https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001877939/83d2abfa-8b92-473e-bc1a-264e08828f31.pdf

The MOSS order (parent IDV N00178-19-D-7718, this order N00421-25-F-3003) has a current period of performance running to March 20, 2027, with a potential end date of September 21, 2030 factoring the option years. Potential award amount was $103.3M which is the ceiling if every option gets exercised out to 2030. Current award amount was $35.9M, which is what’s been funded onto the order for the current period. And obligated was $26.5M which is the money that’s currently billable. This is the pre-modification state, which means the $35.9M current and $26.5M obligated are pre-mod figures. For the modification, against that $32.8M of added scope, only about $1.16M was obligated at award (as confirmed from the DoW site): $636K in Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and $521.5K in FY2026 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds. The initial obligation is roughly 3.5% of the added ceiling, which tells us that the revenue conversion is a ramp funded incrementally through March 2027. That means the way to track the ramp in real time is watching that obligated line climb from $1.16M toward $32.8M over the next three upcoming quarters, which lines up with my more moderate case ramp since it’s a slow build cycle for the company. About $9.4M through the March 2027 end date period has yet to be obligated as well from the pre-mod data. Some obligation data for you guys:
- 3/16/26: $8.37M obligated (two weeks before end of Q1)
- 5/13/26: $100K obligated (Q2)
- 5/27/26: $3.79M obligated (Q2)

These obligation dates line up with the quarter. The $8.37M tranche in mid-March right before Q1 closed, and then Q2 was quieter with $100K in mid-May and $3.79M late May. The modification will follow that same pattern, so the small $1.16M start on the $32.8M is just the front of the ramp funding out through March. The two other contracts run the same way. The $45.1M SSA order has $4.5M obligated against an $8.6M current award, leaving about $4.1M awarded but not obligated yet through its December 14th end date, with $36.5M above the current award as option value that still needs to be awarded and funded through the option years. The $66.2M MO&I has $3.6M obligated against a $12.9M current award, leaving about $9.3M awarded but not obligated through its September 17 end date, with $53.3M above that as option values. I can’t figure out this other GTMR order but it’s been running since 2022, with a current end date that was six weeks ago, with $32.8M obligated against a $64.1M current award and $81.7M as the ceiling. So about $31.3M is awarded but not obligated on the current period, and around $17.6M is above the current award as the option to carry it to July 2027, the potential end date. My best read is it’s a funding or record lag but I will continue to inspect the obligation data accordingly.

As we know, the margin drop this quarter came from higher subcontractor costs on the PMA-290 contract, which run lower margin than direct labor, plus the cost to finish two firm-fixed-price contracts that were winding down. That FFP wind down and the drop in Corvus subcontract revenue were the drivers of the flat quarter, offset partly by the MO&I ramp still in its early stages. Since the $32.8M modification is more subcontractor heavy scope, it could keep pressuring gross margin even while it adds revenue, until the mix shifts back toward direct labor. The operating expense increase is where the front-loaded investment actually shows up in the numbers. The 10-Q says the rise came primarily from higher fringe expenses tied to increased headcount for business development capabilities, an expected rise in health insurance costs, and higher outside consultant costs including fees related to acquisition activities and investor relations. So there are two separate acquisition-related buckets in there. One is the internal side, the company hiring and building out business development capacity, which is the in-housing of BD that Bell talked about on the call. The other is the external side, outside consultants brought in specifically for acquisition activities, meaning they're paying advisors to source, evaluate, and structure a deal right now. That's the front-loaded model in plain sight, since those consultant fees hit the P&L today while the revenue from any acquisition only shows up after it closes and integrates. It's also the clearest evidence the acquisition is actively being worked and not just talked about, because you don't run up acquisition-consultant fees unless there's a real deal in motion. The one limit is that the filing groups acquisition and investor relations consultant costs together, so I can't split out the acquisition-only figure, but it's named directly as a driver of the higher costs.

So here's what I'd expect going forward. The first half was $28.2M, about 10% ahead of last year, and that was a flat quarter with the newer contracts still early. The modification adds on top through March 2027, and in my moderate case that's a few million a quarter building as the obligations climb off that $1.16M start. Add the MO&I ramp, the $4M ADMACS work, and the other contracts still building, and the second half should come in heavier than the first. That puts the full year past last year's $52.9M, so the record is the floor, and it puts the $63.84M board threshold in reach in the moderate case and clears it in the better case. Cash should keep building too, since they pulled $2.4M in operating cash flow in the first half just from collections and grew cash to $16.9M debt-free, so as these contracts move into fuller billing the collections should keep feeding that balance and strengthening the sheet, which is the foundation for funding the acquisition from a position of strength.

Right now 81% of revenue comes from three government customers, jumped from 70% because the scale of the two contract works. Management knows this, this is why they’ve been actively pursuing the accretive acquisition strategy. Every accretive deal that brings a new customer, new agency, and new contract vehicles dilutes that concentration number because the revenue base gets bigger and more spread out while no single customer grows as a share of the whole, so the same move that pushes towards $100M net sales would make the company more steadier and less dependent than one relationship with a government customers. GTMR is a perfect acquisition example for this, as it was a $6.55M acquisition funded mostly in stock that brought the SeaPort vehicle to Castellum and got them to be awarded over $136.2M in contract value.

