Fiscal Q4 2026 brings a reported AI revenue figure in the annual report: revenue of from OpenAI over the year, revenue-sharing payments included, a ratio of to cloud revenue. The CFO adds that nearly of cloud revenue came from outside frontier model companies. The AI business run rate given a quarter earlier is not repeated; the ledger rolls its estimate forward to , against revenue of , with Copilot paid seats past , GitHub Copilot revenue up more than on the quarter and Foundry customers at .
On cost, the annual report again attributes the rise in Intelligent Cloud cost of revenue to AI infrastructure and the rise in Productivity and Business Processes cost of revenue to AI infrastructure for Copilot; from the segment tables the quarter’s rises are and . The research and development rise now mixes AI compute and talent with XBOX impairment, and the sales and marketing rise mixes Copilot advertising with commercial sales, so neither is sized this quarter. Depreciation was for the quarter, against a year earlier; it, lease cost and lease interest are ceiling lines, unsized because the build is named for AI and non-AI infrastructure together.
Capital expenditures including finance leases were , leases signed and not yet commenced rose to and purchase commitments stand at ; the AI part is unsized, since the build is named for AI and non-AI infrastructure together, and capital is left out of totals in any case. Non-operating marks on AI labs: a gain on Anthropic, named in the release, and a gain of on the OpenAI stake, backed out of the annual report.
Steps from the prior quarter. Channels open: ambient clinical documentation (unsized, no traceable price), web grounding sold to AI assistants, forward-deployed engineering teams, and the Anthropic gain. The AI business moves from quantified to described as its run rate goes unrepeated; Security Copilot moves from directional to described; Foundry stays directional on its customer level; the frontier lab channel moves from described to quantified on the annual report’s figure; agent governance moves from described to directional on an agent count and from exploratory to offensive as it is sold inside E7; research and development moves from reported to unsized, and Copilot advertising from sized to unsized, as each rise is named beside another cause. The revenue share paid to OpenAI goes unmentioned. Headcount fell again with no tie to AI, so no saving is registered.
Sized channels against the income statement, Q2 2026
11 of 24 channels sized
Each blue mark is one channel's dollars for the quarter; a bar is the range of an estimate. Grey marks are the company's reported lines. The distance between them is the point: how large the AI channel is next to the line it sits in.
Revenuereported line
$90.01bn
Cost of revenuereported line
$29.52bn
Research and developmentreported line
$10.00bn
Sales and marketingreported line
$7.59bn
General and administrativereported line
$2.29bn
AI business: annual revenue run rate across AI infrastructure, platform and first-party AI productsrevenue in · our inference
Cloud revenue from frontier model companies, OpenAI first among themrevenue in · our inference
Intelligent Cloud cost of revenue increase the filing attributes to AI infrastructure and GitHub Copilot usagespend · reported in the filing
Gain on the investment in Anthropicrevenue in · stated by management
M365 Copilot paid seatsrevenue in · our inference
Database, analytics and other cloud services demand attributed to customers’ AI workloadsrevenue in · our inference
Productivity and Business Processes cost of revenue increase the filing attributes to AI infrastructure for M365 Copilotspend · reported in the filing
Equity-method gains and losses on the OpenAI investmentrevenue in · reported in the filing
GitHub Copilot subscriptions and usage-based billingrevenue in · our inference
Copilot credits and usage-based billing for agents (Copilot Studio, Dynamics, Copilot Cowork)revenue in · our inference
LinkedIn agentic hiring products in Talent Solutionsrevenue in · our inference
$10mn$100mn$1bn$10bn$100bn
AI channel, dollars for the quarter low to high of an estimate reported lineLog scale: each gridline is ten times the one before.
New money and old money, Q2 2026
9 new14 expanded1 relabelled
Each channel is tagged once for whether its money existed before language models, from the company's annual report and call at the start of the period. A bar splits one flow's sized dollars by that tag. The incremental total is the part that would not be there without the models: a new channel counts in full, an expanded one only for what AI added, a relabelled one at zero.
Flow, sized total
Split by novelty
Incremental total
Paid for AI$5.98bn sized
new $947mnexpanded $5.03bn
Incremental total $5.98bn
Revenue arriving through AI$6.61bn to $16.73bn sized
new $6.07bn to $13.10bnexpanded $172mn to $658mnrelabelled $371mn to $2.97bn
Incremental total $6.07bn to $13.76bnpoint $8.41bn$328mn in 2 channels has no traced baseline
The sized total counts every channel the company credits to AI, including relabelled money that existed before language models and the ledger's own estimates for it. The incremental total counts relabelled channels at zero. A flow is split by layer where its dollars sit at more than one: end use, compute sold to builders, and hardware. The same dollar can be a buyer's spend, a cloud's revenue and a chipmaker's revenue, so the layers are never added together.
Paid for AI10 channels · $5.98bn sized · $5.98bn incremental · 8 not sized
other
Capital expenditures on datacenters, AI accelerators and servers, including finance leases
Not sized
The CFO says about two-thirds of capital spending went to short-lived assets 'as customers increasingly build solutions that leverage both AI and non-AI infrastructure' (claim c44), and the annual report ties capital spending to 'growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI training and other infrastructure' (claim c52). Nothing separates AI's part, so capital named together with AI gets no ballpark on a judgment share (wave C). Total capital expenditures including finance leases, , are the ceiling.
described, no sizedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
Capital expenditures including finance leases were , about of it short-lived assets for solutions using AI and non-AI infrastructure; finance leases were and cash additions to property and equipment (claims c44, c45). Leases signed and not yet commenced rose to and purchase commitments, mainly datacenters, stand at (claims c53, c54). The calendar 2026 expectation falls to about only because more leases become operating leases (claim c48). The total is the ceiling; the AI part is unsized because the company names the build for AI and non-AI infrastructure together. The former estimate, , is no longer the size. It is capital either way, shown and left out of totals.
Evidence: 13 quotes, 11 figures, 4 confounds, 2 from before coverage
Spending on GPUs, CPUs, servers, storage and datacenter sites, which management reports including finance leases and splits into short-lived assets (mainly GPUs and CPUs) and long-lived ones. It is capitalized: it reaches the income statement as depreciation and lease cost, which are read on their own channels, so this channel is traced and left out of totals. Neither the filing nor the call gives an AI share; the call says the short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads alike. The payees are chip, server and component suppliers, builders and datacenter landlords.
Why this motive
Capacity built while demand exceeds supply, for priced AI capacity and products (claims c51, c44).
Before LLMs: expanded
Capital spending on datacenters predates the build: in the first quarter of fiscal 2024 including finance leases, already including spending to scale AI infrastructure, and additions to property and equipment of in fiscal 2024. The baseline for the incremental total is that quarter, . The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“We expect capital expenditures to increase in coming years to support growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI infrastructure and training.”
Capital expenditures including finance leases · 2026-CQ2
Share of capital expenditures for short-lived assets, mainly CPUs and GPUs, approximately · 2026-CQ2
Additions to property and equipment, cash (negative: an outflow) · 2026-CQ2
Additions to property and equipment, cash, prior-year quarter (negative: an outflow) · 2025-CQ2
Additions to property and equipment, cash, fiscal 2026 (negative: an outflow) · FY2026
Finance leases commenced in the quarter, mainly large datacenter sites · 2026-CQ2
Leases, mainly datacenters, signed but not yet commenced · as-of 2026-06-30
Purchase commitments, mainly datacenters, including take-or-pay contracts · as-of 2026-06-30
Other receivables from activities to facilitate the purchase of server components, current portion · as-of 2026-06-30
Capital expenditures expected for calendar 2026, after the lease reclassification · 2026-01-01..2026-12-31
Capital expenditures expected for the next quarter, a floor · 2026-CQ3
Reported line it is matched to
Cash additions to property and equipment were against a year earlier (outflows shown as negatives). The annual report ties capital spending to cloud growth and AI training and other infrastructure without an AI amount.
2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2:
What else could explain it
line composition: Short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads alike; the AI share is assumed.
other: Part of the spending is higher component pricing rather than more capacity.
relabel: From fiscal 2027 more datacenter leases are operating leases, which are outside capital expenditures, so the measure narrows without any change in the build.
other: The filings name the build for cloud and AI together: capital spending supports growth in the cloud offerings and investments in AI infrastructure and training, and the investments in cloud and AI infrastructure raise operating costs; the short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads. Nothing separates AI's part.
Quotes
“Capital expenditures were $41 billion, including the impact from higher component pricing as noted in our guide. Roughly two-thirds of our CapEx was for short-lived assets, primarily CPUs and GPUs, as customers increasingly build solutions that leverage both AI and non-AI infrastructure.”
“We added 31 new data centers across five continents this quarter, bringing the total to 88 this year as we expand our footprint in response to accelerating demand.”
“Before I move to outlook, effective at the start of FY 2027, we are extending the estimated useful life of our data centers and office buildings from 15- 25 years, reflecting our operating history and expected use of these assets. The impact of this update is reflected in today's guidance.”
