JPMorgan & Goldman Sachs Earnings: What 2026’s Financial Narrative Hinges On

As earnings season begins, the reports from JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs will serve as a litmus test for the U.S. financial sector’s transition from stabilizing to growing in 2026. Both banks are being assessed not just on yesterday’s results, but on their outlooks for interest rates, deal flow, and margin pressures. JPMorgan’s estimates for Q4 2025 suggest revenues near $46 billion and earnings around $4.85 per share; analysts expect net interest income to grow to nearly $95.8 billion for the full year 2025, but note that NII declined year-over-year in Q4 due to rate cuts and deposit margin compression.

Goldman Sachs enters the earnings week riding the strong M&A trend: it advised on approximately $1.48 trillion in global deal value in 2025, capturing 32% of the market and leading in both advisory activity and underwriting fees. Expected growth in IPOs, underwriting, and fees remains a market focus.

On the macro side, views have diverged. Goldman’s chief economist anticipates rate cuts in June and September 2026 and expects the terminal federal funds rate to settle in the 3.0–3.25% range, assuming inflation cools and growth holds. In contrast, JPMorgan economists see no rate cuts in 2026, projecting instead a potential federal funds rate hike in Q3 2027. New York Fed President John Williams also suggests that current monetary policy is “moderately restrictive” and close to neutral, with no immediate need for further easing.

Strategic implications for both banks are clear. First, sustaining NII will require careful management of deposit costs and asset yield mix; margins are under pressure as high‐cost funding remains. Second, investment banking remains the key growth lever—from M&A and underwriting to IPOs—especially for Goldman but also increasingly for JPMorgan, which is expanding in regions such as the Middle East and emerging markets. Third, credit quality and loan loss provisioning remain watch points: while large banks remain diversified, smaller regional institutions with CRE exposure face greater downside. Finally, regulatory and leadership risk—particularly any shifts in Fed independence or policy direction tied to mid-2026 transitions—may affect the “terminal rate” assumptions built into bank guidance.

Open questions going into the week include: how much optimism about rate cuts is priced in, and how the banks align their guidance; whether dealmaking and IPO pipelines will surprise on the upside or suffer from soft spots; how quickly expenses, particularly for AI investments and credit losses, will eat into recent revenue gains; and whether any missteps in credit signals or capital deployment could trigger downside surprises.