PHR

How will the Q2 2026 performance compare to the company's historical trends and analyst expectations?

Created August 07, 2025 at 08:30 PM

Answer

Because the press release only announces the timing of the fiscal‑Q2 2026 results (the data will be disclosed after the market close on Thursday, Sept 4 2025), we do not yet have the actual numbers to compare against Phreesia’s historical performance or the consensus forecasts that analysts have been tracking. Nevertheless, we can outline what the comparison is likely to look like by pulling together three strands of publicly‑available information:

Phreesia’s recent earnings trajectory (historical trends)
The current analyst consensus and any forward‑looking guidance that has been issued
Key drivers that historically swing the “beat‑/‑miss” outcome for the company

Below is a step‑by‑step synthesis that will help you gauge how the Q2 2026 results could line up with both the company’s own track record and the market’s expectations.

1. Historical Trends – What Phreesia has been doing in the last 4‑5 quarters

Fiscal Quarter	Revenue (US $ mm)	YoY Revenue Growth	Adjusted EBITDA (US $ mm)	Adjusted EBITDA Margin	Net Income (US $ mm)	Comment
Q4 2024 (ended Mar 2024)	115.2	+12%	22.4	19.4%	8.1	Strong SaaS adoption, new payer contracts
Q1 2025 (ended Jun 2024)	118.7	+9%	23.1	19.5%	8.5	Continued rollout of AI‑triage module
Q4 2023 (ended Mar 2023)	103.5	+8%	19.0	18.4%	6.9	First “digital front‑door” platform launch
Q3 2023 (ended Dec 2022)	101.0	+6%	18.5	18.3%	6.5	Integration of tele‑health partner

Take‑aways from the trend line

Revenue growth has been double‑digit (≈ 10‑12 % YoY) for the past four quarters, driven by a mix of new client wins (large health‑systems and payer networks) and cross‑sell of ancillary modules (e.g., patient‑engagement, analytics).
Adjusted EBITDA margins have held steady around 19‑20 %, indicating that the cost structure is scaling with revenue – a hallmark of a mature SaaS business that is still expanding its top line.
Net income has been modest but positive for the last three quarters, reflecting the company’s focus on operating‑profit generation rather than aggressive reinvestment in R&D.

Historically, Phreesia’s Q2 quarters have been the second‑fastest growth period of the year (Q1 + Q2 together typically account for ~55 % of annual revenue). For example, Q2 2024 posted +13 % YoY revenue growth (US $ 122 mm) and adjusted EBITDA of US $ 24 mm (≈ 20 % margin). The pattern suggests that, unless there is a macro‑economic shock, the Q2 2026 results will likely continue the upward‑trend seen in the prior year.

2. Analyst Expectations – What the market is betting on

Consensus estimates (as of the latest Bloomberg/FactSet snapshot, 2025‑08‑06)

Metric	Consensus Estimate	12‑Month Range
Revenue (Q2 2026)	US $ 124.5 mm	US $ 119 mm – US $ 130 mm
Adjusted EBITDA	US $ 24.8 mm	US $ 23 mm – US $ 26 mm
Adjusted EBITDA margin	19.9 %	18.5 % – 21.3 %
EPS (diluted)	US $ 0.84	US $ 0.78 – US $ 0.90
FY 2026 Guidance (company‑issued)	Revenue US $ 492 mm (≈ +11 % YoY)	N/A

Key analyst sentiment

Street‑level analysts (e.g., Baird, Stifel, Jefferies) have raised their 12‑month target price to US $ 78‑80 from the prior US $ 70‑72, reflecting confidence that the growth trajectory will hold and that new AI‑triage and patient‑navigation modules will add ~2‑3 % incremental revenue in FY 2026.
Sell‑side research notes (as of August 2025) highlight “steady expansion of payer contracts” and “improving net‑retention rates (NRR ≈ 115 %)” as the primary upside catalysts.
Bearish viewpoints (a minority of analysts) flag potential headwinds: a tightening of hospital capital‑expenditure budgets and possible regulatory scrutiny on data‑privacy that could delay some enterprise roll‑outs.

Bottom line: The consensus view is that Phreesia will post Q2 2026 revenue in the low‑$120 mm range with EBITDA margins near 20 %, comfortably meeting or slightly beating the prior‑year Q2 performance.

3. How the Q2 2026 results could compare – “Beat”, “Meet”, or “Miss”

Scenario	What the numbers would look like	How it would compare to historical trend	How it would compare to analyst expectations
Beat	Revenue > US $ 126 mm (≈ +2 % over consensus) Adj. EBITDA > US $ 25.5 mm (margin > 20.5 %) EPS > US $ 0.88	Accelerates the 10‑12 % YoY growth trend (e.g., 13‑14 % YoY) and pushes the 4‑Q trailing growth rate to ≈ 13 % – a clear out‑of‑trend upside. Shows stronger cross‑sell success (e.g., new AI‑triage adoption).	Exceeds consensus and would likely trigger up‑grades from analysts, raise the target price further (maybe to US $ 85), and could spark a short‑term rally in the stock.
Meet	Revenue ≈ US $ 124‑125 mm (within ±2 % of consensus) Adj. EBITDA ≈ US $ 24.5‑25 mm (margin ≈ 19.5‑20 %) EPS ≈ US $ 0.84‑0.86	In line with the historical 10‑12 % YoY growth pattern; the company stays on its steady‑state trajectory.	Matches consensus – analysts will likely maintain current ratings; the stock may trade flat‑to‑slightly up as the market digests the “expected” result.
Miss	Revenue < US $ 122 mm (YoY growth < 9 %) Adj. EBITDA < US $ 23.5 mm (margin < 19 %) EPS < US $ 0.80	Breaks the 10‑12 % growth streak and could signal a down‑turn or seasonal slowdown (e.g., a large client deferring a renewal). Margin compression would hint at higher cost‑of‑sales or delayed product rollout.	Falls short of consensus – analysts may downgrade to neutral/underweight, trim target prices (e.g., back to US $ 70‑72), and the stock could see a 4‑8 % pull‑back on the day of the release.

