Nvidia reported strong results for the third quarter of its fiscal year ending October 26, 2025. The company posted $57 billion in revenue, which increased 22% from the previous quarter and 62% from the same period last year. The numbers show that demand for Nvidia’s chips and systems remains high, especially in artificial intelligence and data center markets.
Q3 Performance: High Revenue and Steady Profit Margins
The Data Center segment led the quarter again with $51.2 billion in revenue. This segment grew 25% from the previous quarter and 66% from a year earlier. Growth comes from ongoing orders by cloud companies, enterprise clients, and research institutions. They use Nvidia’s platforms to train and run AI models.
Profitability also stayed strong. Nvidia reported a 73.4% GAAP gross margin, up slightly from the previous quarter. Its non-GAAP gross margin was 73.6%. These margins show the company continues to benefit from strong pricing power and high demand for advanced AI hardware.
Net income reached $31.9 billion, rising 21% from the previous quarter and 65% from the year before. Diluted earnings per share (EPS) came in at $1.30 on both a GAAP and non-GAAP basis. Operating income also remained high at $36 billion, showing that Nvidia is managing its expenses while growing its revenue.
Cash generation continued to strengthen. Free cash flow was about $22.1 billion, which increased by 32% from last year. Nvidia also returned $37 billion to shareholders in the first nine months of fiscal 2026 through buybacks and dividends. The company still has more than $62 billion available under its current buyback authorization.
Overall, the financial results show that Nvidia is still growing at a fast pace, even as its growth rate begins to stabilize. The results also provide a strong base as the company expands into new areas, such as infrastructure and energy-efficient computing.
After the earnings release, Nvidia’s stock rose about 3% in after-hours trading. This came after stronger-than-expected revenue and earnings.
Q4 Forecast and Short-Term Trends
Nvidia expects another strong quarter ahead. For Q4 fiscal 2026, the company forecasts revenue of around $65 billion, plus or minus 2%. It also expects gross margins to improve slightly, reaching about 75% on a non-GAAP basis. Operating expenses are set to rise as the company invests in research and in new product development cycles.
The outlook suggests that Nvidia believes demand will remain strong in the near term. At the same time, the company faces new challenges. Growth is still high, but it is no longer rising at the extreme levels of earlier years.
Nvidia will focus more on expanding its infrastructure. They aim to boost efficiency and manage long-term costs. These trends set the stage for the company’s latest major initiative.
A Major Strategic Turn: The $100 Billion AI Deal with Brookfield
Nvidia just announced a big partnership with Brookfield Asset Management, a leading asset management company. They plan to create an AI infrastructure program worth up to $100 billion. This move marks a shift in Nvidia’s strategy.
The chipmaker will shift from just selling chips and systems. Now, it will help build a complete infrastructure for AI growth. The program will include investments in land, power, data centers, and advanced computing systems.
Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of Nvidia, stated:
“AI is transforming every industry, and like electricity, it will require every nation to build the infrastructure to power it. AI infrastructure demands land, power, and purpose-built supercomputers—and our partnership with Brookfield brings all of these elements together in a ready-to-deploy AI cloud.”
Brookfield brings experience in infrastructure, real estate, and energy. Nvidia brings the technology and the hardware that run modern AI models. Together, they aim to support global demand for AI computing, which continues to rise sharply.
This partnership shows that Nvidia is expanding beyond its traditional role as a chip designer. The company wants to be part of designing and building the physical foundations that AI depends on. This includes everything from cooling systems to energy supply.
The move could help Nvidia secure long-term revenue streams and reduce the bottlenecks that come from limited infrastructure capacity.
Powering AI Responsibly: Energy Use and Emissions
As Nvidia steps deeper into infrastructure, the environmental impact of AI computing becomes more important. Data centers and high-performance computing systems use large amounts of electricity. They also demand advanced cooling systems and steady grid capacity.
The company has acknowledged these challenges and increased its sustainability efforts across its operations, supply chain, and product designs.
