The Oracle of RPO

---

Investors were positively surprised by Oracle’s (ORCL) earnings for the first quarter of fiscal 2026, released after the market closed on Tuesday, September 9; shares rose 36% the following day. However, it wasn’t the reported revenue or profit that shocked investors — both of those metrics missed analyst expectations. The excitement was due to the forward-looking guidance provided by the company in its Oracle Cloud Infrastructure segment, and specifically the 359% year-over-year increase in remaining performance obligations, aka RPO. No, that is not a typo. ORCL’s reported RPO was $455 billion, which is a staggering $356 billion increase compared to the prior year. But what is an RPO? In today’s blog, LPL Research digs into the metric that had most Wall Street analysts singing ORCL’s praises, and everyone else looking up just what exactly constitutes a remaining performance obligation.

 

Brief Accounting Lesson

---

Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) require public companies to report RPO (if applicable to the business) in the notes to their financial statements, and companies must follow the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rules set out in the Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) section 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. RPO refers to the total value of contracted products or services that a company is obligated to deliver but has not yet recognized as revenue on its financial statements. It encompasses both "unearned" revenue (already received but not yet earned) and "unbilled" revenue (not yet invoiced) from existing customer contracts and serves as a forward-looking metric to show future revenue potential. RPO is often broken out into near-term or current RPO, which will be recognized within one year, and non-current RPO, which will not be recognized within one year. This metric can be thought of as revenue backlog, which must follow explicit GAAP rules, including being based on executed contracts, making RPO more concrete than some non-GAAP metrics like “pipeline” or “bookings”. That said, contracts, especially long-term contracts with completion dates far into the future, can be amended/changed, and as such, RPO can change. Don’t believe us? Just ask any offshore rig owner / operator.

 

RPO Does Not Equal Revenue, or Return on Investment

---

Now that we have the basics of RPO from an accounting perspective, we can touch on how investors should, and shouldn’t, think about RPO. Returning to the ORCL earnings release, one key data point that investors did not get was the profit profile of the RPO. This is not a requirement of reporting RPO, and investors should always take an exuberant management team’s messaging on backlog / RPO with a grain of salt, especially when related to long-dated contracts far into the future.

 

Consider this hypothetical an investor may come across when analyzing RPO: a business is eager to grow their share of a given market and agrees to a multi-year contract starting two years in the future, with a total revenue value of $10 billion. The company’s services generally carry an operating margin of 25%, in line with competitors, but in this case the company will also need to purchase custom widgets to fulfill the customer’s contract that cost an incremental $2 billion (ie, 20% of total contract value) compared to standardized widgets. This brings the operating margin for the contracted revenue down to 5%, well below the company’s typical rate of return, and their cost of capital. Upon execution of the contract, the company issues a press release highlighting their multi-year contract with a large, well-known customer, that will add $10 billion to the company’s RPO, an increase that is larger than five times their prior year’s total revenue. The company does not have to report the below-market return profile of the new contract and has followed the guidelines of GAAP when it comes to RPO. This conduct is typically seen in cyclical, commodified businesses with high asset intensity, particularly during a downturn in the industry. There are several potential rationales for agreeing to a value destroying contract such as the hypothetical scenario laid out: it may be better to keep an asset working through a down-cycle; the mere winning of the contract may signal to competitors that the company is serious about growth; or perhaps there are executive compensation targets aligned to asset utilization / RPO additions. This is how a diligent analyst adds value to their investment process.

 

The takeaway here is that reported growth in backlog, or RPO, does not equal increased profitability or returns on capital. Investors must remain diligent, with a dose of healthy skepticism, when managements report massive upticks in RPO that is not to be recognized for many years into the future. Reported RPO is most useful for analysts modeling and forecasting revenue into the future, as well as understanding the market’s demand for a product or service into the future.

 

Conclusion

---

ORCL’s recent quarterly earnings report, including disclosure of a massive ramp up of RPO in its cloud infrastructure business, was by all accounts a coronation of sorts into the mega cap AI leaders club, if they weren’t already part of it. Setting aside the specifics of ORCL’s quarterly earnings release, we learned that remaining performance obligations, or RPO, is a GAAP approved measure with specific rules governing its reporting. RPO and contracts that add to it are not guaranteed and are not always near-term sources of revenue. Nor does the reporting of a large uptick in RPO tell us anything about the ROI on that revenue, when it is eventually realized.

 

LPL Research’s Strategic and Tactical Asset Allocation Committee (STAAC) remains neutral on the technology sector. While fundamentals are solid currently and technical analysis trends remain positive, sector concentration (~34% of the S&P 500) and elevated valuations (~30 times the consensus next 12 months EPS estimate) cause us to maintain our tactical neutral stance and wait for a better entry point before considering adding technology equities exposure beyond the market’s weight.

 

• Important Disclosures
• This material is for general information only and is not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. There is no assurance that the views or strategies discussed are suitable for all investors. To determine which investment(s) may be appropriate for you, please consult your financial professional prior to investing.
• Investing involves risks including possible loss of principal. No investment strategy or risk management technique can guarantee return or eliminate risk.
• Indexes are unmanaged and cannot be invested into directly. Index performance is not indicative of the performance of any investment and does not reflect fees, expenses, or sales charges. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results.
• This material was prepared by LPL Financial, LLC. All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however LPL Financial makes no representation as to its completeness or accuracy.
• Unless otherwise stated LPL Financial and the third party persons and firms mentioned are not affiliates of each other and make no representation with respect to each other. Any company names noted herein are for educational purposes only and not an indication of trading intent or a solicitation of their products or services.
• Asset Class Disclosures –
• International investing involves special risks such as currency fluctuation and political instability and may not be suitable for all investors. These risks are often heightened for investments in emerging markets.
• Bonds are subject to market and interest rate risk if sold prior to maturity.
• Municipal bonds are subject and market and interest rate risk and potentially capital gains tax if sold prior to maturity. Interest income may be subject to the alternative minimum tax. Municipal bonds are federally tax-free but other state and local taxes may apply.
• Preferred stock dividends are paid at the discretion of the issuing company. Preferred stocks are subject to interest rate and credit risk. They may be subject to a call features.
• Alternative investments may not be suitable for all investors and involve special risks such as leveraging the investment, potential adverse market forces, regulatory changes and potentially illiquidity. The strategies employed in the management of alternative investments may accelerate the velocity of potential losses.
• Mortgage backed securities are subject to credit, default, prepayment, extension, market and interest rate risk.
• High yield/junk bonds (grade BB or below) are below investment grade securities, and are subject to higher interest rate, credit, and liquidity risks than those graded BBB and above. They generally should be part of a diversified portfolio for sophisticated investors.
• Precious metal investing involves greater fluctuation and potential for losses.
• The fast price swings of commodities will result in significant volatility in an investor's holdings.
• This research material has been prepared by LPL Financial LLC.
• Not Insured by FDIC/NCUA or Any Other Government Agency | Not Bank/Credit Union Deposits or Obligations | Not Bank/Credit Union Guaranteed | May Lose Value
• For Public Use – Tracking: #797433

 

Contact us directly should you have questions about this topic.