How did the 2Q25 outlook affect companies’ expectations

How did the 2Q25 outlook affect companies’ expectations

Mexico’s economic environment became more challenging in the second quarter, with pressured consumption, weaker industrial activity, and limited visibility across several sectors. While some industries proved resilient, others faced operational adjustments and margin pressures. Against this backdrop, several companies that had issued 2025 guidance adjusted it in their 2Q25 reports, while others improved or reaffirmed it, and a significant group did not mention guidance at all.

Adjusting guidance should reflect a new read of the environment and could in theory be independent of whether results are in line with market expectations (although in practice more often than not, a large miss will lead to a downward adjustment in guidance and a big beat an upward revision in guidance). Reaffirming guidance can signal financial predictability, as long as it is consistent with results. However, revising guidance without explanation creates uncertainty and, in some cases, may undermine trust.

The section below outlines how guidance evolved after 2Q25 and what it means for IR teams and investors, based on a sample of 139 listed issuers on BMV and BIVA. Before going into the numbers, a word of caution. The impact of a change in guidance is not always straightforward. Guidance can cover one or more metrics (sales, volumes, margins, profits, cash flow, capex, capacity, leverage or just outlook), and its key to look at the net impact of what is being measured and changed. A company can raise sales estimates but reduce margin forecast, or the opposite. Is this good or bad? A cut in capex could be positive (more cash flow) or negative (less positive sales outlook). Given this, referring to ’guidance’ in the singular may be misleading.

• 107 companies (77.0%) Ø

Did not mention guidance or had not issued any at the start of the year.

• 17 companies (12.2%) →

Reaffirmed their guidance: Alfa, América Móvil, Axtel, Banorte, Becle, Cadu, Fibra Mty, Fibra Macquarie, Fibra Nova, Fresnillo, Herdez, Liverpool, Nemak, Orbia, Vesta, Vinte, and Walmex.

• 1 company (0.7%) →

Issued guidance for the first time this year: Traxión.

• 5 companies (3.6%) ↑

Revised guidance upward: Cemex, Fibra Prologis, Gentera, Vista Energy, and Volaris.

• 5 companies (3.6%) ↓

Revised guidance downward: Alpek, BanBajío, Bimbo, GCC, and Regional.

• 4 companies (2.9%)

Did not provide formal guidance but shared expectations for 2025: Bafar, Quálitas, Televisa, and Viva Aerobus.

The few companies that revised guidance upward did so on the back of clear fundamentals, such as stronger operations or results above expectations. Volaris raised its EBITDAR margin outlook based on strong fundamental drivers, while Vista Energy adjusted its production and EBITDA projections fueled by a recent transaction and good momentum in the energy sector. Positive revisions were also reported by Fibra Prologis and Gentera, the latter supported by improved profitability across all divisions and a strategic acquisition.

Meanwhile, downward revisions came from sectors under stronger margin pressure or with significant international exposure. Bimbo cut its revenue estimates due to peso appreciation, while Alpek and GCC reduced expectations on weaker prices and softer demand. Regional and BanBajío reported lower-than-expected results and significantly revised their guidance downward. BanBajío also has lower growth expectations in Mexico and foresees more aggressive rate cuts.

Maintaining guidance in a quarter marked by contrasts also sends a message to the market. Banorte reaffirmed its targets supported by profitability and efficiency improvements. Walmex maintained its objectives despite a slower-than-anticipated consumption recovery. Fibra Mty, Becle, and Alfa confirmed their objectives, signaling disciplined execution and confidence in their long-term strategies. Minimal adjustments were made by Fibra Macquarie and Orbia: the former updated the peso per AFFO, with no material impact beyond reporting, while the latter broadened its effective tax rate range by 1%.

Finally, of the companies that provided certain expectations without issuing formal guidance, Quálitas reaffirmed its outlook, underscoring confidence in its strategic financial goals. Bafar raised its EBITDA margin projections. Televisa lowered its capex expectation to US 600 million from US 665 million following favorable supplier negotiations. Viva Aerobus, with jet fuel and FX hedging adjusted the percentage of its projected 2025 exposure that is hedged.

Guidance is optional but can be a powerful communication tool. The goal is not to provide absolute certainty, but to demonstrate clear direction and adaptability. As 2025 proves more challenging than expected, a well-structured narrative —whether with or without formal guidance— can make the difference in how the market perceives a company.

At Miranda IR, we know that guidance is only useful when it is well-grounded. Sharing estimates without sufficient visibility can be more damaging than not providing any at all, as it creates false certainty and erodes credibility when missed. That is why we help clients decide whether it truly is the right time to share guidance, what metrics to share, how to communicate it clearly and prudently, and how to build realistic narratives that connect current performance with long-term strategies.

For more information, please contact:
ana.ybarra@miranda-ir.com or damian.fraser@miranda-partners.com