巴西上市公司增收不增利，高利率吞噬中资企业利润空间

Luciano Castro Gabriel Reis/Valor Publicly traded companies in Brazil have struggled to translate revenue growth into value creation. A PwC Strategy& Brazil survey found that, despite rising sales, higher financing costs and weaker operating profitability have limited net profit growth. Between 2022 and 2025, the combined revenue of the 280 companies analyzed rose by R$558.8 billion, or 21.9% in nominal terms, while operating profit increased by R$43.1 billion. Yet net profit fell by R$6 billion over the period, as a R$45.7 billion deterioration in financial results more than offset operating gains. The survey covers non-financial listed companies, excluding Petrobras and Vale to avoid distortions from the 2022 commodities boom. In real terms, however, the revenue of Brazilian-listed companies was virtually flat between 2022 and 2025. Although aggregate revenue rose 21.9% in nominal terms during the period, the increase was only slightly above cumulative inflation of 20.95%, suggesting that companies struggled to achieve meaningful business expansion. By comparison, over the same four-year period, money invested in Brazil’s traditional savings accounts would have generated returns of just over 34%, while an investment linked to 100% of the CDI benchmark interbank rate would have returned roughly 61%. “A high Selic policy rate raises borrowing costs, curbs credit-financed consumption, and puts pressure on sectors that rely on working capital or installment sales. At the same time, many companies have lost pricing power, managing to raise prices in nominal terms but not above inflation,” said Luciano Castro, business director and head of business transformation and performance improvement at PwC Brazil. The most recent portion of the survey, based on first-quarter 2026 results, analyzed 289 non-financial listed companies. Of those, 64.7% posted revenue growth compared with the first quarter of 2025. Among that group, 43.9% saw operating margins decline, 32.6% reported lower operating profit, and 44.9% posted lower net profit. Overall, operating activities added R$3.4 billion during the quarter, while financial results reduced earnings by R$12.2 billion. Aggregate quarterly net profit still increased by R$4.9 billion, but only because companies booked an additional R$13.7 billion in income tax effects, discontinued operations, and other non-recurring items. Between 2022 and 2025, the sectors experiencing the highest revenue pressure included chemical and petrochemical companies, metallurgy and steel producers, pulp and paper manufacturers, oil and gas firms, plastics and rubber producers, building materials suppliers, electronics companies, and retailers. Among chemical and petrochemical companies, aggregate real revenue fell 38.8% across the six companies analyzed. Only one company in the sector posted revenue growth above inflation. Aggregate real revenue in metallurgy and steel declined 27.1% between 2022 and 2025, while pulp and paper companies recorded a 16.3% drop. Real revenue in the oil and gas sector fell 12%. Water and sanitation companies experienced a significant revenue increase of 67.3%, with construction and engineering firms growing by 51.2%, specialized services providers by 50.6%, and healthcare services companies by 34.2%. However, Castro noted that this growth was uneven and selective, and should not be viewed as representative of entire industries, emphasizing that each sample may not reflect the overall sector performance. The study also identifies signs of deteriorating operating performance even before the impact of higher interest rates. Between 2022 and 2025, 210 of the companies surveyed increased revenue. Of those, 52 expanded sales while reporting lower operating profit in absolute terms. Another 74 companies increased revenue but posted lower net profit. Operating profit reflects earnings generated exclusively by a company’s core business, excluding taxes and financial results. According to Castro, the problem is closely tied to how companies define value creation. “Today, growth is no longer seen as a capital allocation issue,” he said. “The prevailing mindset has been to grow first and convert that growth into margins later, but the current environment has made that strategy much harder to sustain.” Flávio Conde, sector coordinator at the economics committee of Apimec Brasil, the Brazilian association of investment analysts and capital markets professionals, argues that the deterioration in corporate earnings is directly tied to the sharp shift in Brazil’s interest-rate environment over the past several years. He notes that many companies took on more leverage during a period of historically low borrowing costs but were then surprised by the rapid rise in the Selic policy rate. “In 2021, when the Selic policy rate was about 4.5%, some investors grew overly enthusiastic and took on too much debt,” he said. “Three or four years later, the rate had risen to 15%. Financial expenses became a major drag on corporate earnings, and profits plunged.” In his view, the sharp rise in borrowing costs helps explain the compression of corporate earnings. Castro agrees that the Selic policy rate bears part of the blame but argues that high interest rates alone do not fully explain what he describes as the “bleeding” in companies’ financial results. He said high borrowing costs have long been a feature of Brazil’s economic environment, and that companies’ exposure to financial expenses reflects strategic decisions made long before current rates were reached. “High interest rates are only fatal for companies that built balance sheets assuming borrowing costs would remain low. And that was a choice,” Castro said. Castro suggests that many companies have effectively bought growth by leveraging their balance sheets more assertively—such as granting customers longer payment periods, accepting higher receivables, holding more inventory, financing working capital through debt, or offering significant discounts to increase sales at the end of each quarter. “That model works when the cost of capital is low, but it begins to break down as the financial environment becomes more restrictive,” he said. Charles Putz, a board member at Ibef-SP, the São Paulo chapter of the Brazilian Institute of Finance Executives, argues that corporate results are being squeezed by both weaker operating margins and rising financial expenses. According to Putz, consumers have become more price-sensitive, making it harder for companies to pass higher costs on to customers. “Sometimes a company can preserve revenue by selling higher volumes, but only at lower prices. That inevitably means lower margins and weaker earnings,” he said. Castro also believes consumer behavior has shifted, with shoppers placing greater emphasis on discounts and lower-priced products. Although real household income has recovered somewhat on average, family budgets remain under pressure from high interest rates, expensive credit, rising indebtedness and cumulative inflation in essential goods. As a result, consumers have become more price-sensitive, increasingly seeking discounts, lower-cost brands, smaller package sizes and substitute products. According to Putz, companies’ difficulty in turning revenue growth into higher profits reflects a corporate environment in which cash preservation has once again become a top priority. He said the greatest concern among finance executives today is liquidity risk. “The companies performing best are those that have managed liquidity well,” Putz said. The PwC study highlights issues with corporate incentives and governance. It notes that many companies primarily evaluate their commercial teams based on revenue growth and market share, with less focus on metrics like margins, cash flow, and return on capital. Additionally, board discussions often emphasize expansion and sales volumes over the quality and sustainability of growth. Castro believes part of that mindset reflects a generation of executives who built their careers during periods of inexpensive capital, when revenue growth alone was often enough to mask operational inefficiencies. He believes many executives still see value creation mainly as increasing sales, but it should involve balancing growth, profit, and shareholder value. “In my experience, few leaders actually prioritize shareholder returns as their main goal," he noted. Even so, Castro sees signs that this mindset is beginning to shift. According to him, the growing number of chief financial officers promoted to chief executive reflects the need for management teams that place greater emphasis on capital allocation and value creation. Putz also sees a direct connection between the current environment and the growing influence of CFOs within organizations. In periods of tighter financial conditions, he said, companies increasingly value executives capable of managing capital, debt and liquidity. “This more challenging financial environment may be increasing the importance of CFOs within companies and leading to more CFOs being promoted to CEO positions,” he said.