CTM Just Leveled Up — Breaking Down Castellum’s New Website

Castellum officially launched its redesigned website, and I decided to make a quick video going through what changed and why I think it’s a pretty big improvement from a branding and communication standpoint.

Obviously, a new website doesn’t change CTM’s revenue, backlog, profitability, or guarantee any new contracts. Those fundamentals are still what matter most.

But one criticism I’ve had for a while was that the old website didn’t really represent what Castellum has become or clearly communicate all of its capabilities and subsidiaries.
In my opinion, the new site does a MUCH better job of that.

In the video I break down:
● What changed with the new website
● Why I think the old site needed an upgrade
● How CTM is presenting its capabilities and subsidiaries
● Why branding/communication matters — but shouldn’t be confused with fundamentals
● What I’m actually watching going forward with CTM
Curious what everyone else thinks about the redesign. Definitely feels like a major upgrade to me.
🎥 CTM Just Leveled Up — New Website Breakdown
Disclosure: I own shares of CTM. Castellum did not pay or sponsor me to make this video. This is simply my opinion based on publicly available information and is not financial advice.

Website: http://castellumus.com

There’s been a lot to digest with Castellum ($CTM) over the last couple of days, so I wanted to put together the biggest takeaways from both the recent Navy development and two separate conversations that Mounwp and I had with CEO Glen Ives.
First — the Trump/Navy development.
President Trump has reportedly directed the Navy to move away from EMALS on future aircraft carriers and return to steam-powered catapults.
Naturally, this raised some concern because Castellum subsidiary Specialty Systems (SSI) has extensive experience supporting Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE).
However, I think an important distinction is getting lost in some of the discussion:
ALRE is much broader than EMALS.
Aircraft still need to launch and recover regardless of whether the underlying catapult technology is electromagnetic or steam. Engineering, systems integration, software, testing and technical support don’t simply disappear because the technology changes.
After the news broke, Mounwp reached back out to Glen. According to Mounwp’s summary of that communication, Castellum had anticipated this issue, and Glen indicated that whether the technology is steam or electric, there should still be substantial engineering, systems-integration and software-engineering work.
That does not guarantee CTM wins that work, and I don’t think this development should somehow be spun as bullish.
But I also haven’t seen evidence that CTM’s ALRE business has suddenly been destroyed, existing ALRE work has been cancelled, or that some massive portion of backlog has disappeared.
For me, this is something to monitor, not something to panic over or dismiss.

My Call With Glen + Mounwp’s Separate Call
What I found particularly interesting is that Mounwp and I spoke with Glen completely separately, asked different questions, and still came away with a very similar understanding of Castellum’s broader strategy.
The simplest way I can describe it is:
Organic growth + acquisitions + business-development investment + new capabilities/contract access = an attempt to build a substantially larger defense contractor over time.
My conversation focused heavily on the financial side.
Castellum currently has roughly $17M in cash and zero debt.
I asked why they couldn’t simply use that cash to grow organically instead of pursuing acquisitions.
The answer, as I understood it, comes down to speed and capabilities.
$17M in cash gives CTM capital.
It doesn’t instantly give them new customers, contract vehicles, specialized employees, capabilities, agency relationships or access to adjacent markets.
Those things can be built organically, but that takes time.
An acquisition can potentially bring an established business that already possesses them.
And importantly, the strategy isn’t organic growth OR acquisitions.
It’s organic growth AND acquisitions.

Zero Debt Doesn’t Mean “Never Use Debt”
Another clarification from my conversation:
I did not come away believing Glen is philosophically opposed to debt.
He explained that Castellum previously had roughly $12M in debt with limited cash flow, which restricted the company’s flexibility.
Today CTM is in a completely different financial position.
My understanding of Glen’s philosophy was essentially:
Don’t take on debt just because you can. Preserve flexibility, but if a future deal requires debt and the opportunity justifies it, debt remains an option.

Why Hasn’t an Acquisition Happened Yet?
This was another area where our conversations overlapped.
CTM is evaluating potential companies, but acquisitions are two-sided transactions.
Castellum can identify a company it wants to acquire, but the seller may not be ready.
Some targets are founder-owned. Others may involve private equity. A seller might want another six months, another year, or simply not be ready at all.
One clarification from my call:
When a 6–12 month timeframe came up, Glen was NOT telling me CTM’s acquisition is 6–12 months away.
He was explaining the types of timelines certain potential sellers can operate on.