“The greater impact is on capital expenditures, as more of our future data center leases will shift from finance leases to operating leases as a result of this update. Finance leases are included in capital expenditures, while operating leases are not. Outside of this useful life impact, our calendar year 2026 CapEx investment expectations remain unchanged. However, the shift from finance to operating leases adjusts our expectation to approximately $175 billion.”
“You've seen our CapEx really pivot toward what I would call and do call short-lived assets, which really, right, that's CPUs and GPUs that have relatively shorter lead times. If the demand environment changes, you just slow down what is, in fact, the largest component, right, and the driver of COGS.”
“There are still constraints in the system. I think we've continued to say, I think now for a number of quarters, that demand continues to exceed available supply, that certainly remains true. You can even see it, I think, in some of the pricing that's occurring in the spot market for assets.”
“We will continue to invest in capital expenditures to support growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI training and other infrastructure.”
“As of June 30, 2026, we had additional leases, primarily for datacenters, that had not yet commenced of $329.1 billion, with some arrangements subject to certain contractual conditions being met.”
“(d)Purchase commitments primarily relate to datacenters and include open purchase orders and take-or-pay contracts that are not presented as construction commitments above.”
“We may experience supply problems. There are limited suppliers for certain critical device and datacenter components, and those items are in short supply.”
“Given that we continue to see growing demand, no matter what model is chosen or what model family or whether it's run a model of your own, the Azure platform's quite efficient at delivering that. Think about that infrastructure as being pretty fungible.”
Q1 2026quantified · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026quantified · described, no size · offensive
cost of-revenue
Depreciation of the AI infrastructure build
Not sized
The build's own costs carry an AI share only where the company bounds AI's part of the build; Microsoft names the capital behind this depreciation for cloud and AI together ('to support growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI training and other infrastructure', claim c52; short-lived assets for 'both AI and non-AI infrastructure', claim c44). The quarter's depreciation, , is the ceiling line.
Matched line moved : the whole line, not this channel.
described, no sizedisclosure: direction only· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
Depreciation was for the fiscal year against (claim c56); the quarter's, backed out, was , the ceiling line. From fiscal 2027 datacenters depreciate over a longer life (claim c47). The channel is unsized because the company bounds no AI part of the build; the former estimate, , is no longer the size. It overlaps the cost increases the filings attribute to AI infrastructure.
Evidence: 6 quotes, 3 figures, 3 confounds, 2 from before coverage
Depreciation of the servers, accelerators and datacenters bought for the AI build, most of it in cost of revenue and some in research and development. The filing reports depreciation for the whole company; the AI part is assumed. It sits inside the cost increases the filing attributes to AI infrastructure and is read as overlapping them.
Why this motive
Carried: the cost of capacity built for priced AI services (claim c52).
Before LLMs: expanded
Depreciation was in fiscal 2024, about a quarter; the anchor annual report already named the scaling of AI infrastructure inside cloud gross margin. The size is the depreciation above that level, times an assumed AI share. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“We expect capital expenditures to increase in coming years to support growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI infrastructure and training.”
“Excluding the impact of the change in accounting estimate, Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage increased slightly driven by improvements in Azure and Office 365 Commercial, inclusive of scaling our AI infrastructure, offset in part by sales mix shift to Azure.”
Depreciation expense for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Reported line it is matched to
Depreciation for the quarter, backed out of the annual report, was against , an increase of .
2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2:
What else could explain it
line composition: Depreciation covers all property and equipment.
other: The longer useful life for datacenters from fiscal 2027 will lower depreciation of the same assets without any change in the build.
other: The filings name the build for cloud and AI together: capital spending supports growth in the cloud offerings and investments in AI infrastructure and training, and the investments in cloud and AI infrastructure raise operating costs; the short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads. Nothing separates AI's part.
Quotes
“During fiscal years 2026, 2025, and 2024, depreciation expense was $34.3 billion, $22.0 billion, and $15.2 billion, respectively.”
“We will continue to invest in capital expenditures to support growth in our cloud offerings and our investments in AI training and other infrastructure.”
“•Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage decreased to 66% driven by continued investments in AI infrastructure and growing AI product usage, offset in part by efficiency gains in Azure and Microsoft 365 Commercial cloud.”
“Before I move to outlook, effective at the start of FY 2027, we are extending the estimated useful life of our data centers and office buildings from 15- 25 years, reflecting our operating history and expected use of these assets. The impact of this update is reflected in today's guidance.”
“You've seen our CapEx really pivot toward what I would call and do call short-lived assets, which really, right, that's CPUs and GPUs that have relatively shorter lead times. If the demand environment changes, you just slow down what is, in fact, the largest component, right, and the driver of COGS.”
“Research and development expenses also include technology development costs, including AI training and other infrastructure costs, third-party development and programming costs, and the depreciation and amortization of assets used to conduct research and development.”
Q1 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
cost of-revenue
Lease cost of datacenters for the AI build (operating leases and amortization of finance leases)
Not sized
The build's own costs carry an AI share only where the company bounds AI's part of the build; the leased sites are named as large datacenter sites (claim c45) and the build they serve for AI and non-AI infrastructure together (claim c44). Operating lease cost, , and finance lease amortization, , are the ceiling lines.
described, no sizedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
Finance leases commenced in the quarter were , mainly large datacenter sites, and leases not yet commenced rose to (claims c45, c53). The channel is unsized because the company bounds no AI part of the build; the former estimate, , is no longer the size. It overlaps the cost increases the filings attribute to AI infrastructure.
Evidence: 3 quotes, 6 figures, 2 confounds, 1 from before coverage
Operating lease cost and the amortization of finance lease assets, mostly for datacenters signed to add capacity. The filing does not split leases by purpose. It sits inside the cost increases the filing attributes to AI infrastructure and is read as overlapping them.
Why this motive
Carried with the build: datacenter sites leased for capacity sold as AI services (claims c45, c53).
Before LLMs: expanded
Datacenter leases predate the build: operating lease cost was and finance lease amortization in fiscal 2024, with of finance leases signed and not yet commenced at the anchor. The size is the lease cost above that level, times an assumed AI share. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“We have operating and finance leases for datacenters, corporate offices, research and development facilities, Microsoft Experience Centers, and certain equipment.”
Leases, mainly datacenters, signed but not yet commenced · as-of 2026-06-30
Finance leases commenced in the quarter, mainly large datacenter sites · 2026-CQ2
Operating lease cost, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
Finance lease amortization of right-of-use assets, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
Operating lease cost for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Finance lease amortization for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Reported line it is matched to
Operating lease cost for the quarter was against , and finance lease amortization against , each backed out of the annual report.
2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2: 2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2:
What else could explain it
line composition: Leases also cover offices and general-purpose sites, and finance lease amortization may also be inside depreciation.
other: The filings name the build for cloud and AI together: capital spending supports growth in the cloud offerings and investments in AI infrastructure and training, and the investments in cloud and AI infrastructure raise operating costs; the short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads. Nothing separates AI's part.
Quotes
“This quarter, total finance leases were $5.6 billion and were primarily for large data center sites, and cash paid for PP&E was $35.8 billion.”
“As of June 30, 2026, we had additional leases, primarily for datacenters, that had not yet commenced of $329.1 billion, with some arrangements subject to certain contractual conditions being met.”
“The greater impact is on capital expenditures, as more of our future data center leases will shift from finance leases to operating leases as a result of this update. Finance leases are included in capital expenditures, while operating leases are not. Outside of this useful life impact, our calendar year 2026 CapEx investment expectations remain unchanged. However, the shift from finance to operating leases adjusts our expectation to approximately $175 billion.”
Q1 2026quantified · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026quantified · described, no size · offensive
other
Interest on datacenter finance leases
Not sized
The build's own costs carry an AI share only where the company bounds AI's part of the build; the annual report and the CFO name only interest on datacenter finance leases (claims c58, c59), and the build those sites serve is named for AI and non-AI infrastructure together (claim c44). Interest on finance lease liabilities, , is the ceiling line.
described, no sizedisclosure: direction only· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
The annual report attributes higher interest expense mainly to finance lease interest and the CFO again names datacenter finance lease interest (claims c58, c59); the line was , the ceiling. The channel is unsized because the company bounds no AI part of the build; the former estimate, , is no longer the size.
Evidence: 2 quotes, 3 figures, 2 confounds, 2 from before coverage
Interest on the finance lease liabilities for datacenter sites, below operating income in other income and expense. The filing attributes the rise in interest expense to finance lease interest; the AI share of the leases is assumed.
Why this motive
Carried with the build: the financing cost of datacenter sites (claims c58, c59).
Before LLMs: expanded
Interest on lease liabilities was in fiscal 2024, and the anchor filing explained the rise in interest expense by commercial paper. The size is the interest above that level, times an assumed AI share. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“We have operating and finance leases for datacenters, corporate offices, research and development facilities, Microsoft Experience Centers, and certain equipment.”
Interest on finance lease liabilities, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
Interest on finance lease liabilities, fiscal 2025 · FY2025
Interest on finance lease liabilities for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Reported line it is matched to
Interest on finance lease liabilities for the quarter was against , backed out of the annual report.
