Many issuers are already building their 2027 budgets. That makes this the right moment to decide whether, and how, to provide guidance for next year.
The challenge is visibility. Several variables that could materially affect 2027 remain unresolved at the same time: the USMCA review, potential changes to automotive rules and tariffs, new CNBV and CONSAR regulations, and Mexico’s midterm elections, which will renew 500 congressional seats, 17 governorships and thousands of local positions.
Banxico has already cut its growth forecast for that year from 1.37% to 1.15%, citing domestic political uncertainty. For IR teams, the implication is straightforward: the 2027 guidance may need wider ranges, clearer assumptions and more explicit caveats than usual.
The data already points to a mixed environment. Mexican exports to the U.S. remain at record levels, but the auto sector contracted 11.3% in 1Q26. More importantly for the medium-term outlook, new investment fell from 18% of total FDI in 2025 to 7.2% in 1Q26. The question for issuers is therefore not just what number to guide to, but how much confidence the current environment allows them to put around that number.
What to do with guidance in this environment
When assumptions can change from one negotiation round to the next, pretending to have certainty is risky. It is better to acknowledge uncertainty upfront than to give a precise number and revise it repeatedly during the year.
What to do depending on where your company stands
Situation | What to do |
Never given formal guidance | Probably wait. This is not the ideal year to introduce guidance for the first time. A first miss can cost more credibility than delaying the practice. |
Already gives guidance | Keep it. Withdrawing guidance without a clear reason can be read as a company-specific problem rather than macro prudence. Instead, adjust the format and assumptions. |
Was already considering dropping it | This is a defensible moment to do so. During COVID-19, many companies withdrew or revised guidance as visibility collapsed. Systemic uncertainty gives issuers more room to explain a change in policy. |
If you give guidance, change how you build it
The right format depends largely on your exposure to trade, regulation and government spending.
- Lower exposure: use a range, not a point estimate, and clearly identify the external variables that could move results.
- Higher exposure: consider base, upside and downside scenarios, with the assumptions behind each.
- For everyone: identify the milestones that could trigger a revision, whether a USMCA development, a regulatory decision or the election.
- Separate execution from the environment: be explicit about what management controls and what it does not.
The goal for 2027 should not be the most precise outlook. It should be to give investors a framework they can use to understand what you expect, what you are assuming, and what could change.
At Miranda Investor Relations, we help issuers build next year’s outlook on what they can actually control, and name with precision what’s still being negotiated.
Contacts at Miranda Partners
Damian Fraser
Miranda Partners
damian.fraser@miranda-partners.com
Ana María Ybarra Corcuera
Miranda-IR
ana.ybarra@miranda-ir.com