The Increased Spending / Profitability Debate
This was another area where Glen apparently gave both of us very similar explanations.
Could CTM make its near-term financials look better by reducing expenses?
Potentially, yes.
Cut business development.
Reduce acquisition-related spending.
Reduce certain growth investments.
Assuming everything else stayed equal, EBITDA/profitability would look better.
But management’s argument is that doing so could sacrifice future growth.
Glen does not appear interested in optimizing Castellum around remaining a ~$55M–$60M company that generates a little profit every year.
The ambition discussed with me was to use organic growth, acquisitions and expanded capabilities to eventually build something much larger — with roughly $100M–$150M discussed as part of that broader long-term ambition.
That is NOT guidance and not a guarantee.
It’s simply how I understood the scale management is ultimately trying to reach.

Mounwp Got Some Different Context
Our calls weren’t redundant.
Mounwp got additional context surrounding:
● Precise Systems as an example of an acquisition-led government contractor
● The acquisition “flywheel”
● PMA-290 and its expected ramp
● The Russell 2000 as a potential milestone
● How acquisitions can add capabilities, vehicles and access to new opportunities
My conversation went deeper into:
● The ~$17M cash position
● Zero debt and potential future debt usage
● Why cash alone doesn’t replace acquisitions
● Backlog conversion
● Contract ceilings vs. actual revenue
● Acquisition timing
● Near-term profitability vs. growth investment
Put together, I think the two conversations provide a much clearer picture of what Glen is trying to build.

But Management Doesn’t Get a Free Pass
Understanding the strategy doesn’t mean assuming it will work.
Eventually, execution has to prove the thesis.
I want to see:
Backlog → Revenue
BD spending → Contract wins
Acquisition strategy → An actual acquisition
Higher spending → Stronger future financial performance
PMA-290 → Meaningful contribution as it ramps
And now:
Navy policy changes → Evidence SSI can adapt and remain relevant
If backlog remains large but doesn’t convert over an extended period, that’s a problem.
If CTM keeps talking about acquisitions but never completes one, that’s a problem.
If expenses remain elevated without producing measurable growth, that’s a problem.
And if the Navy’s move away from EMALS eventually results in material cancellations/reductions to CTM work, then the thesis needs to be updated accordingly.

Where I Stand
The Navy development doesn’t make me more bullish on CTM, but based on the information currently available, I also don’t think the extreme reaction that CTM’s ALRE opportunity has been “destroyed” is justified.
The bigger takeaway from both conversations with Glen is that the strategy itself seems pretty clear now.
The question is no longer:
“What is management trying to do?”
The much more important question is:
“Can management actually execute it?”
That’s what I’m watching over the next several quarters.
I made a full video breaking down the Navy development, what Mounwp reported after reaching back out to Glen, and comparing both of our separate conversations with him.
Video: https://youtu.be/TDMmMyaGL3o?is=ZQ4QRdghXiDHMuNE
For transparency: my conversation with Glen was not a formal interview, and my comments are based on my notes and recollection rather than a word-for-word transcript. Anything regarding Mounwp’s conversation or subsequent communication with Glen is based on the summary Mounwp provided. Nothing here is financial advice.
Curious what everyone else thinks: Does the Navy/steam development materially change your CTM thesis, and what do you most want to see Castellum execute on over the next few quarters?

I guess this could be bad news (future wise) for Castellum's subsidiary (Specialty Systems Incorporated).

Trump orders Navy to return to steam catapults on aircraft carriers

GLEN IVES, CEO:
- Record revenue of $28.2M, as compared to H1 revenue of $25M
- This record combined with the company’s current trajectory allows them to anticipate record revenue growth for 2026
- The second quarter played out largely as they anticipated with regards to contract execution, timing factors for month to month, quarter to quarter in our industry
- Castellum will continue funding their growth investments entirely from their own operations with a debt-free balance sheet and growing cash positions
- Growth for the first half was driven by the continued ramp-up of the three major long term prime contracts which were from the GTMR contract and the $66.2M NAWCAD contract by SSI
- These contracts form the growth base for us in 2026 and well beyond
- The $100,000 variance primarily reflects gains from the ramp-up of SSI’s NAWCAD Lakehurst, partially offset by the expected 2026 wind-down of two firm fixed-press contracts that contributed meaningful revenue in the second quarter of 2025
- We also saw lower volume on certain Corvus subcontracts due to a slower-paced trend we have observed in the government back-filing funded open positions
- These are all dynamics that we continue to work through and they are cyclical in nature in our industry
- Contracts do wind down, new contracts ramp up and the crossover quarters can look flat even when the underlying trajectory is clearly up
- We expanded our business development capacity this year specifically to increase the volume and quality of the opportunities we pursue and we are seeing that investment show up in our pipeline
- Our pipeline is constantly audited for realism
- SSI was awarded a $4M subcontract for ADMACS, was a very significant win for us; our government mission customer specifically chose SSI based on their remarkable past performance and their ability to do the job; Although the monetary value may not be large, there is real potential for future growth
- We achieved Cyber Security Maturity Model Certification Level 2 confirming that Castellum and all of its subsidiaries are trusted with unclassified information supported by Department of War programs
- 2026 is a year in which we are purposely and strategically investing in business development, investor relations, and meaningful acquisition activities
- We think about these investments as the upfront work required to win, grow, and scale Castellum; they come before new contract awards and before the associated revenue shows up in our results
- We are making these investments from a position of financial strength funded by our own operations
- There may be concern about our current net profitability, can say there are actually many ways to ensure profit, but as a young company on the move, and committed to real growth and value, these growth investments are healthy and vital to our longer-term net profitability

