Q3 is the point at which to test whether the second-half recovery is real under a full-year plan for zero operating profit

FY2026-H1 revenue was ¥3,937.151 million, down 8.1% year on year, while operating results shifted from an operating profit of ¥606.660 million in the year-earlier period to an operating loss of ¥71.139 million. Ordinary results likewise shifted from a profit of ¥609.301 million to a loss of ¥76.439 million, while interim net results attributable to owners of the parent shifted from a profit of ¥416.813 million to a loss of ¥72.197 million. The deterioration in the first half was not limited to a one-off bottom-line loss. It reflected deterioration at the operating level, accompanied by declines in gross and operating profit margins.

Alongside its first-half results, the company revised its FY2026 full-year forecasts to revenue of ¥8,000 million, operating profit of ¥0 million, ordinary loss of ¥10 million and net loss attributable to owners of the parent of ¥383 million. Revenue is expected to rise 3.5% from FY2025 actual revenue of ¥7,728 million, while operating profit is assumed to fall to zero from FY2025 actual operating profit of ¥445 million. On a simple difference basis, the second half would need to generate revenue of ¥4,063 million and operating profit of ¥71 million. For net profit, the calculation implies a second-half loss of ¥311 million, although this includes the impact of extraordinary losses related to the head-office relocation and therefore needs to be assessed separately from operating results.

In Q3, the first point to check is whether nine-month cumulative revenue approaches ¥6,000 million, equivalent to 75% of the full-year forecast. However, because the operating profit forecast is ¥0 million, the usual operating-profit progress rate is of limited significance. Instead, the focus should be on whether the H1 operating loss of ¥71 million has widened in the Q3 cumulative results, whether standalone Q3 results have turned profitable, and whether additional support is provided for achieving profitability in the second half.

The latest earnings forecast revision did not present the pre-revision forecasts for each profit item or the revision rates in a form that allows sufficient comparison. In the Q3 results, it will be necessary to check not only whether the full-year forecasts are maintained or revised again, but also how much of the impact of AI-related investment, head-office relocation costs and the recovery in product-level revenue has been incorporated into the full-year plan.