A key part of Nvidia’s environmental strategy is its use of clean electricity. The company reports that it achieved 100% renewable electricity for its offices and data centers under its operational control. This shift reduces its Scope 1 and 2 emissions and lowers the carbon footprint of its own operations.
- The GPU king has set science-based targets to reduce emissions. They want to limit global warming to 1.5°C. The goal is to cut Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 50% by FY 2030, using FY 2023 as the baseline.
For its products, Nvidia aims to cut emissions intensity during customer use by 75% per petaflop of computing power by 2030. This target matters because most of Nvidia’s emissions come from how its products are used, not how they are manufactured.
A big part of Nvidia’s total emissions comes from its suppliers, also known as Scope 3 emissions. They occur during the production of components.
Nvidia is also engaging its supply chain. The company reports that it has engaged suppliers responsible for more than 80% of its upstream emissions. It encourages these suppliers to set their own science-based targets.
The Blackwell GPU and Beyond
Energy efficiency is another focus area. Nvidia’s newer systems deliver much better performance for every unit of power used. Some platforms show 50% to 99% lower energy use per unit of compute compared to older systems.
The Blackwell GPU platform is very energy-efficient. It’s built to manage large AI workloads and cut down on power use.
Despite these efforts, Nvidia still faces challenges. Its total emissions rose in recent years because demand for its products grew so quickly. Scope 3 emissions make up the biggest part of its footprint. Reducing them will require long-term efforts with suppliers and customers.
As Nvidia grows its infrastructure role, it must also create facilities that use clean electricity. Efficient cooling systems will help keep its environmental impact aligned with its goals.
Balancing Growth, Infrastructure, and Sustainability
Nvidia’s Q3 results show a company that remains strong financially and continues to grow at a fast pace. The new partnership with Brookfield shows that Nvidia is preparing for the next phase of AI growth by investing in global infrastructure.
At the same time, the company is working to reduce emissions, improve energy efficiency, and manage its environmental impact as its influence expands. The coming years will test how well Nvidia balances these goals.
Strong finances give the company momentum. Large-scale projects bring long timelines. Sustainability efforts will become more important as AI’s energy use grows worldwide. Nvidia’s long-term progress will depend on how effectively it brings the strategies together.
The post Nvidia’s (NVDA) Stock Rose on Q3 Strong Results: $57B Revenue, $100B AI Infrastructure Plan appeared first on Carbon Credits.
For most businesses, the emissions that matter most sit outside their own walls. Scope 3 emissions, everything generated across your value chain, from the suppliers who make your inputs to the customers who use your products, typically make up the majority of a company’s total carbon footprint. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), those value-chain emissions now have to be measured and disclosed with a rigour that spend-based estimates alone struggle to satisfy. This guide sets out how to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD: the calculation methods open to you, how to move from estimates to verified supplier data, and how to govern that data so it holds up to audit.
A carbon credit is a commitment that extends well into the future. The tonne of CO₂ compensated for today from a nature-based carbon project must remain out of the atmosphere for good, which means the forest behind the credit has to remain standing long after the transaction is complete. For any buyer, this raises a defining question: What ensures that the forest endures?
What replaced the cheap REDD credit on the boardroom slide deck, and why procurement is leading the rewrite.
Three years ago, a corporate slide showing a portfolio of cheap REDD+ credits could carry a board meeting. The number was big, the price was low, and the press release wrote itself. Today, that same slide gets sent back with questions. The questions are uncomfortable, the answers are unclear, and your general counsel is suddenly in the room.
Conventional carbon offsets are not dead. The voluntary carbon market retired 202 million tonnes in 2025, and the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing survey published in January 2026 confirmed that interest from corporate buyers remains substantial. What changed is the credibility threshold. The integrity floor has risen, the disclosure scrutiny has tightened, and the buyer profile has shifted. This article tracks what changed, what sophisticated buyers now ask before signing, and what serious corporates are putting on the board slide instead.