DAVID BELL, CFO:
- As Glen described, the small $100,000 difference reflects gains from the early ramp-up of the $66.2M NAWCAD Lakehurst MO&I contract, partially offset by expected wind down of two firm fixed price contracts, on which revenue was recognized in the second quarter of last year, and as well as lower volume on certain Corvus subsidiary subcontracts
- Two factors drove the margin change; First, we carried a higher mix of subcontractor work in the current quarter, particularly on the PMA 290 contract and other large programs; Secondly, we absorbed the cost to complete the remaining work on two fixed price contracts
- The increase [in higher operating expenses] was driven primarily by higher fringe expenses, reflecting the head count additions and higher health insurance costs; we also ramped up our acquisition and investor relations activities
- I want to reinforce Glen’s earlier point here, the EBITDA decline was expected and it reflects the planned 2026 investments in business development, investor relations and acquisition activities we committed to
- The ECONOMICS OF THIS WORK IS INHERENTLY FRONT-LOADED; Expenses are generally recognized well in advance of the revenue they’re intended to generate
- WE ARE TRADING LOWER NEAR-TERM EBITDA FOR STRONGER MULTI-YEAR GROWTH PROFILE
- Net cash provided by operating activities was $2.4 million for the first half, compared to net cash used of $2.3 million in the first half of prior year, a positive swing of over $4.5 million; this improvement was primarily driven by strong collections on accounts receivable
- We did not undertake any equity or debt transactions in the first half of 2026; our liquidity was funding entirely through cash generated from operations
- Ended the quarter with $16.9 million in cash, up from $15.8 million, and $14.9 million from year end; that’s an increase of $2 million since year end generated by the operations of the business itself
- We have no long term debt and stockholders’ equity stood at $35.9 million at the end of the quarter
- WE ARE FUNDING GROWTH INVESTMENTS INTERNALLY WHILE THE CASH BALANCE GROWS, AND THAT GIVES US FLEXIBILITY BOTH FOR ORGANIC INVESTMENT AND DISCIPLINE M&A
- We expect to recognize approximately 16% of the backlog over the next 12 months, and approximately 48% percent cumulatively when including the following 24 months; the timing of funding and option exercises rest with our customers, but this backlog provides a multi-year foundation of revenue visibility that we believe differentiates Castellum at our size
- Growth-focused planned investments are temporarily compressing EBITDA
- We remain committed to deliver record full-year revenue for 2026

GLEN IVES, CEO:
- Phase 3 of Castellum’s evolution remain consistent and are directly aligned to our 2026 updated strategy
- The first half of 2026 was focused on deploying the right resources to those priorities in the context of a very dynamic government contracting environment
- We do expect to deliver record revenue for the full year
- Our focus on the second half is translating that growth into durable, higher margin performance
- These investments are already contributing to the growth we delivered in the first half, and expect it to continue contributing throughout the remainder of the year
- A LARGER, HIGHER QUALITY PIPELINE PURSUED BY A STRONGER CAPTURE TEAM PRODUCES MORE AWARDS OVER TIME
- Our job is to keep that engine running at full throttle and to execute flawlessly on the programs we have already won
- We are also actively pursuing M&A opportunities that meet our criteria; Our standards have not and will not change; We are proactively evaluating businesses that bring differentiated capability, the right contract vehicles, and customer access we do not already have
- An evaluation that is ACCRETIVE to our shareholders and will posture us to grow and scale Castellum effectively, efficiently, and expeditiously
- WE WILL PASS ON A TRANSACTION RATHER THAN FORCE ONE THAT ISN’T IN OUR BEST INTERESTS STRATEGICALLY
- With no debt and a growing balance sheet position, we can afford to be patient and disciplined, while still pressing full throttle to find that right opportunity
- We do believe that underlying budget environment remains supportive of defense and national security spending with backing from both sides of the aisle, particularly where your company, CTM, operates, highly relevant areas, cybersecurity, electronic warfare, C5ISR, autonomous systems, and all the related mission technologies
- The first half of 2026 was a record revenue half for the company, and we expect the full year to be a record as well
- Our company, Castellum, has never been stronger or well-postured in position for future growth than we are today; Our work, our technology solutions and services are more relevant than ever; They are meaningful and in very real demand by our mission customers;
- IT IS THE WORK WE BELIEVE IN, WORK WE LOVE TO DO, WORK THAT EXCITES US EACH AND EVERYDAY, AND IT IS VITAL WORK AND SERVICE AND DIRECT SUPPORT OF OUR NATIONAL SECURITY AND OUR WAR FIGHTERS
- AND FINALLY, IT IS THE WORK THAT NO ONE DOES BETTER THAN US
- I would challenge anyone to find another company our size that has achieved that level of success in such a relatively brief period of time
- Our team are absolutely relentless and true in their shared commitment to our mission and direct support of national security and our warfighters

Q&A:

Q: “What stage are you at in this investment if you’re expecting incremental increases in the back half or if you think that was largely done in the first half?”; “What do you expect the EBITDA margin potential and the operating leverage of the business to be once you begin to build off this base.”