2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2:
What else could explain it
line composition: Finance leases include offices and general-purpose sites.
other: The filings name the build for cloud and AI together: capital spending supports growth in the cloud offerings and investments in AI infrastructure and training, and the investments in cloud and AI infrastructure raise operating costs; the short-lived assets serve AI and non-AI workloads. Nothing separates AI's part.
Quotes
“Interest expense increased primarily due to higher finance lease interest expense, offset in part by higher capitalization of debt interest expense.”
“Excluding any impact from our investments in OpenAI, other income and expense is expected to be roughly negative $100 million, as interest income will be more than offset by interest expense, which includes the interest payments related to data center finance leases.”
Q1 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
cost of-revenue
Intelligent Cloud cost of revenue increase the filing attributes to AI infrastructure and GitHub Copilot usage
5.6% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts in full.
Matched line moved : the whole line, not this channel.
reported in the filingdisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
The annual report attributes the rise in Intelligent Cloud cost of revenue over the year to investments in AI infrastructure; the segment tables give the quarter’s rise as , the fiscal-year change less the nine-month change, which the release tables confirm (claim c60). The CFO adds mix shift to Azure and GitHub Copilot usage, with margins improving after the pricing change (claim c20). Microsoft Cloud gross margin was (claim c64).
Evidence: 6 quotes, 6 figures, 3 confounds, 2 from before coverage
The year-over-year rise in the Intelligent Cloud segment’s cost of revenue, which the filing attributes to investments in AI infrastructure to support growing customer demand and, in Q3 of fiscal 2026, to increased GitHub Copilot usage. It holds the depreciation, leases, power and operations of AI capacity serving Azure customers, the AI labs among them. The size is the filing’s figure, a change against the prior year rather than a level.
Why this motive
Carried: cost of serving demand for priced AI capacity and services, which the annual report names as the cause (claim c60).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor the scaling of AI infrastructure was already named as a drag on cloud gross margin, then for the Microsoft Cloud, and the segment cost line held the same kinds of datacenter cost. The filing figure is an increase over the prior year, so it is sized as an increment. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“Excluding the impact of the change in accounting estimate, Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage increased slightly driven by improvements in Azure and Office 365 Commercial, inclusive of scaling our AI infrastructure, offset in part by sales mix shift to Azure.”
“Excluding the impact of the change in accounting estimate for use ful lives, Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage increased roughly 2 points, driven by the improvement just mentioned in Azure, as well as Office 365, partially offset by the impact of scaling our AI infrastructure to meet growing demand.”
“•Gross margin increased $13.8 billion or 21% driven by growth in Azure. Gross margin percentage decreased driven by the continued investments in AI infrastructure as well as sales mix shift to Azure, offset in part by efficiency gains in Azure.”
“Segment gross margin dollars increased 24% and gross margin percentage decreased year-over-year, primarily driven by sales mix shift to Azure, as well as the continued scaling of our AI infrastructure ahead of growing demand, partially offset by ongoing efficiency gains in Azure. Segment gross margins were also impacted by growing GitHub Copilot usage, though margins improved through the quarter with the June business model change to usage-based pricing.”
“•Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage decreased to 66% driven by continued investments in AI infrastructure and growing AI product usage, offset in part by efficiency gains in Azure and Microsoft 365 Commercial cloud.”
“Company gross margin percentage was 67%, down year-over-year, driven by sales mix shift to Azure, as well as continued investments in AI infrastructure and growing product usage, partially offset by ongoing efficiency gains, particularly in Azure and M365 Commercial Cloud.”
“Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage was better than expected at 65% and down year-over-year, driven by sales mix shift to Azure, as well as continued investments in AI infrastructure and increased product usage, partially offset by ongoing efficiency gains noted earlier.”
Q1 2026quantified · reported in the filing · offensive · $4.80bn
Q2 2026quantified · reported in the filing · offensive · $5.03bn
cost of-revenue
Productivity and Business Processes cost of revenue increase the filing attributes to AI infrastructure for M365 Copilot
1.1% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts in full.
Matched line moved : the whole line, not this channel.
reported in the filingdisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new
The annual report attributes the rise in Productivity and Business Processes cost of revenue to AI infrastructure for Copilot; the segment tables give the quarter’s rise as (claim c65). The CFO says the segment margin slipped with higher Copilot usage, while the CEO cites higher Copilot throughput and large GPU cost cuts from the company’s own models (claims c17, c25, c24).
Evidence: 8 quotes, 4 figures, 2 confounds, 2 from before coverage
The year-over-year rise in the Productivity and Business Processes segment’s cost of revenue, which the filing attributes to investments in AI infrastructure to support M365 Copilot seat and usage growth: the inference cost of serving Copilot. The size is the filing’s figure, a change against the prior year rather than the whole serving cost.
Why this motive
Carried: the cost of serving a separately priced product, attributed by the annual report to its seat and usage growth (claim c65).
Before LLMs: new
At the anchor M365 Copilot had not reached general availability and the segment carried no serving cost for it; the scaling of AI infrastructure was named only inside cloud gross margin. The cost of serving an LLM product is new.
“Excluding the impact of the change in accounting estimate, Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage increased slightly driven by improvements in Azure and Office 365 Commercial, inclusive of scaling our AI infrastructure, offset in part by sales mix shift to Azure.”
“Excluding the impact of the change in accounting estimate for use ful lives, Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage increased roughly 2 points, driven by the improvement just mentioned in Azure, as well as Office 365, partially offset by the impact of scaling our AI infrastructure to meet growing demand.”
“Segment gross margin dollars increased 14% and 13% in constant currency, and gross margin percentage decreased slightly with increased Microsoft 365 Copilot usage as we continue to invest in product quality and drive further efficiency gains.”
“•Microsoft Cloud gross margin percentage decreased to 66% driven by continued investments in AI infrastructure and growing AI product usage, offset in part by efficiency gains in Azure and Microsoft 365 Commercial cloud.”
“More broadly, across our model implementations, we are seeing significant efficiency gains, including 89% reduction of GPU costs in Dynamics 365 with MAI-Voice-2-Flash and up to 84% reduced GPU costs in PowerPoint with MAI-Image-2.5.”
“We're also getting more from the infrastructure we already have by optimizing across silicon systems and software. For example, we increased the throughput for Copilot workloads 4x since the start of the year.”
“The work, frankly, on model diversification also is a margin improvement opportunity. Being able to serve the best possible outcome with a more efficient, or both efficient in terms of token usage and efficient in terms of cost structure, are also margin levers.”
“We are also accelerating our own model development. We announced more than a dozen new models across image, voice, transcription, coding, security, including our first reasoning model, MAI Thinking-1, all with cost-efficient inference at the core for the enterprise use cases.”
“These quality improvements, together with continued product innovation, are driving record usage intensity. The number of conversations per user nearly doubled year-over-year.”
Q1 2026quantified · reported in the filing · offensive · $680mn
Q2 2026quantified · reported in the filing · offensive · $947mn
research
Research and development increase attributed to AI compute, AI talent and data
Not sized
The annual report names the research and development rise for compute capacity, AI talent and data together with XBOX impairment and related expenses (claim c67), and nothing separates AI's part in the quarter. The reported rise, , is the ceiling. The step from Q1, which the filing credited to compute, AI talent and data alone, comes from the wording, not from a change at the company.
Matched line moved : the whole line, not this channel.
described, no sizedisclosure: quantified· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: expanded
The annual report attributes the rise in research and development over the year to AI compute, talent and data and to XBOX impairment (claim c67), so the quarter has no AI-only figure; the reported rise of is the ceiling, and the channel is unsized. The former estimate, , the ledger's share of that rise, is no longer the size. Headcount fell , to full-time employees (claim c69).
Evidence: 6 quotes, 4 figures, 3 confounds, 1 from before coverage
The year-over-year rise in research and development, which the filing attributes to investments in compute capacity, AI talent and data to support product development, with headcount falling. It holds model training compute, and the filing allocates AI infrastructure and training costs across segments. The size is the filing’s figure, a change against the prior year.
Why this motive
Carried: compute, talent and data for product development and the company’s own models (claims c68, c70).
Before LLMs: expanded
Research and development was in fiscal 2024, and the anchor annual report explained its rise by an acquisition and cloud engineering without naming AI. A budget redirected to AI work is expanded; the filing gives the change, so it is sized as an increment. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“Research and development expenses increased $2.3 billion or 9% driven by Gaming, with 7 points of growth from the Activision Blizzard acquisition, and investments in cloud engineering.”
Research and development increase in fiscal 2026, which the filing attributes to compute capacity, AI talent and data and to XBOX impairment · FY2026
Full-time employees · as-of 2026-06-30
Total company headcount, year-over-year decline · as-of 2026-06-30
Research and development, increase on the prior-year quarter · 2026-CQ2
Reported line it is matched to
Research and development was against , an increase of .
