Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Boeing reports best airliner delivery year since 2018
By Scott Hamilton
Jan. 13, 2026, © Leeham News: Boeing delivered 600 airliners last year, its best year since 2018—the last normal year before the 737 MAX grounding began in March 2020. In 2018, Boeing delivered 813 airliners.
The MAX grounding lasted 21 months. This was followed by the COVID-19 pandemic beginning in April 2020, lasting about two years. In October 2020, deliveries of most 787s were suspended due to a production flaw. From September to November in 2024, Boeing’s assembly workforce, the IAM 751, went on strike for 53 days, halting all deliveries.
Steady progress
Boeing delivered 447 737s last year, including a handful of 737 NGs, the airplane used for the military P-8 and the Wedgetail. This compares with 580 737 NGs and MAXes in 2018. Deliveries of the MAX, which entered service in May 2017, were ramping up. Last year’s 737 deliveries were 77% of 2018’s.
The 600 deliveries last year were 74% of 2018’s deliveries.
Deliveries of the 787 are 60% of 2018’s deliveries.
While Boeing’s performance is well below the 2018 level, steady progress has been made since 2020, when the grounding of the MAX was lifted, and the effects of the COVID pandemic lessened. Progress was interrupted in 2024 when the IAM 751 went on strike at midnight on Sept. 12 for 53 days.
Unlike Airbus yesterday, Boeing did not hold a media briefing.
Boeing announced today a breakthrough order from Delta Air Lines for 30+30 787-10s. Delta was the only of the Big Three US carriers without an order for the 787. Northwest Airlines was a launch customer for the 787, but after it merged into Delta, the latter continually deferred the order and eventually canceled it. Delta, with aging Boeing 767s still in its fleet, has been a large operator of Airbus wide-body aircraft. Northwest operated A330-300s, which became Delta aircraft upon the merger. Delta has a large fleet and backlog of A330-900s and A350s. The addition of 787-10s is a big win for Boeing.
Boeing and Aviation Capital Group today also announced an order for 25 737-8s and 25 737-10s.
Not bad from BA..
At last, Delta finally commits;
60 ordered / optioned 787-10’s.
I never thought Delta was going to buy a 787. I don’t get it at all. Fantastic for Boeing but ??????????????
They should have kept the NW orders, early pricing, sweet deal. I am sure they got a good one but not that good.
Oh to be a fly on the wall.
NWA’s orders were for the 787-8. Certainly they could have been switched to -9s later but at the time DL didn’t want the -8s.
767-400 and older A330 CEO replacements. And it is pretty efficient per seat, especially the 10.
https://www.reuters.com/business/delta-bets-premium-travel-demand-with-upbeat-outlook-boeing-787-order-2026-01-13/
The 787-10 is a great plane and should make a great people mover for Delta.
In conjunction with the Premium Strategy, this allows for more real estate across the fleet to make extra room for those premium seats.
Also gives their TechOps access to the GE engine maintenance.
The A330 gives Delta as much as a 787-10 can.
Adding an aircraft to a fleet becomes sub optimal as Delta was intending on the A330/350.
I can buy the GE engine aspect being of an adder but not the whole operation.
I am suspicious it has to do with Trump and Delta being able to keep buying Airbus. Throw in some buy America stuff (now much o0f the 787 is really made in US?)
I thought it was a reach when I stare ted thinking about it more – but I don’t buy coincidences with combined with a major course change .
Delta may have well decided they could fit the 787-10 in at least ok, they did go about it as full in and not a toe dip.
Has engine choice been announced? For commonality they could stay with RR…
Great news… and potentially some background for future chapters in Scott Hamiltons great book „on the rise and fall of Boeing and the way back“. Team Boeing deserves good news… but stay humble and fix balance sheet before showering shareholders…
Yea verily
Great delivery numbers for 2025, but remarkable that BA still generated a sizable loss for the year — with the loss at BCA being even bigger.
It will be interesting so see if BA can break even in 2026. BCA won’t be breaking even any time soon.
Breaking even has already happened in 3Q 25 as the free cash flow is slightly positive
Operating Cash Flow: +$1.12 billion.
Free Cash Flow (Non-GAAP): +$0.2 billion
As Boeing uses program accounting the overall numbers you mentioned aren’t a true reflection of ‘break even’. Indeed ‘normal accounting’ for large corporates isnt a reflection of financial health but a complex dance of revenue, writeoffs, assets, inventory, pension future costs etc
1. Q3 was before the Spirit deal is closed.
2. Spirit was losing $$$ AFAIK
3. Under BA’s aggressive PFS 2.0 aka beggar thy suppliers FCF is not as good a measure of the company’s **true performance**.
Interesting that @Duke didn’t take any consideration of the impacts of the “merger” with Spirit AeroSystems.
1. Spirit AeroSystems has been losing money in recent years,
2. In the first nine months of 2025, Spirit lost almost $2 billion (2024: $1.5 billion),
3. FCF for the first nine months of 2025: ($0.9 billion) [2024: ($1.4 billion)],
4. Debts outstanding: almost $4.4 billion as of Sept 30, 2025.
Anyone who touted profit/FCF of Boeing without considering the effects of the “merger” with Spirit AeroSystems did not do a proper job.
Oops!
take into* consideration
> At the end of the day, Ortberg expects BA to have a **cash burn of around $3.5 billion**.
Free cash flow isn’t profit.
Boeing’s free cash flow has been coming from customer deposits…not from operations.