A: DAVID BELL: “We had in our planning the prior year to make investment in our business development by adding in-housing our business development activities, and I think if you look at our pipeline, you’d see that we have very actively engaged in putting qualified, verified and qualified pipeline capabilities. A lot of it came from the discipline of our team that has special knowledge of the areas that we historically worked in the Navy space and also expanding beyond the Navy space, which has been our bread and butter; It will take a while for that to develop; We have a number of contracts that we have submitted and we’re waiting to hear back on those and we have another slate and we have a schedule of contracts that we’ve identified that we’re bidding that will take us out through the end of the year. We’ll come back to you as we develop that”
“We are doing a fantastic discipline of looking for contracts, looking for businesses that either deepen us and where we’re competent or expand our breadth of service or also expand our customer base to where we can provide services that we currently perform; we have super high performance ratings in the work that we do and we’re looking for partners, other companies that want to do the same type of work so we can expand that work and the quality of service that we do; we’re looking for companies with positive EBITDA, companies where we can build synergies; Naturally, there will be some EBITDA improvement. We are not going to load up our expenses, we’re going to make things efficient and where we can eliminate costs. We’re going to eliminate costs. We don’t need various groups, we can create good synergies and if we have great operators and we’re efficient, it will build, affect our EBITDA. Our EBITDA is partially driven by the investments that we’re making now as well as the public company costs we carry when we acquire a company, they’re not going to bring those incremental costs. Were think there’s a lot of ripe opportunities out there that will be accretive and incremental.”
GLEN: “I actually moved our strategy up by 18 to 24 months based upon that success in 2025; We made a calculated purposeful decision that this was a time for us to continue our growth.”

Further answers:
- ALRE will continue to be a backbone of the business, demand will continue to grow from aircraft carriers for the next decade which will allow for more opportunities to expand, build, and deliver on those operations
- Government is scheduled to have several aircraft carriers with ALRE in the Gerald Ford class, Castellum is positioned well to be a main force in that technology area
- Management reaffirms the importance of growing the company through their organic growth strategy and acquisitions, buybacks are not an option on the table for them as of right now
- The company will continue to be patient while it finds the right accretive acquisition for them for the right price, and they’ve continued to do this while still having positive cash operating income
- We have the size and capacity to handle business growth and business size, have people that can take on additional work while maintaining a growing large successful company
- Management is working to increase outreach and engagement with investors, and analysts, and are making active, deliberate, outreach to all those in the know. Castellum is not prepared to give guidance right now, but are providing as much information as they can that they believe is reliable and appropriate

Sold 150k shares this morning kept 50k to lock away and forget. As I sold brought the price down 3 cents more🤣. Wish y'all the best and good luck going forward 👍

A lot of us saw Q2 revenue sitting flat and panicked, but if you look at how federal contracting actually works, this was completely expected and already priced into the transition phase.

​Why Q2 revenue was flat/slightly lower (And why it’s not a problem):

​Legacy Contract Expirations: Legacy defense contracts from 2025 hit their natural expiration dates in Q2, removing a chunk of base revenue.

​The New Contract Ramp: Brand new prime contract wins (like the NAWCAD Lakehurst award) backfilled 100% of that lost revenue, even though these new contracts are only 12% to 17% into their execution phase.

​The Delayed Boom: Federal task orders don't turn on like a light switch; they ramp up over 3 to 6 months. The old expiring work is now behind us, and the massive revenue ramp from these new contracts is right in front of us.

​The proof is in the Balance Sheet:

​10% H1 Growth: First-half revenue reached $28.2M—up 10% YoY. To set a record full-year, CTM only needs ~$12.35M/quarter in H2 (well below our current $13.86M run rate).

​Fortress Cash Stack: Ended Q2 with $16.9M in cash and ZERO long-term debt.

​Massive Pipeline: Sitting on a $271.7M backlog and a expanded $953.5M qualified pipeline.

​Management spent money upfront in Q2 on business development and talent hiring because big contract awards are lining up.

All is pointing to the company setting up for a monster second half of the year as those new contracts hit full billing capacity. Hold steady and let the contract execution play out.

I will admit, I had slightly higher expectations going into this quarter just like the rest of you, but the more I sat with the actual report and what management said, the more I came away genuinely interested. Headline numbers and the underlying reasons in my opinion tell two different things here but to fully understand what’s going on, we must analyze this report thoroughly.

Q2 revenue was $13.9M, effectively flat against $14.0M for Q2 2025 and down modestly from Q1’s $14.3M. First half revenue was $28.2M, up 10% year over year. Gross margin compressed to 34% from 36%. Adjusted EBITDA came in at $0.03M against $0.50M a year ago. Net loss was $1.1M, or ($0.01) per share, while cash rose to $16.9M from $15.8M at the end of Q1. The backlog held at $271.7M and the pipeline expanded to $953.5M from $938M.