2026-CQ2: 2025-CQ2:
What else could explain it
one time item: XBOX impairment and related expenses, and the voluntary retirement program, sit in the same lines.
transformation program: Headcount fell on the year; management does not tie it to AI.
other: XBOX impairment and related expenses are named in the same sentence as AI compute, talent and data; nothing separates AI's part of the rise.
Quotes
“Research and development expenses increased $3.1 billion or 9% driven by continued investments in compute capacity, AI talent, and data to support product development that benefits the entire portfolio, as well as impairment and other related expenses in our XBOX business.”
“Operating expenses increased 10%, driven by continued investment in R&D compute capacity, talent, and data to support product development across the portfolio. G&A growth was impacted by a low prior year comparable, as well as some of the discrete items mentioned earlier.”
“Research and development expenses also include technology development costs, including AI training and other infrastructure costs, third-party development and programming costs, and the depreciation and amortization of assets used to conduct research and development.”
“We are also accelerating our own model development. We announced more than a dozen new models across image, voice, transcription, coding, security, including our first reasoning model, MAI Thinking-1, all with cost-efficient inference at the core for the enterprise use cases.”
“Operating expenses increased $4.9 billion or 7% driven by continued investments in research and development compute capacity, AI talent, and data to support product development that benefits the entire portfolio, impairment and other related expenses in our XBOX business, investments in commercial sales, and higher Copilot advertising expenses.”
Q1 2026quantified · reported in the filing · exploratory · $717mn
Q2 2026quantified · described, no size · exploratory
marketing
Advertising for Copilot
Not sized
The annual report names the sales and marketing rise for investments in commercial sales and higher Copilot advertising together (claim c71), and the advertising expense line covers all advertising, not Copilot's. Nothing separates AI's part; the quarter's rise, , and annual advertising expense, , are the ceilings. Q1, where the 10-Q names Copilot advertising as the primary driver, keeps its size; the step comes from the wording.
Matched line moved : the whole line, not this channel.
described, no sizedisclosure: described· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: expanded
The annual report attributes the year's rise in sales and marketing to commercial sales and higher Copilot advertising, and advertising expense was against (claims c71, c73). The quarter's rise was . Nothing separates Copilot advertising from commercial sales, so the channel is unsized; the former estimate, , the ledger's share of the rise, is no longer the size.
Evidence: 3 quotes, 4 figures, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
Advertising for the consumer Copilot assistant and the commercial Copilots, which the filing names as the main driver of the rise in sales and marketing. No amount is given; the size is the ledger’s residual of the line’s rise after the stated currency effect.
Why this motive
Carried: advertising for a largely free consumer assistant and for priced commercial Copilots (claim c71).
Before LLMs: expanded
Advertising predates the Copilots: advertising expense was in fiscal 2024. The size is part of the rise in sales and marketing over the prior year, so it is sized as an increment. The size is the change AI made, not the whole line.
“Advertising expense was $1.7 billion, $904 million, and $1.5 billion in fiscal years 2024, 2023, and 2022, respectively.”
“Operating expenses increased $4.9 billion or 7% driven by continued investments in research and development compute capacity, AI talent, and data to support product development that benefits the entire portfolio, impairment and other related expenses in our XBOX business, investments in commercial sales, and higher Copilot advertising expenses.”
Q1 2026direction only · our inference · exploratory · $208mn to $416mn
Q2 2026described · described, no size · exploratory
vendor bill
Revenue share paid to OpenAI, eliminated by the April 2026 agreement
Not sized
No stored source gives the payment, its line or a base; the quarter’s sources do not mention it.
inscrutabledisclosure: not mentioned· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: new· layer: compute
The quarter’s sources are silent on the revenue share the company paid OpenAI, which the prior quarter’s call said the new agreement eliminated. The CEO and CFO describe model diversification and the company’s own models as margin levers, without reference to the payment.
Evidence: 0 quotes, 1 from before coverage
The share of revenue the company paid OpenAI for its models and intellectual property, which the CFO says the new agreement eliminated, leaving the models royalty-free to the company. No amount was ever given in the stored sources.
Why this motive
Carried from the prior quarter: no tell in the sources and nothing contradictory, which reads exploratory.
Before LLMs: new
At the anchor the company deployed OpenAI’s models across its products; no payment to the lab is quantified there. A model bill could not exist without LLMs.
“We have a long-term partnership with OpenAI, a leading AI research and deployment company. We deploy OpenAI’s models across our consumer and enterprise products.”
Microsoft Frontier Company: forward-deployed engineers building customers’ AI systems
Not sized
The organization was launched after the quarter ('this month', on the call; claim c76), so the standing cost had not started in the quarter, and the only measure of the test is a count of projects over the past year, , with no cost, team size or period split (the methodology rules for money not started and for counts).
described, no sizedisclosure: described· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: expanded
The channel opens this quarter. The CEO says the company will embed industry and engineering experts with customers to build AI systems, after completing over projects while testing the model over the past year (claims c76, c77). No cost is given and the organization launched after the quarter, so the channel is unsized. The former estimate, , judgment people per project and cost per person times the project count, is no longer the size.
Evidence: 2 quotes, 2 figures, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
The industry and engineering experts the company embeds with customers to build AI systems, tested over the fiscal year in forward-deployed teams and launched as a standing organization in July 2026, after the quarter. No cost or revenue is given.
Why this motive
A model tested over the past year and launched after the quarter (claim c76).
Before LLMs: expanded
Consulting and support staff that help customers deploy the company’s products predate the AI build, in Enterprise and Partner Services, including Industry Solutions; the anchor gives no headcount for them and employees in total. The teams are sized as a level of redeployed staff with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“Enterprise and Partner Services, including Enterprise Support Services, Industry Solutions, Nuance professional services, Microsoft Partner Network, and Learning Experience, assist customers in developing, deploying, and managing Microsoft server solutions, Microsoft desktop solutions, and Nuance conversational AI and ambient intelligent solutions, along with providing training and certification to developers and IT professionals on various Microsoft products.”
Industry and engineering experts the company will embed with customers · as-of 2026-07-29
Projects completed while testing the model over the past year, a floor · 2025-07-01..2026-06-30
What else could explain it
relabel: The organization may be assembled from consulting and industry staff the company already employed.
Quotes
“To help customers capture that opportunity this month, we launched Microsoft Frontier Company, the largest outcome-driven engineering organization in the industry. We will embed 6,000 industry and engineering experts with customers to co-design, co-innovate, and continuously improve AI systems at scale. We've been testing this model over the past year, completing over 330 projects across 164 customers, including many of the world's leading companies across industries.”
“For example, our FD teams worked with Novo Nordisk to build an agent that helps analyze clinical data while meeting its strict compliance requirements.”
Revenue arriving through AI14 channels · $6.61bn to $16.73bn sized · $6.07bn to $13.76bn incremental · 5 not sized
product revenue
AI business: annual revenue run rate across AI infrastructure, platform and first-party AI products
9.6% to 14.6% of the quarter’s revenue; overlaps another channel, not added into totals
our inferencedisclosure: described· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded
Management does not repeat the AI business run rate given a quarter earlier, ; it credits demand for Azure and the first-party AI applications for the year’s growth and says capacity added in the quarter was monetized quickly (claims c2, c4). The stored reference quarter, ended 2025-12-31, gave no level either, describing the AI business only by comparison with the company’s biggest franchises (claims msft-anchor-c27, msft-anchor-c28): the run rate was stated only in Q3 of fiscal 2026, not in consecutive quarters, so its absence is not a withdrawal and the state is described. The size, , rolls the prior estimate forward at an assumed sequential rate, against revenue of ; the product channels below sit inside it and count in totals, and the umbrella is left out of totals as overlapping them. The counterparty is mixed: enterprises buying the Copilots and model services, and AI labs renting accelerator capacity.
Evidence: 9 quotes, 4 figures, 2 confounds, 5 from before coverage
Management’s headline AI revenue metric: the annual revenue run rate of what it calls its AI business, given once in coverage, at the end of Q3 of fiscal 2026. The sources do not define it: it appears to span AI accelerator capacity sold on Azure, model and agent services, and the first-party Copilots, and may include the AI lab customers as well as enterprises. A run rate is not the quarter’s revenue; the size is a quarter of the stated level scaled for what was in force. Its product channels below sit inside it. By the user’s ruling of 2026-10-05 the products count in totals, each by its own novelty, and the umbrella is shown, read every quarter and left out of totals as overlapping them.
Why this motive
Carried from the prior quarter: separately priced AI products and capacity, with demand above supply (claims c2, c3).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor AI services were already sold on Azure: they added roughly of Azure growth of in the first quarter of fiscal 2024, and the annual report lists AI, cognitive services and machine learning among Azure’s services. No level was given for them, and AI accelerator capacity rented for machine learning predates LLMs, so the tie-break gives expanded with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“In Azure, as expected, the optimization trends were similar to Q4. Higher than expected AI consumption contributed to revenue growth in Azure.”
“Customers can use Azure through our global network of datacenters for computing, networking, storage, mobile and web application services, AI, Internet of Things (“IoT”), cognitive services, and machine learning.”
