then beaten by 27.9% was not modelling the business. It was modelling a charge.
The quarter in the house series
| Quarter | Revenue | Revenue YoY | Diluted EPS | FCF | FCF margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Q1 | $12,729M | — | $3.06 | $156M | 1.2% |
| 2025 Q2 | $15,558M | — | $6.29 | $1,390M | 8.9% |
| 2025 Q3 | $17,601M | — | $6.21 | $6,748M | 38.3% |
| 2025 Q4 | $19,292M | — | $7.39 | $678M | 3.5% |
| 2026 Q1 | $19,799M | +55.5% | $8.26 | $3,007M | 15.2% |
| 2026 Q2 | $22,970M | +47.6% | $7.94 GAAP / $8.38 adj | not yet published | — |
Look at the free-cash-flow column rather than the revenue column. It reads 1.2%, 8.9%, 38.3%, 3.5%, 15.2%. That is not a business with an unstable cash engine — it is a business whose capital expenditure is landing in lumps, and Lilly has been spending on manufacturing capacity at a scale that makes any single quarter's conversion close to meaningless.
This is why the preview quoted Lilly's Rule of 40 two ways: 63.80 on a trailing basis, and a per-quarter range of 46 to 92. A metric that swings 46 points across four quarters of the same business is measuring the capex calendar, not the company. The trailing number is the one to carry.
The Q2 cash-flow statement is not in the release. We will recompute the score when the 10-Q lands rather than infer it.
Where the growth actually came from
| Product | Q2 2026 revenue | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Mounjaro | $9.94B | +91% |
| Zepbound (US) | $4.93B | +44% |
Mounjaro alone is now larger than Lilly's entire quarterly revenue was in 2024 Q1 ($8,768M in our series). The split was $4.8B US and $5.2B international — international is now the bigger half, which is the more important structural fact in the release. The US GLP-1 story is a price story with volume growth fighting net-price erosion; the international story is still a volume story with the price fight ahead of it.
Zepbound's $4.93B beat the $4.64B expected, with prescription demand more than covering a decline in net prices. That is the trade the whole category is making, and Lilly is currently winning it on volume.
The guidance is the tell
Full-year revenue guidance went up to $85B–$87B from $82B–$85B. Full-year adjusted EPS guidance was narrowed to $35.50–$36.50 from $35.50–$37.00 — the floor held and the ceiling came down.
Raising revenue while trimming the top of the EPS range is a company saying: demand is better than we thought, and the cost of serving it is too. On a business adding manufacturing capacity as fast as Lilly is, that is the expected shape, and it is a more credible pair of revisions than raising both would have been.
The number to watch is not next quarter's EPS, which will again be argued about on one line. It is international Mounjaro against US Mounjaro, and whether the international half keeps growing faster than the price erosion arriving behind it.