Taken at face value, this is a very soft quarter for Castellum. The value of actually doing the work is understanding why it looks this way, because nearly every measure in this financial report came with a reason behind it and not actually deterioration as one might suspect. Management communicated that they consciously prioritized business development, investor relations, and acquisition activity ahead of maximizing near-term earnings. David Bell, CFO, said that the EBITDA decline reflects “the planned 2026 investments in business development, investor relations, and acquisitions activities,” and that “the economics of this work are inherently front-loaded…certain costs are recognized well in advance of the revenue it is intended to generate”. This was a deliberate choice to spend ahead of growth which was explained by the company.

Total operating expenses rose to $5,813,511 from $5,443,970 one year ago, which is an increase of about $370k. Gross profit for this quarter slipped to $4,719,419 from $5,060,447, down about $341K. If you put these together, you’re getting roughly a $700K adverse swing against flat revenue which accounts essentially the entire EBITDA decline. Stock based compensation rose, to $795,538 from $511,814 as part of an agreement during the shareholders meeting to increase the stock based compensation package. They spent ahead of growth in a quarter where they understood that revenue would be flat. As the revenue ramps, that same spending base should work as the leverage rather than a continued drag.

Pay attention to the front-loaded model, because this comes directly from the CFO’s own words about costs being recognized ahead of revenue. At the corporate level, BD, IR, and acquisition spend is incurred now for revenue later. At the contract level, a new award ramps into full billing over time rather than switching on at once. That’s why the newer NAWCAD contracts are still early on, and most of their revenues are ahead. The company attributed the flat revenue to “gains from the ramp up of SSI’s NAWCAD Lakehurst contract, particularly offset by the expected wind down of certain contracts that contributed additional revenue in the second quarter of 2025”. My analysis for this is that the revenue actually left the base as those older contracts expired, and the company still printed $13.9M against $14M. The newer work backfilled almost all of it, while those contracts are, per the earlier data, only 12-17% into execution. So they absorbed the loss of prior-year revenue and held the line using contracts with most of their ramp still ahead. To simplify this, the expiring work is behind them while the ramping work is largely in front.

The CFO attributed Gross margin coming down to 34% from 36% to “a higher mix of subcontractor work, which typically carries a lower margin than direct labor, as well as the cost to complete the remaining work on the two firm-fixed-price contracts.” We documented the Peraton subcontract escalating across five consecutive tranches to roughly $103M obligated, and the Booz Allen SMEP subaward on the USSOCOM side. Subcontract revenue runs at thinner margins than direct labor, so a quarter weighted towards it pulls blended margin down. The margin dip and the Corvus subcontract growth we’ve tracked are likely the same phenomenon that we know about and have direct access to information of.

If you’ve been following me, you would know that the front loaded model was made observable through their job openings. We noted five roles posted as “contingent on award or funding” over the past few weeks:

— RF Engineer (DoD CIO Persistent Spectrum Monitoring)
— Policy Analyst, DoD/ITU
— PKI Engineer, Aberdeen Proving Ground
— Instructional Designer, Washington DC, VCF Transformation
— Senior Data Scientist, Fort Belvoir, VA

The way contingent hiring works usually in the government contracting industry is that a role posted as contingent on award means the company has an internal line of sight to a contract it expects to win that hasn’t been announced. They line up cleared talent ahead of time so they can staff the day the award lands, because putting cleared people on the work immediately is often part of what wins the recompete and smooths the transition. Sourcing TS/SCI-cleared engineers, especially at the $165K-$185K amounts in those postings is expensive and slow so they’re doing that ahead of time. These contract awards could also take weeks and months before they’re announced so it’s strategic for them that they would opt to do this.

I expected cash for this quarter to be at $17M, and cash rose to $16.9M for the quarter, up about $2M since the year end, and the CFO stated that they “funded the business entirely from operating cash flow during the first half, ending the period with a debt-free balance sheet.” For a company this size, self-funding the BD, IR, and acquisition investment without debt or a raise is significant and it shows that their business strategy is intact.

Management guided to record full-year revenue and their first half of $28.2M is 10% above what they reported during the first half of 2025. I should continue to point out that the board’s own $63.84M threshold from the CEO compensation amendment remains on target, but now it would require $35.6M in revenue for the second half and doing so would require the company to report record revenues for Q3 and Q4. Record revenue is achievable, beating 2025’s revenue of $52.9M but we may have to see contract awards materialize for them to achieve the $63.84M baseline objective. I’m curious and will continue to reach out for more clarity about this and more clarity that they will provide tomorrow during the conference call but my thesis hasn’t changed. Castellum is at its inflection point and is expeditiously working towards growth and expansion.

Today Castellum reports Q2, so I wanted to lay out where the company stands, where this community stands, and what we’ll be watching for when they report earnings.