“We are only at the beginning phases of AI diffusion and already Microsoft has built an AI business that is larger than some of our biggest franchises,”
“This fiscal year, we delivered over $331 billion in revenue, with growth accelerating to 18%, driven by strong demand across both the Azure platform and our first-party AI applications and services.”
“In Azure and other cloud services, revenue grew 43% against a prior year that included accelerating growth. Customer demand continues to exceed available capacity. Revenue growth was ahead of expectations, driven by efficiency gains across our CPU and GPU fleet, as well as process improvements to enable earlier delivery of new capacity.”
“That additional in-quarter capacity for Azure was quickly monetized. Results also benefited from stronger than expected GitHub Copilot consumption following the June business model change to align pricing with usage and value.”
“The remaining portion, recognized beyond the next 12 months, increased 112%. Microsoft Cloud revenue was $59.3 billion and grew 27%, reflecting strong demand across Azure and our first-party AI applications and services.”
“Given that we continue to see growing demand, no matter what model is chosen or what model family or whether it's run a model of your own, the Azure platform's quite efficient at delivering that. Think about that infrastructure as being pretty fungible.”
“When it comes to knowledge work, we now have over 30 million paid Microsoft 365 Copilot seats with net seat adds more than doubling quarter-over-quarter.”
“There are still constraints in the system. I think we've continued to say, I think now for a number of quarters, that demand continues to exceed available supply, that certainly remains true. You can even see it, I think, in some of the pricing that's occurring in the spot market for assets.”
“This year, Azure revenue surpassed $100 billion for the first time, and Microsoft 365 Copilot reached over 30 million paid seats, reflecting the confidence customers are placing in us to power their AI transformation.”
our inferencedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new
Paid seats passed , from a quarter earlier, with net adds rising on the quarter; E7 launched and its largest deployment covers employees (claims c12, c14). The annual report now names Copilot first among the drivers of revenue per user (claim c15). The size, , is the ledger’s: average seats times an effective price from a reference class, since no price is in the stored sources.
Evidence: 11 quotes, 4 figures, 2 confounds, 2 from before coverage
The separately priced Copilot add-on for M365 commercial seats, and from Q4 of fiscal 2026 the Copilot inside the E7 suite. Management reports paid seats and seat-add growth, not revenue; the filing counts it inside M365 Commercial cloud revenue and names it as a driver of revenue per user. The work it does is drafting and summarising documents, mail and meetings, which a user checks quickly.
Why this motive
A separately priced add-on with a paid seat count, named first among the drivers of revenue per user (claims c12, c15).
Before LLMs: new
At the anchor M365 Copilot was weeks from general availability, described as incrementally priced, with its revenue expected to grow gradually; no seat count or price is in the anchor sources. A priced LLM assistant could not exist before LLMs.
“We're excited for Microsoft 365 Copilot general availability on November first and expect the related revenue to grow gradually over time.”
“I mean, at the end of the day, we are grounded on enterprise cycle times in terms of adoption and ramp, and it's incrementally priced, so therefore that all will apply still.”
Microsoft 365 Copilot paid seats, a floor · as-of 2026-06-30
E7 seats at the largest customer · as-of 2026-06-30
Microsoft 365 Commercial products and cloud services revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Microsoft 365 Copilot paid seats, a floor · as-of 2026-03-31
What else could explain it
bundling: From this quarter Copilot is also sold inside the E7 suite with E5 and the agent governance product, so its price is allocated rather than paid.
mix shift: E5 and E7 upgrades drive revenue per user beside Copilot.
Quotes
“When it comes to knowledge work, we now have over 30 million paid Microsoft 365 Copilot seats with net seat adds more than doubling quarter-over-quarter.”
“Building on our Copilot momentum from Q3, net paid seat adds more than doubled sequentially, with paid seats now over 30 million. Premium offerings, including Copilot, E5, and early traction in E7, drove ARPU growth this quarter.”
“We have been encouraged by the response to our new E7 suite as customers increasingly go all in on an integrated AI offering that brings together Copilot E5, Entra, and Agent 365. Just two months after launch, hundreds of enterprise customers have already purchased millions of seats, this quarter, EY deployed E7 to 400,000 employees in our largest win to date.”
“•Microsoft 365 Commercial products and cloud services revenue increased $14.2 billion or 16%. Microsoft 365 Commercial cloud revenue grew 17% with growth in revenue per user driven by Microsoft 365 Copilot and Microsoft 365 E5.”
“With the premium SKU momentum and the increased monetization opportunity from adding usage-based billing products alongside per-seat licensing in July, we expect to see acceleration in M365 commercial cloud revenue growth through this fiscal year.”
“Segment gross margin dollars increased 14% and 13% in constant currency, and gross margin percentage decreased slightly with increased Microsoft 365 Copilot usage as we continue to invest in product quality and drive further efficiency gains.”
“In addition to this, we are also evolving our business model beyond per seat to per seat plus consumption, further expanding our TAM and delivering more customer value. Earlier this month, we added usage-based billing to Copilot Cowork with thousands of customers already paying for and actively using it.”
“This year, Azure revenue surpassed $100 billion for the first time, and Microsoft 365 Copilot reached over 30 million paid seats, reflecting the confidence customers are placing in us to power their AI transformation.”
“These quality improvements, together with continued product innovation, are driving record usage intensity. The number of conversations per user nearly doubled year-over-year.”
GitHub Copilot subscriptions and usage-based billing
0.09% to 2.5% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts in full.
our inferencedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new
GitHub Copilot has users and its revenue grew more than on the quarter after usage-based billing took effect; the CFO says consumption beat expectations and segment margins improved after the change (claims c18, c4, c20). No level is given. The size, , grows the prior quarter’s seat estimate by the stated rate.
Evidence: 3 quotes, 3 figures, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
The coding assistant sold per seat and, from 2026-06-01, with usage-based billing on top. Management reports organizations, users, enterprise subscriber growth and from Q4 of fiscal 2026 a sequential revenue growth rate, never a level. It sits in Azure and other cloud services revenue. Code with tests is cheap to check.
Why this motive
Usage-based pricing aligned to usage and value, with consumption above expectations (claims c18, c4).
Before LLMs: new
GitHub Copilot was already sold at the anchor, with over paid users and more than organizations on the business tier; no revenue was given. It is an LLM product, so the money is new whether or not the anchor shows it.
“We have over 1 million paid Copilot users and more than 37,000 organizations have subscribed to Copilot for Business, up 40% quarter-over-quarter, with significant traction outside the United States.”
GitHub Copilot revenue, sequential growth, a floor · 2026-CQ2
Organizations using GitHub Copilot, approximately · as-of 2026-03-31
What else could explain it
other: The pricing change mid-quarter moves revenue from seats to consumption, so sequential growth mixes volume and price.
Quotes
“When it comes to developers, GitHub Copilot now has 50 million users. This quarter, we introduced usage-based billing and have continued to see business and enterprise seat growth and also significant consumption revenue after the new model went into effect. Copilot revenue accelerated over 60% quarter-over-quarter.”
“That additional in-quarter capacity for Azure was quickly monetized. Results also benefited from stronger than expected GitHub Copilot consumption following the June business model change to align pricing with usage and value.”
“Segment gross margin dollars increased 24% and gross margin percentage decreased year-over-year, primarily driven by sales mix shift to Azure, as well as the continued scaling of our AI infrastructure ahead of growing demand, partially offset by ongoing efficiency gains in Azure. Segment gross margins were also impacted by growing GitHub Copilot usage, though margins improved through the quarter with the June business model change to usage-based pricing.”
Microsoft Foundry: model access, tokens and agent services for customers building their own AI
Not sized
Revenue more than doubled on the year (claim c21), a rate with no level and no base; the estimate rolled forward the prior quarter's token decomposition, which rests on customer counts and is no longer a size. The quarter's other measures are counts of customers (claims c22, c23), so the channel gets no ballpark (the methodology rules for counts and for a rate with no line to apply it to).
described, no sizedisclosure: direction only· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded· layer: compute
Foundry has customers and its revenue grew on the year at a rate management gives only in words; the counts of customers at a trillion-token annual pace and of customers using several model providers rose (claims c21, c22, c23). No revenue level is given; a customer count is a count, so the state stays directional. The former estimate, , rolled forward a prior estimate that is no longer a size, and the growth rate has no base of its own, so the channel is unsized.
Evidence: 6 quotes, 1 figure, 1 confound, 3 from before coverage
Revenue from the platform on which customers call OpenAI, Anthropic, open and Microsoft models and run agents they build, sold by consumption inside Azure. Management reports customer counts, token volumes and, from Q4 of fiscal 2026, a revenue growth rate given in words; no level is given.
Why this motive
Consumption-priced model and agent services whose revenue grew on the year (claim c21).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor the same work was sold as Azure OpenAI Service, used by more than organizations, beside the cognitive services and machine learning tools the annual report lists. Token sales could not exist without LLMs, but the platform also carries the machine learning service that predates them, so the tie-break gives expanded, sized as a level with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“In Azure, as expected, the optimization trends were similar to Q4. Higher than expected AI consumption contributed to revenue growth in Azure.”