What boards used to buy, and why it stopped working
The 2020 to 2022 model was simple: buy a large tranche of avoidance credits at low single-digit prices, retire them against the company footprint, announce the carbon-neutral claim, and move on. Most of those credits came from REDD+ projects, renewable energy installations in countries where the renewable energy was already economic, or methane projects with thin documentation.
Several things broke that model. Academic research published in 2023, including a widely cited Science paper, found that the majority of REDD+ credits issued under the most common methodologies did not represent additional reductions when tested against rigorous counterfactuals. The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative published its Claims Code of Practice, which sets requirements for what companies can credibly claim from credit use. The European Union finalised its Green Claims Directive, restricting how companies can describe products as climate-neutral. France’s Décret 2022-539 already restricts carbon neutrality advertising. California’s AB 1305 imposes disclosure requirements on any company making net-zero or carbon-neutral claims while doing business in the state.
The collective effect: the cheap credit no longer buys the announcement, and the announcement now carries litigation risk.
The integrity reset: ICVCM, VCMI, and what changed
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market published the Core Carbon Principles in 2023 and began assessing methodologies against them in 2024. The first methodologies received the CCP label later that year. The point of the label is to give corporate buyers a defensible quality screen they can cite in disclosure.
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative complements this on the demand side. Its Claims Code of Practice defines what a buyer can say (Silver, Gold, or Platinum claims, with associated requirements) based on the quality of credits used and the underlying decarbonisation strategy. Together, CCP and VCMI build a quality stack: CCP on the supply, VCMI on the claim, with the science-based target sitting underneath both.
The reset is not a ban on offsets. It is a ratchet. Credits that meet the new bar continue to clear; credits that do not, do not. The Morgan Stanley survey found that 61% of current buyers like the CCP label concept but that supply of labelled credits remains limited. That supply constraint is now visible in pricing.
What sophisticated buyers ask before they sign
The questions on the procurement scorecard have changed. A 2022 buyer might have asked about price, vintage, and project type. A 2026 buyer asks five different questions before any of those.
- What does the counterfactual look like, and who validated it.
- What is the permanence regime, and what is the buffer pool exposure.
- What is the leakage risk, and how is it mitigated.
- What rating has the project received from the independent ratings agencies (Sylvera, BeZero, Calyx Global), and what was the rationale.
- What is the documentation discipline that survives an audit four years from now when the procurement team that signed the contract has moved on.
If the vendor cannot answer those five questions on a first call, the conversation ends. Conversely, if the vendor can answer them with documented specificity, the conversation often expands beyond a single transaction toward a multi-year engagement.
Where this leaves your near-term commitments
You probably have near-term commitments that pre-date the integrity reset. Public targets to be carbon neutral by 2025 or 2030. Product-level claims that ran in last year’s marketing. Disclosed reduction trajectories that assumed continued access to cheap credits.
You have three workable paths. The first is to re-baseline your strategy, replacing the most exposed credits with higher-quality alternatives and adjusting the public language to match what you can defend. The second is to shift the underlying spend from offsetting outside your value chain to investing inside your value chain, where reductions count against Scope 3 directly and the audit trail is cleaner. The third is to keep the strategy and absorb the risk, which is increasingly the most expensive option once you price in litigation, restatement, and reputational exposure.
Most serious buyers are choosing the second path. It moves the carbon spend from a compliance cost to a procurement and resilience investment, and it removes the central failure point of the legacy model: the disconnect between where the emissions occurred and where the reductions sat. Nature-based supply chain investments, structured under the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard and aligned to the SBTi FLAG Guidance, are the asset class that fits this brief. They generate inventory-grade reductions, they produce audit-grade documentation, and they survive the new claim restrictions because the carbon math sits inside the value chain that the disclosure already covers.
If you are reassessing a carbon strategy under the new integrity bar, or rebuilding a board narrative that has to survive a more skeptical audience, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help. The Dual-Value Model gives you a defensible alternative to legacy offset purchases, with the documentation and operational integration that survives the procurement scorecard and the audit. Schedule a consultation.
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测