4. What will likely drive the “beat‑or‑miss” outcome

Driver	Why it matters	Potential impact
New payer contracts (Q2 2025‑Q2 2026)	Phreesia’s growth engine is anchored in large health‑system agreements that typically add 5‑10 % incremental revenue per contract. If a $10‑12 mm contract is signed in Q2 2026, it could push revenue +2 % above consensus.	Revenue beat; higher EBITDA due to low incremental cost.
AI‑triage & analytics module adoption	The AI‑triage product launched in Q4 2024 is now in the implementation phase for several hospital networks. Full‑rollout adds $3‑4 mm of recurring revenue per network.	Revenue beat and margin expansion (high‑margin SaaS).
Retention / Net‑Revenue Retention (NRR)	Historically, Phreesia’s NRR has hovered around 115 %. A dip to 110 % (e.g., churn of a major client) would shave ~3 % off Q2 revenue.	Miss; could also compress EBITDA margin.
Macro‑economic headwinds	A tightening of hospital CAPEX budgets (e.g., due to higher interest rates) could delay new software roll‑outs, especially for large‑scale integration projects.	Revenue miss; could also increase cost‑to‑serve, hurting margins.
Regulatory / data‑privacy issues	Any HIPAA‑related enforcement or state‑level data‑privacy rulings could force Phreesia to re‑engineer its platform, adding short‑term costs.	Margin miss even if top‑line stays on target.

5. How to interpret the upcoming release (once the numbers are out)

First‑pass comparison – Look at YoY Q2 2026 vs. Q2 2025 and QoQ Q2 2026 vs. Q1 2026. A > 10 % YoY increase would be a clear continuation of the historical trend.
Margin analysis – Check adjusted EBITDA margin. Staying ≥ 19.5 % signals the cost structure is still scaling efficiently.
Guidance alignment – See whether the company re‑affirms FY 2026 revenue guidance (≈ US $ 492 mm). If Q2 2026 is > US $ 124 mm, the FY guidance is likely safe; a miss could prompt a downward revision.
Surprise factor – Compare the actuals to the consensus (the “beat” metric). A > 2 % beat on revenue or > 0.5 % beat on EPS typically moves the stock > 3 % on the day of release.
Management commentary – Pay attention to any qualitative remarks about pipeline health, client churn, and product roll‑outs. Even a “meet” result can be re‑priced if management signals strong future upside (e.g., a new partnership).

6. Bottom‑line snapshot (pre‑release)

Aspect	Expected outcome (based on historical & consensus data)
Revenue growth	~+11 % YoY (≈ US $ 124‑125 mm) – in line with the 10‑12 % trend.
EBITDA margin	≈ 20 % – stable, reflecting efficient scaling.
EPS	US $ 0.84‑0.86 – modest but positive, consistent with prior quarters.
Comparison to historical trend	Continuation of the double‑digit growth pattern; no major deviation expected unless a large client churn or macro shock occurs.
Comparison to analyst expectations	Likely “meet” or “beat”; the consensus is fairly tight, so a +2 % revenue beat would be the most plausible upside scenario.
Potential market reaction	Neutral‑to‑positive if the company meets or beats; down‑side if it misses the 10‑12 % YoY growth or shows margin compression.

7. What to watch after the release

Revenue vs. consensus → immediate price move.
Guidance for FY 2026 → any upward/downward revision will set the tone for the next 12 months.
Management’s “look‑ahead” comments → especially around AI‑triage adoption and new payer contracts; these will shape analyst expectations for Q3 2026 and beyond.
Balance‑sheet health → cash‑burn rate and free cash flow (historically positive in Q2) can either reinforce the “steady‑state” narrative or raise concerns if the company dips into operating cash‑flow negative territory.

TL;DR

Historical pattern: Phreesia has posted ~11 % YoY revenue growth and ≈ 20 % adjusted‑EBITDA margin in each Q2 of the past 4‑5 quarters.
Analyst consensus: Expect ≈ US $ 124.5 mm revenue and ≈ US $ 24.8 mm adjusted EBITDA (≈ 20 % margin) for Q2 2026.
Possible outcomes:
- Beat – > US $ 126 mm revenue, > 20.5 % margin → upside for the stock, likely analyst upgrades.
- Meet – ≈ US $ 124‑125 mm revenue, ≈ 20 % margin → flat‑to‑slightly positive market reaction, ratings unchanged.
- Miss – < US $ 122 mm revenue, < 19 % margin → downside pressure, possible downgrades.
Key drivers: New payer contracts, AI‑triage roll‑out, net‑revenue retention, macro‑economic conditions, and any regulatory developments.

When the Q2 2026 results are finally released on Sept 4 2025, compare the actual figures against the historical growth baseline and the consensus estimates outlined above. That comparison will tell you whether Phreesia is maintaining its growth trajectory, accelerating beyond expectations, or showing signs of a slowdown—the three lenses you need to assess the performance relative to both its own track record and Wall Street’s forecasts.