“Customers can use Azure through our global network of datacenters for computing, networking, storage, mobile and web application services, AI, Internet of Things (“IoT”), cognitive services, and machine learning.”
line composition: Foundry consumption sits inside Azure and other cloud services with the capacity sold to labs.
Quotes
“It gives agents access to the IQ layer, the tools they use, along with durable state and memory, secure sandboxes, rubrics and evals, and even their own self-improvement loops. We now have 100,000 Foundry customers and revenue more than doubled year- over- year.”
“We offer the broadest model catalog in the cloud with over 11,000 models, including the latest from OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral, xAI, as well as our own MAI family. Since the start of the year, we have seen 5x increase in the number of customers building with models from multiple providers.”
“Given that we continue to see growing demand, no matter what model is chosen or what model family or whether it's run a model of your own, the Azure platform's quite efficient at delivering that. Think about that infrastructure as being pretty fungible.”
“When it comes to analytics, we now have over 40,000 paid Fabric customers, up more than 60% year-over-year, and over 17,000 customers now use Foundry and Fabric, up 60% year-over-year as enterprises connect agents to real-time operational, analytical, and unstructured data in Fabric.”
“In Azure and other cloud services, revenue grew 43% against a prior year that included accelerating growth. Customer demand continues to exceed available capacity. Revenue growth was ahead of expectations, driven by efficiency gains across our CPU and GPU fleet, as well as process improvements to enable earlier delivery of new capacity.”
Q1 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
customer cohort
Cloud revenue from frontier model companies, OpenAI first among them
5.9% to 9.2% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts in full.
our inferencedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new· layer: compute
The annual report gives revenue of from OpenAI in fiscal 2026, revenue-sharing payments included, of the year’s cloud revenue, with owed at year end (claim c9). The CFO says nearly of cloud revenue of more than came from outside frontier model companies and that all sequential RPO growth came from outside them; RPO excluding OpenAI grew (claims c6, c7). The size, , applies that share to the quarter’s cloud revenue of and is the ledger’s. It is the buildout’s money moving: the labs pay from outside funding rounds and from money the company itself put in, as an investor in OpenAI and in Anthropic (claims c39, c42); the payments are spent on capacity the company builds.
Evidence: 7 quotes, 10 figures, 2 confounds, 3 from before coverage
Azure compute, AI accelerator and other cloud services bought by frontier model companies, of which OpenAI, an equity-method investee and related party, is the one named. The annual report gives the year’s revenue from commercial arrangements with OpenAI, revenue-sharing payments included; the Q4 call gives the share of fiscal-year cloud revenue from outside these companies. Their Azure commitments sit in the remaining performance obligation management reports with and without OpenAI. These payers are funded largely by investors.
Why this motive
Priced capacity sold to AI labs; the CFO now bounds their share of cloud revenue (claim c6).
Before LLMs: new
At the anchor Azure already ran all of OpenAI’s workloads and AI services added roughly of Azure growth; no revenue from the lab was given. The payer is an AI lab, so the money is new whatever the product.
“Azure and other cloud services revenue grew 29% and 28% in constant currency, including roughly 3 points from AI services.”
“We have a long-term partnership with OpenAI, a leading AI research and deployment company. We deploy OpenAI’s models across our consumer and enterprise products.”
Revenue from commercial arrangements with OpenAI, revenue-sharing payments included, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
Revenue from OpenAI, revenue-sharing payments included, as a ratio to fiscal 2026 Microsoft Cloud revenue (the numerator includes revenue share that may not be cloud revenue) · FY2026
Accounts receivable from OpenAI · as-of 2026-06-30
Microsoft Cloud revenue, fiscal 2026, a floor · FY2026
Share of fiscal 2026 cloud revenue from customers outside frontier model companies, approximately · FY2026
Commercial remaining performance obligation including OpenAI · as-of 2026-06-30
Commercial bookings growth including Azure commitments from OpenAI · 2026-CQ2
Microsoft Cloud revenue · 2026-CQ2
What else could explain it
other: The buyers are funded largely by investors and the company holds an equity stake in the largest; money moves between investor, customer and supplier.
line composition: The annual OpenAI figure includes revenue-sharing payments, which may not be cloud revenue, and is not split by quarter.
Quotes
“For the full year, our cloud revenue surpassed $214 billion, with nearly 90% from customers outside of Frontier Model companies.”
“Commercial remaining performance obligation grew 84% to $678 billion. All sequential commercial RPO growth was driven by commitments from customers outside of Frontier Model companies, and RPO increased 25% when excluding OpenAI.”
“Now to our commercial results. Commercial bookings grew 18% when excluding the impact from OpenAI, driven by strong execution in our core annuity sales motions and reflecting broad customer demand across geographies and customer segments. Bookings increased 10% and 11% in constant currency when including Azure commitments from OpenAI.”
“As an equity method investee, OpenAI is a related party as defined in Accounting Standards Codification Topic 850, Related Party Disclosures (“ASC 850”). In accordance with ASC 850, we are disclosing revenue and accounts receivable balances from transactions with OpenAI. For fiscal year 2026, we recorded revenue from commercial arrangements with OpenAI, inclusive of revenue-sharing payments, of $24.1 billion, and accounts receivable from OpenAI as of June 30, 2026 was $6.0 billion.”
“As a reminder, the significant OpenAI contract signed in the prior year will result in some quarterly volatility in both bookings and RPO growth rates.”
“When it comes to running agents, CPUs are just as important as GPUs. Our Cobalt VMs are powering both our own first-party workloads as well as workloads for customers, including Adobe, Arm, Elastic, OpenAI, Sprinklr, and TomTom.”
“The remaining portion, recognized beyond the next 12 months, increased 112%. Microsoft Cloud revenue was $59.3 billion and grew 27%, reflecting strong demand across Azure and our first-party AI applications and services.”
Copilot credits and usage-based billing for agents (Copilot Studio, Dynamics, Copilot Cowork)
0.09% to 0.55% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts at zero at the point and in full at the high end, with no traced baseline.
our inferencedisclosure: bounded· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded
Usage-based credit consumption in customer service rose on the quarter, and usage billing was added to Copilot Cowork with customers already paying, a bound management gives in words (claims c26, c27). The CFO expects usage-based billing from July to lift M365 commercial cloud growth (claim c16). The size, , is the ledger’s, on Dynamics revenue of backed out of the annual report.
Evidence: 5 quotes, 2 figures, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
The metered part of the business-application and productivity AI: Copilot credits consumed by custom agents built in Copilot Studio, usage-based credits in Dynamics customer service, and from Q4 of fiscal 2026 usage billing on Copilot Cowork. Management reports growth multiples and adoption shares, never a level. Customer service resolution is cheap to check.
Why this motive
Metered prices for agent work, extended this quarter to Copilot Cowork (claims c26, c27).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor Copilot Studio was already on sale beside the Power Platform’s virtual agents and process automation, which predate LLMs, and more than organizations had used Copilot and Power Platform. No credit revenue was given. Copilot Studio continues the virtual-agent product, so the tie-break gives expanded, sized as a level with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“Copilot Studio allows customers to customize Copilot for Microsoft 365 or build their own Copilot. Microsoft Power Platform helps domain experts drive productivity gains with low-code/no-code tools, robotic process automation, virtual agents, and business intelligence.”
Dynamics products and cloud services revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Microsoft 365 Commercial products and cloud services revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
What else could explain it
mix shift: CRM bookings kept moderating, so credit revenue may partly replace seat revenue.
Quotes
“We are also moving from seats to seats plus consumption model. Customer service is at the forefront of this transformation with usage-based credit consumption in this category up 4x quarter-over-quarter with customers like Northern Trust using our tools to drive proactive intelligence.”
“In addition to this, we are also evolving our business model beyond per seat to per seat plus consumption, further expanding our TAM and delivering more customer value. Earlier this month, we added usage-based billing to Copilot Cowork with thousands of customers already paying for and actively using it.”
“With the premium SKU momentum and the increased monetization opportunity from adding usage-based billing products alongside per-seat licensing in July, we expect to see acceleration in M365 commercial cloud revenue growth through this fiscal year.”
“More broadly, across our model implementations, we are seeing significant efficiency gains, including 89% reduction of GPU costs in Dynamics 365 with MAI-Voice-2-Flash and up to 84% reduced GPU costs in PowerPoint with MAI-Image-2.5.”
LinkedIn agentic hiring products in Talent Solutions
0.1% to 0.18% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts at zero at the point and in full at the high end, with no traced baseline.
our inferencedisclosure: quantified· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded
Recruiters at over companies use the AI-powered hiring products and seats grew on the quarter (claim c29); the run rate of given a quarter earlier is not repeated, and the CFO credits LinkedIn growth mainly to marketing solutions (claim c30). The size, , rolls the prior estimate forward and is the ledger’s.
