Revenue rebounded to $251.4M in Q3 2026 with a 83.5% efficiency ratio, yet Q1 2026 posted a 104.7% efficiency ratio and provision swings from $133.3M to a $271.2M reversal suggest earnings quality remains highly uneven.
Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) annual income statement — 6-year revenue, gross profit & net income history
| Metric | TTM | Dec'25 | Dec'24 | Dec'23 | Dec'22 | Dec'21 | Dec'20 |
|---|
| Net Interest Income | 0 | 0 | 10.3M | -276K | -276K | -7.61M | -15.74M |
| NII Growth % | 0% | -100% | 3831.88% | 0% | 96.37% | 51.68% | - |
| Net Interest Margin % | 0% | 0% | 1.17% | -0.04% | -0.04% | -1.06% | -2.9% |
| Interest Income | 0 | 0 | 10.3M | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Interest Expense | 0 | 0 | 0 | 276K | 276K | 7.61M | 15.74M |
| Loan Loss Provision | -252.91M | 20.83M | 525.94M | 426.3M | 391.06M | 496.76M | 358.59M |
| Non-Interest Income | 775.98M | 750.9M | 867.74M | 648.65M | 631.51M | 801.66M | 518.99M |
| Non-Interest Income % | 100% | 100% | 98.83% | 100.04% | 100.04% | 100.96% | 103.13% |
| Total Net Revenue | 775.98M | 750.9M | 878.04M | 648.38M | 631.23M | 794.06M | 503.25M |
| Revenue Growth % | 2.45% | -14.48% | 35.42% | 2.72% | -20.51% | 57.79% | - |
| Non-Interest Expense | 983.26M | 682.06M | 430.63M | 337.18M | 287.91M | 230.71M | 159.25M |
| Efficiency Ratio | 126.71% | 90.83% | 49.04% | 52% | 45.61% | 29.06% | 31.64% |
| Operating Income | 45.63M | 48.01M | -78.53M | -115.1M | -47.73M | 66.58M | -14.6M |
| Operating Margin % | 5.88% | 6.39% | -8.94% | -17.75% | -7.56% | 8.39% | -2.9% |
| Operating Income Growth % | - | 161.13% | 31.77% | -141.13% | -171.69% | 556.18% | - |
| Pretax Income | 52.4M | 51.52M | -68.25M | -112.82M | -21.42M | 22.95M | -20.89M |
| Pretax Margin % | 6.75% | 6.86% | -7.77% | -17.4% | -3.39% | 2.89% | -4.15% |
| Income Tax | 9.72M | 3.51M | 21.09M | -980K | 10.33M | 18.93M | 3.45M |
| Effective Tax Rate % | 18.56% | 6.82% | -30.9% | 0.87% | -48.21% | 82.47% | -16.53% |
| Net Income | 33.75M | 35.48M | -64.73M | -17.22M | 17.88M | -9.42M | -24.34M |
| Net Margin % | 4.35% | 4.72% | -7.37% | -2.66% | 2.83% | -1.19% | -4.84% |
| Net Income Growth % | -27.98% | 154.81% | -275.82% | -196.34% | 289.77% | 61.3% | - |
| Net Income (Continuing) | 42.67M | 48M | -89.34M | -111.84M | -31.75M | 4.02M | -24.34M |
| EPS (Diluted) | 0.33 | 0.55 | -1.22 | -1.33 | -0.46 | -0.22 | -0.26 |
| EPS Growth % | -33.34% | 145.08% | 8.27% | -189.13% | -109.09% | 15.38% | - |
| EPS (Basic) | - | 0.55 | -1.22 | -0.40 | 0.41 | -0.22 | -0.26 |
| Diluted Shares Outstanding | 103.29M | 64.21M | 53.19M | 86.78M | 89.76M | 42.6M | 92.8M |
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying PWP stock.
For fiscal year 2025, Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) reported total revenue of $750.9M. This represents a 49.2% increase compared to $503.2M in 2020.
Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) is profitable, generating $35.5M in net income for the fiscal year ending 2025 with a net profit margin of 4.7%.
Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) reported an operating income of $48.0M, resulting in an operating profit margin of 6.4%. This margin reflects the operational efficiency of the business before interest and taxes.
Perella Weinberg Partners (PWP) generated $730.1M in gross profit for the year, representing a gross profit margin of 97.2%. This demonstrates the company's core pricing power and production efficiency.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Advisory revenue volatility and deal delays
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Quarterly Results Mask Underlying Advisory Volatility
Based on reported figures, PWP's Q3 2026 revenue of $251.4M appears to reflect a rebound, yet the quarter's EPS of $0.21 against sharply uneven prior quarters suggests earnings remain highly dependent on the timing of success fee recognition.
Revenue swung from $148.9M in Q1 2026 to $251.4M in Q3 2026, a pattern that suggests recognition is concentrated around deal closings rather than steady advisory activity. The single-quarter improvement should not be extrapolated without confirmation that backlog conversion continues across consecutive periods. Investors should monitor whether the $271.2M provision reversal in Q4 2025 was a one-time benefit that flatters the trailing earnings base.
Elevated Efficiency Ratio Signals Cost Rigidity
As reported in the income statement, PWP's efficiency ratio of 83.5% in Q3 2026 and 104.7% in Q1 2026 indicates that compensation and overhead have repeatedly consumed most or all of revenue in recent quarters.
Efficiency ratios above 90% in several quarters imply that the firm's professional cost base does not flex quickly with revenue softness. This operating leverage cuts both ways, producing outsized profit in strong quarters and near-breakeven or losses in weak ones. Whether the Gleacher Shacklock acquisition improves this ratio will depend on how much of its cost base can be absorbed without raising the compensation-to-revenue ratio.
Provisioning Pattern Distorts Earnings Comparisons
Based on PWP's reported figures, provision expense moved from $133.3M in Q4 2024 to a $271.2M reversal in Q4 2025, indicating that the earnings line is heavily influenced by non-operating accounting adjustments.
Provision expense for an advisory-led firm of this type is unusual and warrants further investigation into the nature of the underlying liabilities being reserved. The large swing in Q4 2025 materially inflates year-over-year comparisons and makes trend analysis of core earnings unreliable without normalization. Analysts should request the composition of these provisions before drawing conclusions about underlying profitability.
Fee Income Concentration Drives Revenue Entirely
According to the reported income statement, non-interest income accounts for 100% of total revenue in every quarter shown, reflecting a pure advisory model with no net interest income offset.
The absence of a lending or deposit base means PWP has no structural buffer against advisory cyclicality, unlike universal banks with net interest income support. This concentration makes the revenue line directly exposed to M&A and restructuring activity levels. Investors should view fee income quality through the lens of deal completion rates and backlog conversion rather than recurring income.