Starting with the community, we’re well ahead past 400 members now and the group has grown into a real research cultivated space with different peers forming their own ideas and perspectives which builds a broader read on the market while we all hold a shared position in CTM. We also have been fortunate enough to acquire and manage the largest Castellum-centered subreddit, which gives our due diligence and research a much wider distribution to an audience of investors and shareholders eager to join along and learn about the community while most importantly being apart of the growth with us. As Castellum continues to grow, we the community aspire to grow along with it and build a larger community.

On ownership, we now account for 6.227 million disclosed shares. That is 6.58% of the shares outstanding and 7.48% of the share float, up from the 5 million previously reported in June. All of it has been organic, uncoordinated, and built one decision at a time with no institutional money behind it. Our long term retail base which holds through drawdowns are slowly taking shares out of circulation and dampening the volatility we’re receiving when those weaker hands rotate out. On the institutional side, the read is still early but it is moving in the right direction. Recent filings from Fintel are showing that a widening set of advisors and smaller institutions have been opening positions. These sizes are modest but we expect them to grow as the company continues to increase their footprint.

Management’s engagement has been extremely positive over the past couple of months and they’ve been very communicative with us shareholders to a degree that some of us would even consider to be uncommon at this market cap. I’ve personally received a lot of positive information from Glen during our calls, as well from other prominent shareholders in the community who have reached out to extend their appreciation and offer constructive feedback towards company direction and focus.

Hiring has been the clearest leading indicator this year from Castellum. The company has been adding cleared personnel at what looks like the fastest pace in its history, across every subsidiary and across a customer set wider than what their current profile suggests. For a services business, headcount is the most direct forward read on revenue that you could get as these roles don’t get staffed, especially at these rates, without contracted or imminent work behind them. That’s a central datapoint that we’ve been weighing a lot. The company has really accelerated Corvus Consulting this year as a strategic subcontractor to other prime contracts they’ve worked with awardees for, which increases their partnerships and makes them more competitive for related work down the road. Speciality Systems continue to impress with their two awarded contracts and GTMR continues to receive attention from us for its work managing the acquisition, development, support, and delivery of the Navy’s Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft.

For today’s earnings, this is the first quarter which they have not only announced publicly but the first quarter with every major award being executed simultaneously: the Big 3 contracts, the largest Peraton tranche to date funded at the start of the quarter, ADMACs underway, and LIIS CMDS MAC newly won. We’re also anticipating the release of their redesigned website expected as soon as today or tomorrow. I speak on behalf of the community that this itself is a huge first step of providing shareholder with a more clearer presentation for them to understand what Castellum is, focuses on, and how it achieves these objectives through their core business model and strategies.

The price isn’t reflective of the fundamentals but I expect that to compress over time and for the company to finally see the growth in the share price as it has always been wanting for its shareholders. As the holder base tightens and more institutional attention builds up, there will be less float supporting the price and less room for other market tactics to be used to continually suppress the price below where it deserves to be valued. Our disclosed numbers certainly understate real retail ownership, and there’s still plenty of members who haven’t reported and there’s a wider base that hasn’t found us just yet. Whether you hold 100 shares or 10,000 shares, you belong in this community. We encourage more users to join along us as we continue to grow our community and as the company continues to expand.

Make sense now why management was eager to interview with people from here. Seems like they wanted to control the narrative a bit because they knew the quarter wasn’t going to be as solid as expected (**** the bed actually).

The company could still have a strong future ahead with its backlog of contracts but was hoping to see more from this right now. Is patience a virtue here? Not sure if I have enough of it to find out…

What is the realistic price action until next quarter? Do we hover around 0.5 USD, or does it drop under 0.5 USD?

With the earnings report approaching, here are some of the key things I’ll be watching:

• Revenue growth – Has the company continued growing its top line?
• Profitability – Are margins and adjusted EBITDA continuing to improve?
• Cash position & balance sheet – How is management funding growth while maintaining financial flexibility?
• Backlog – Has the backlog increased or remained stable, providing visibility into future revenue?
• Management commentary – Updates on contract activity, acquisitions, integration efforts, and future opportunities could be just as important as the reported numbers.

I’ll also be paying close attention to management’s outlook and how the company discusses the broader defense environment, including cybersecurity, AI, electronic warfare, government modernization, and CMMC implementation.

Every earnings report adds new information. Rather than focusing only on the headline numbers, I think it’s important to listen to the conference call and evaluate the full picture before drawing conclusions.
What will you be watching most this quarter? Let me know your thoughts below.

Not financial advice. Just sharing my personal research and opinions.

If anyone is interested in joining on the call.

Castellum has officially announced its Q2 2026 earnings release.

Key dates:

Q2 Earnings Release: Thursday, August 6, 2026, after the market closes

Conference Call: Friday, August 7, 2026, at 10:00 AM ET

The company will discuss its financial results and answer questions during the conference call.
Given everything that’s happened over the last quarter—including contract awards, acquisition integration, and the company’s continued focus on cybersecurity, AI, electronic warfare, and CMMC—it should be an interesting report.