Evidence: 2 quotes, 4 figures, 1 confound, 2 from before coverage
Agentic products sold to recruiters in LinkedIn Talent Solutions that source and screen candidates and draft messages. Management gives an annualized revenue run rate in Q3 of fiscal 2026 and seat growth in Q4. The size is the products’ own revenue, all of it taken as what AI added.
Why this motive
Carried: a separately priced agentic hiring product, now with seat growth (claim c29).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor Talent Solutions already sold tools to hire and recruiters had AI-assisted messaging; LinkedIn revenue was in fiscal 2024 and the hiring line is not broken out. A separately priced product doing work the anchor already shows is expanded under the tie-break; the products may repackage recruiter tools sold before, so the size is read as a level, with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“In addition to LinkedIn’s free services, LinkedIn offers monetized solutions designed to offer AI-enabled insights and productivity: Talent Solutions, Marketing Solutions, Premium Subscriptions, and Sales Solutions. Talent Solutions provide insights for workforce planning and tools to hire, nurture, and develop talent.”
“Since introducing AI-assisted messages for recruiters five months ago, 3/4 of them say it saves them time, and we have seen a nearly 80% increase in members watching AI-related learning courses this quarter.”
Companies whose recruiters use the AI-powered hiring products, a floor · as-of 2026-06-30
AI-powered hiring seats, sequential change as stated; ambiguous between seats at 140 percent of the prior level (up 40 percent) and seats up 140 percent · 2026-CQ2
LinkedIn revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
LinkedIn agentic hiring products, annualized revenue run rate, a floor · as-of 2026-03-31
What else could explain it
relabel: The CEO now speaks of AI-powered solutions used by recruiters at many companies, a wider description than the agentic products’ run rate given a quarter earlier.
Quotes
“Recruiters at over 20,000 companies are now using our AI-powered solutions to reduce time to hire and improve candidate matching. Seats increased to 140% quarter-over-quarter.”
No customer count, price or revenue is given for the launched product this quarter; the only statements are a security system in private preview to be sold by consumption and the cost of the company's own security model (claims c31, c32). The prior quarter, measured only by counts, is unsized, so there is nothing to carry forward.
described, no sizedisclosure: described· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new
Management describes a multi-agent security system in private preview, to be sold by consumption, and says its own security model handles most tasks at lower cost (claims c31, c32). No customer count or revenue is given this quarter, so the channel is unsized. The former estimate, , the same assumed share as a quarter earlier, is no longer the size.
Evidence: 2 quotes, 1 figure, 1 confound, 2 from before coverage
The AI assistant and agents for security operations, sold by compute unit, with a consumption-based agentic security system announced for later. Management reports customer growth multiples and alert counts, no level. Triage and remediation errors are costly, so the work is expensive to check.
Why this motive
Carried: a priced AI security product, with a consumption-based agentic system announced (claim c31).
Before LLMs: new
Copilot for Security was a product at the anchor annual report; no revenue was given. An LLM security assistant could not exist before LLMs.
“With Copilot for Security, Microsoft offers an AI cybersecurity product that enables security professionals to respond to cyberthreats quickly.”
“To make it easier for security teams to onboard, we are rolling out Security Copilot to all our E5 customers, and our security solutions are also becoming essential to manage organizations' AI deployments.”
Microsoft 365 Commercial products and cloud services revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
What else could explain it
bundling: Security Copilot capacity can be included with security suites.
Quotes
“Earlier this week, we introduced Project Perception, a complete multimodal agentic security system that brings together teams of agents to simulate attacks, investigate threats, and drive remediation. As Perception moves beyond private preview, we expect to bring it to customers through a consumption-based offering.”
Q1 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
Q2 2026described · described, no size · offensive
product revenue
Agent365: identity, governance and management of customers’ AI agents
Not sized
The quarter's measures are counts: nearly agents registered across tens of thousands of companies (claim c33). No price or revenue is given, and it is sold mainly inside E7, so a count of companies times an assumed paying share and price sizes nothing (the methodology rule for counts).
described, no sizedisclosure: direction only· motive: offensive· before LLMs: new
Shortly after launch the product has nearly agents registered, and the CFO credits it, inside E7, with giving customers control of token spend (claims c33, c34). No price or revenue is given; the measures are counts, so the state is directional and the channel is unsized. The former estimate, , is no longer the size.
Evidence: 5 quotes, 1 figure, 1 confound
A control plane that registers and governs the AI agents customers run, sold inside the E7 suite and on its own. Management reports companies and agents managed, no price or revenue.
Why this motive
Now sold, shortly after launch, inside the E7 suite, which enterprise customers bought in volume (claims c14, c34): a priced product.
Before LLMs: new
The anchor has no product for governing AI agents; identity and security management of users and devices existed. Governing AI agents could not exist without them.
Figures
Agents registered in the governance product, approximately · as-of 2026-06-30
What else could explain it
bundling: Sold mainly inside E7, so its own price is allocated, not observed.
Quotes
“Finally, with Agent 365, we offer a control plane that extends companies' existing governance, identity, security, and management frameworks to agents they build. Just two months in, Agent 365 now has nearly 40 million agents registered across tens of thousands of companies.”
“We'll see a little bit more from Microsoft 365 E7 really has a lot of interesting value in the Microsoft Agent 365 component in particular, where Satya Nadella's talking about having SecOps and FinOps, think about in general, everyone is going to need both observability of token spend and the manageability of token spend for all business processes, and that is what Microsoft 365 E7 brings.”
“We have been encouraged by the response to our new E7 suite as customers increasingly go all in on an integrated AI offering that brings together Copilot E5, Entra, and Agent 365. Just two months after launch, hundreds of enterprise customers have already purchased millions of seats, this quarter, EY deployed E7 to 400,000 employees in our largest win to date.”
“Building on our Copilot momentum from Q3, net paid seat adds more than doubled sequentially, with paid seats now over 30 million. Premium offerings, including Copilot, E5, and early traction in E7, drove ARPU growth this quarter.”
Q1 2026described · described, no size · exploratory
Q2 2026direction only · described, no size · offensive
customer cohort
Database, analytics and other cloud services demand attributed to customers’ AI workloads
0.41% to 3.3% of the quarter’s revenue
Incremental total: counts at zero.
our inferencedisclosure: direction only· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: relabelled
PostgreSQL revenue grew and PostgreSQL customers also using Foundry rose , which the CEO ties to AI workloads; agents need CPUs as much as GPUs, and every major coding agent runs on GitHub (claims c35, c37, c19). Azure and other cloud services grew . The size, , is the ledger’s; relabelled, it adds nothing to the incremental total.
Evidence: 5 quotes, 4 figures, 2 confounds, 3 from before coverage
The part of demand for non-AI services (Cosmos DB, PostgreSQL, Fabric, general compute on Cobalt, the GitHub platform) that management attributes to customers’ AI applications and agents. The dollars sit inside Azure and other cloud services revenue and no figure separates them.
Why this motive
Carried: AI credited for growth in existing products with growth rates and attach counts and no AI-attributed measure (claims c35, c37), which reads exploratory; no narrative-defensive tell of its own is quoted.
Before LLMs: relabelled
The same claim was made at the anchor: the CEO said AI projects use many other cloud meters and the CFO expected AI workloads to use data services too. Server products and cloud services revenue was in fiscal 2024. Management gives growth rates and attach counts for the products, not a measure of the AI-attributed part: a count of customers using Foundry and Fabric together says how many use both, not how much of the database or analytics spend AI caused, and the same pull-through was claimed at the anchor. The movement therefore reads as relabelled.
“Customers can use Azure through our global network of datacenters for computing, networking, storage, mobile and web application services, AI, Internet of Things (“IoT”), cognitive services, and machine learning.”
“And primarily, we're expecting those to come from AI workloads, but AI workloads don't just use our AI services. They use data services, and they use other things.”
Growth in PostgreSQL customers also using Foundry · 2026-CQ2
Server products and cloud services revenue for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Azure and other cloud services revenue growth · 2026-CQ2
What else could explain it
operating leverage: The filing explains Azure growth by demand across the platform and all workloads.
mix shift: Fleet efficiency and earlier capacity lifted consumption of AI and non-AI services alike.
Quotes
“Customers are rapidly adopting our AI-optimized databases like Cosmos DB and PostgreSQL to give agents fast, secure access to real-time data and context they need for memory and retrieval. PostgreSQL revenue was up 55%, accelerating for the third consecutive quarter. Also, the number of PostgreSQL customers also using Foundry increased 80% as customers increasingly choose it as the database for AI workloads.”
“When it comes to analytics, we now have over 40,000 paid Fabric customers, up more than 60% year-over-year, and over 17,000 customers now use Foundry and Fabric, up 60% year-over-year as enterprises connect agents to real-time operational, analytical, and unstructured data in Fabric.”
“When it comes to running agents, CPUs are just as important as GPUs. Our Cobalt VMs are powering both our own first-party workloads as well as workloads for customers, including Adobe, Arm, Elastic, OpenAI, Sprinklr, and TomTom.”
“The agentic era is being built on GitHub. Every major coding agent runs on the platform, and one in three pull requests on GitHub now involves an agent.”
“In Azure and other cloud services, revenue grew 43% against a prior year that included accelerating growth. Customer demand continues to exceed available capacity. Revenue growth was ahead of expectations, driven by efficiency gains across our CPU and GPU fleet, as well as process improvements to enable earlier delivery of new capacity.”
Q1 2026direction only · our inference · exploratory · $326mn to $2.61bn
Q2 2026direction only · our inference · exploratory · $371mn to $2.97bn
other
Equity-method gains and losses on the OpenAI investment
0.7% of the quarter’s revenue; a non-operating gain, not added into totals
reported in the filingdisclosure: quantified· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: new
Backing the nine months out of the annual report’s figure gives a net gain of from the OpenAI investments in the quarter; the release puts the after-tax effect at a gain as well (claims c38, c41). The ownership share fell to about through the recapitalization and other funding (claims c39, c40). Recorded as non-operating and left out of totals.
Evidence: 5 quotes, 4 figures, 2 confounds, 3 from before coverage
The company’s share of OpenAI’s results and the dilution gains on its stake, recognized in other income under the equity method and excluded from management’s adjusted results. Non-cash and not revenue: it is recorded as a non-operating channel, traced and left out of flow totals.
Why this motive
Carried: a non-cash equity-method result set by the investee’s results and funding, read exploratory since none of the operating tells applies and nothing contradicts.
Before LLMs: new
At the anchor the stake existed and equity method losses, the investee not named, sat in other, net, in fiscal 2024. The holding is in an AI lab, so the mark is new money in the ledger’s sense; marks on other equity stakes predate LLMs.
“As OpenAI’s exclusive cloud provider, Azure powers all of OpenAI's workloads.”
“We have a long-term partnership with OpenAI, a leading AI research and deployment company. We deploy OpenAI’s models across our consumer and enterprise products.”
Net (gains) losses from investments in OpenAI, fiscal 2026 (negative: a gain) · FY2026
Ownership of OpenAI on an as-converted basis, approximately · as-of 2026-06-30
Funding of OpenAI commitments paid to date · as-of 2026-06-30
Revenue from commercial arrangements with OpenAI, revenue-sharing payments included, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
What else could explain it
one time item: Dilution gains recur only when the lab raises money; the fiscal year’s gain is mainly the recapitalization.
other: Non-cash, outside operating income, excluded from management’s adjusted results.
Quotes
“Other income (expense), net included $6.5 billion of net gains and $4.8 billion of net losses for fiscal years 2026 and 2025, respectively, from investments in OpenAI, primarily net recognized gains (losses) on our equity method investment reflected in Other, net.”
“During fiscal year 2026, our proportionate ownership of OpenAI decreased due to the OpenAI Recapitalization and other funding activity, and we recorded dilution gains in other income (expense), net.”
“In fiscal year 2026, net income and diluted earnings per share were impacted by net gains from investments in OpenAI, which resulted in an increase in net income and diluted earnings per share of $480 million and $0.07, respectively, in the fourth quarter, and $4,963 million and $0.67, respectively, for the full fiscal year.”
“As an equity method investee, OpenAI is a related party as defined in Accounting Standards Codification Topic 850, Related Party Disclosures (“ASC 850”). In accordance with ASC 850, we are disclosing revenue and accounts receivable balances from transactions with OpenAI. For fiscal year 2026, we recorded revenue from commercial arrangements with OpenAI, inclusive of revenue-sharing payments, of $24.1 billion, and accounts receivable from OpenAI as of June 30, 2026 was $6.0 billion.”
Q1 2026quantified · reported in the filing · exploratory · −$19mn
Q2 2026quantified · reported in the filing · exploratory · $632mn
product revenue · expensive to verify
Dragon Copilot and DAX: ambient clinical documentation
Not sized
No price for the product is in the stored sources or traceable to a public page, and the ledger has no reference class for revenue per clinical encounter, so the stated encounter count cannot be turned into dollars.
inscrutabledisclosure: direction only· motive: offensive· before LLMs: expanded
The channel opens this quarter. The company automated patient encounters in the quarter and gives a pace for the calendar year (claim c74). No revenue or price is given, and none can be traced, so the channel is unsized; automated encounters are a count of AI work, so the state is directional.
Evidence: 1 quote, 1 figure, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
Ambient documentation sold to health systems that drafts clinical notes from patient encounters. Management reports encounters automated, no revenue; it sits in Azure and other cloud services as health and life sciences cloud services. A wrong clinical note is costly, so the work is expensive to check.
Why this motive
A priced clinical product with a stated volume of automated encounters (claim c74).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor Dragon Ambient eXperience already documented patient interactions, more than to date, and DAX Copilot was adding generative drafting. The product continues the earlier one, so the tie-break gives expanded, sized as a level with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“In healthcare, our Dragon Ambient eXperience solution helps clinicians automatically document patient interactions at the point of care. It's been used across more than 10 million interactions to date. With DAX Copilot, we are applying generative AI models to draft high-quality clinical notes in seconds, increasing physician productivity and reducing burnout.”
Patient encounters automated in the quarter · 2026-CQ2
What else could explain it
relabel: The count may include encounters documented by the earlier ambient product sold before generative AI.
Quotes
“In healthcare, we are on pace to automate over 100 million patient encounters this calendar year, including 28 million this quarter, up 2x year-over-year. Mass General Brigham rolled out DAX Copilot to over 4,000 providers and after a study found Ambient AI reduced burnout by 21%.”
Web IQ: web search grounding sold to AI assistants
Not sized
No price, volume or customer count is given, the line it would sit in is not split, and the stored sources hold no reference class for search grounding sold to AI platforms.
inscrutabledisclosure: described· motive: channel-defensive· before LLMs: expanded
The channel opens this quarter. The CEO introduces Web IQ, which gives agents web context and is already used by the most popular AI assistants, ChatGPT among them (claim c75). Nothing permits a size.
Evidence: 1 quote, 1 confound, 1 from before coverage
Search results and web context supplied to AI assistants, ChatGPT among them, through Web IQ, introduced in Q4 of fiscal 2026. No price, volume or revenue is given; any revenue would sit in search advertising or Azure.
Why this motive
Supplying search to the AI assistants where users now start, ChatGPT among them, to stay present there (claim c75).
Before LLMs: expanded
At the anchor Bing was already being supplied to another company’s AI chat assistant, and search syndication to partners predates LLMs; no revenue was given. Some payers are AI labs and some are not, so the tie-break gives expanded, sized as a level with no traceable quarter before AI. The size is the whole of an activity that existed before.
“We're also expanding to new endpoints, bringing Bing to Meta's AI chat experience in order to provide more up-to-date answers, as well as access to real-time search information.”
line composition: Any revenue would sit in search advertising or in Azure, neither split.
Quotes
“This quarter, we introduced Web IQ, which gives agents access to real-world intelligence from across the web. It is already being used by the most popular AI assistants, including ChatGPT.”
3.6% of the quarter’s revenue; a non-operating gain, not added into totals
stated by managementdisclosure: quantified· motive: exploratory· before LLMs: new
The channel opens this quarter. The release names a gain on the investment in Anthropic among the quarter’s discrete items, and the CFO says it drove other income (claims c42, c43). Net recognized gains on investments for the quarter, backed out of the annual report, were . Recorded as non-operating and left out of totals.
Evidence: 2 quotes, 2 figures, 2 confounds
A gain on the company’s investment in the AI lab Anthropic, named in the Q4 release and call as a discrete item in other income. Non-cash and not revenue: a non-operating channel, traced and left out of flow totals.
Why this motive
A non-cash gain set by the investee’s funding. None of the operating tells applies and the sources do not contradict each other, so it reads exploratory, the motive for AI money with no measured operating effect; unknown is only for contradictory sources.
Before LLMs: new
The anchor sources do not mention an investment in Anthropic. A stake in an AI lab is new money in the ledger’s sense.
Figures
Net recognized gains on investments for the quarter (fiscal year less the first nine months) · 2026-CQ2
Net recognized gains on investments, fiscal 2026 · FY2026
What else could explain it
one time item: A gain named as a discrete item; it can reverse.
other: The annual report does not name the investment; the release and call do.
Quotes
“Several discrete items impacted our financial results in the quarter when compared to our forward-looking guidance provided on April 29, 2026, resulting in a benefit of $0.27 on diluted earnings per share. These include a $3.2 billion gain from our investment in Anthropic and lower-than-expected expenses related to the Voluntary Retirement Program which were partially offset by severance expense and impairment charges in XBOX.”
“When adjusted for the impact of our investments in OpenAI, other income and expense was $2.8 billion, driven by the gain on investment in Anthropic noted earlier.”
Q2 2026. Growing slower than revenue: research and development (+13.2%), sales and marketing (+4.3%), general and administrative (+14.9%). A displaced cost shows up as a line that stays under the dashed revenue line. These are the audited lines, as first reported; nothing here is attributed to AI by the filing.
Cost of revenueResearch and developmentSales and marketingGeneral and administrativeRevenue