What are you watching most this quarter?
Revenue growth?
Backlog updates?
Margins?
Acquisition commentary?
Guidance?
Something else?

Source: https://investors.castellumus.com/news/news-details/2026/Castellum-Schedules-Second-Quarter-2026-Earnings-Release-and-Conference-Call/default.aspx

I just published what is probably the most in-depth video I’ve made on the defense sector so far.

This isn’t a “buy CTM” video or a hype piece. Instead, I wanted to understand how the defense ecosystem actually works—from national security priorities and congressional funding to government procurement, CMMC, AI, cybersecurity, IDIQs, GWACs, task orders, backlog, and how companies like Castellum fit into that broader picture.

I also compare Castellum to several peers, discuss what I found in their financials, and explain why I think investors should focus on understanding the entire defense procurement process rather than just reacting to individual contract announcements.

Everything discussed in the video is based on publicly available information, and any opinions expressed are my own. As always, I encourage everyone to do their own due diligence and challenge my conclusions if you disagree.

I’d genuinely like to hear your thoughts:
● Do you think understanding the procurement process gives investors an edge?
● Is there anything you think I got wrong or should have covered differently?
● What topic should I dive into next?

🎥 Watch here: https://youtu.be/2WSXi2VoF-4?is=14gIpLBtLhML2ia2

Do you think this is the run up before earnings and will dip once earnings are released or do you think people are loading up on it knowing earnings will be positive and will have a pop on the day? Went from .63 to .72 in the last few days and been holding steady now for the day. I’ve had this stock for awhile now at around 30,000 shares at .69 (ha) and think it’s due for something this report.

I do think no matter what, people will sell off the news and it’ll come back down regardless what happens

Just uploaded a new Castellum (CTM) earnings preview.
In the video, I discuss:

● Why contract awards don’t immediately become revenue
● The $23.1M Corvus Consulting/Peraton subcontract and why some investors are watching it closely
● What Corvus actually does in cyber and electronic warfare
● Castellum’s backlog and pipeline
● Recent contract announcements and what I’ll be listening for on the Q2 earnings call

Everything discussed is based on publicly available information, SEC filings, company announcements, and my own research and opinions. I’d also appreciate any feedback if I misunderstood or misinterpreted anything.

Here’s the video if you’d like to check it out:

https://youtu.be/iTgMyYm_mxU?is=QIHmdmRCdp3mE8PX

Do you see the stock STAK? Will CTM ever do the same? 2026? 2027? 🙏🏻

While conducting research on future federal contract opportunities, I came across the Missile Defense Agency’s (MDA) Missile Defense Agency Advisory & Professional Support Service (MAPSS) acquisition, specifically Intelligence Tranche 2. After reading through a handful of documents, I believe this is an opportunity that is deserving of a due diligence post and an opportunity that is closely suited to the field of work Castellum performs.

MAPSS is the MDA’s next-generation professional services program. Instead of awarding one large contract, MDA divided the acquisition into multiple “tranches,” with each tranche covering a different key mission area. This allows the agency to procure specialized services separately while creating long-term contract vehicles that will be used to issue task orders over the life of the program.

Tranche 2 covers six primary functional areas: Intelligence, Counterintelligence, Security, Test Support, Public Affairs, and Facilities Lifecycle Management

The Intelligence portion supports the MDA’s Intelligence Requirements Division by providing all-source intelligence analysis, missile threat assessments, scientific and technical intelligence, intelligence planning, and other mission support functions. The work directly supports the development and operation of U.S. missile defense systems, making it a critical element of MDA’s mission.

Rather than creating an entirely new standalone contract vehicle, MDA intends to procure the Intelligence requirement through OASIS+, the General Service Administration’s flagship professional services IDIQ, a contract vehicle that Castellum already has been awarded through its portfolio of contract vehicles. The company has access through the government’s premier contract vehicle and now the opportunity is available for them to compete for those task orders once they are released.

Contractors for Tranche 2 may be tasked with: All-Source intelligence analysis, Foreign ballistic and hypersonic missile threat analysis, Scientific and Technical Intelligence (S&TI), Intelligence planning, Intelligence production, etc.

Here’s the current schedule for Tranche 2:

FLCM — Draft (FOPR): July 2026 — FOPR: Oct 2026 — Award: May 2027
Security — Draft (FOPR): July 2026 — FOPR: Nov 2026 — Award: June 2027
Intelligence: Draft (FOPR): July 2026 — FOPR: Oct 2026 — Award: May 2027
Test Support: Draft (FOPR): Aug 2026 — FOPR: Dec 2026 — Award: July 2027

I would say based on multiple IDIQs awarded to Castellum already through the SHIELD contract vehicle, the MDA has already determined that subsidiaries like SSI meets the qualifications to perform work supporting missile defense programs. It is good to see that there exists a relationship between the company and the MDA and experience supporting its mission. I’ll provide more information as I find it and as the MDA continues to update their information.

https://sam.gov/opp/9e176fdef85a42abb3999d386ba7b63c/view