> Free cash flow isn’t profit.
Boeing’s free cash flow has been coming from customer deposits…not from operations.
Verily.
So those orders surge for Airbus isn’t providing a flood of customer deposits too ?
Or is the customer financing eating away at that. ie paying for the planes its airlines buy
Boeings BCA division only
Free Cash Flow was $223m for the quarter and ($2.252bn) for the first nine months of 2025. Operating cash flow was $1.123bn for the quarter, ($266m) for the year, driven by higher commercial deliveries.
https://leehamnews.com/2025/10/29/boeing-3q2025-777x-gets-new-4-9bn-write-off-as-earnings-results-prove-mixed/%20commercial%20deliveries.
Airbus receives customer deposits…AND…it also generates profits.
Boeing doesn’t generate the latter.
As I recall, Boeing was bringing payments into the slush funds, I do not know if they continued. Maybe have been something in regards to payments sooner?
Frankly its splitting hairs on where Boeing is at. Ball park they are improving and as of right now, it is looking better into the future. Exact dates are not important nor an hour a minute and a second.
Financials are not a end all be all. They are markers of Up, Down or even. Its where they are trending that is relevant not the exact break point of this or that.
I agree with Duke its close enough.
Boeing did sell more aircraft last year than Airbus. That is another marker. It may well not last,
@Duke
1. There’s no such thing as: “Boeings BCA division only
Free Cash Flow”
BA ony discloses FCF of the whole company, not by divisions. Haha.
2. Your link posted is dead: Not found, Error 404
Some gremlins on the LNA link
https://leehamnews.com/2025/10/29/boeing-3q2025-777x-gets-new-4-9bn-write-off-as-earnings-results-prove-mixed
It was a quote from LNA Finance editor Karl Sinclair, an expert, which Ill repeat on full and which refutes Pedros claim
Go back and re-read the LNA article from the top: it’s apparent the author was referring to BA the company.
Don’t believe me? Check with Boeing’s 3Q25 earnings release to find out. Haha.
@Duke
See my comment above:
“… Ortberg expects BA to have a **cash burn of around $3.5 billion**.”
BA’s FCF for the full year 2025 is going to come out at about *negative* $2.5B.
600 deliveries, a load of earnings from BGS…but still negative group cashflow and earnings.
Let’s see how things pan out at higher production rates.
What happened to the more they make the more they loose?
See my comment below:
“BCA lost almost $4.5 billion under unite cost accounting.”
“Breaking even has already happened in 3Q 25”
Absolutely not. Boeing recorded loses for both the Q3 and the first nine months of 2025. (Net losses: $5,339M and $5,982M respectively.) And Scott agreed with me.
https://leehamnews.com/2026/01/06/comments-open-forum/#comment-556239
If we consider *true profits/losses* BCA lost almost $4.5 billion under unite cost accounting, this is the true state of affairs of BCA when we count dollars and cents.
Clarify:
BCA lost almost $4.5 billion under unite cost accounting *in the first half of last year*.
The current analyst consensus is also for a loss in Q4 2025 — implying a loss in every quarter of the year.
Nothing remarkable about the loss.
They lost money on the Defense side, they bought Spirit out and they have a boat load of debt to service.
I am curious when China weight in and voids the Spirit deal.
Yes.
Even Airbus made a ‘free cash flow loss’ in 2025 3Q. No one suggests its financially in a bad place
Airbus is famous for its 4Q cash flow /deliveries to boost its numbers
Negative free cashflow at Airbus is caused by investment and inventory build-up — it’s clearly detailed in their quarterly reports.
Airbus can sustain periods of negative cashflow because it generates actual profits — unlike Boeing.
“Actual profits” is a misnomer.
Cash flow is aways the magic number for large manufacturing businesses, plus firm orders
Boeing also has investment and inventory build-up – it just started on its 1 $bill new factory at Charleston.
Remember all the major tech companies which for decades never made any ‘profit’. They were still cash flow positive
Amazon for instance had decade of losses before it had a profitable quarter of 1 cent per share ( 2001)
Profit = revenue minus losses.
Cash flow = cash in minus cash out. That cash in can come from sources other than revenue — e.g. deposits, rebates, loans.
Wall Street (ultimately) doesn’t look kindly upon companies that don’t generate profits.
So, the numbers mean one thing for Airbus and another for Boeing, check.
Obviously the Airbus 3rd quarter was accounting shenanigans (by which I mean all the tricks used to not pay any more than they can get away with).
Back to what counts. Airbus has been healthy consistently.
Boeing was going down the drain, ship is not only stabilized, they are making progress on pumping out water.
As important they are obviously shifting the culture to quality builds. They are closing in on MAX rate (love saying that) – that opens up Everett lines next.
The 787 is selling like hotcakes and are putting in another assembly line building.
@Duke
I don’t think overemphasis of the bottom line and FCF worked well for BA.
It resulted in twin crashes of the 737 MAX. Where were you the last seven, eight years?
Airbus does not have to deliver xx free planes as compensation for all the delays on the 737, 787 and 777x programs. The next decade of deliveries at Boeing will be much less profitable than Airbus because a lot of these deliveries will not bring in so much $$ per frame. Same for the orders by the way. Except if those losses are already factored in the numerous write offs they did. If such were the case I’m curious as to how they would factor in inflation
Very relevant points 👍
Time to have a second look of this chart
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/737-MAX-Del-Stream-at-12-31-23.png
The levelling of the “level playing field” has finally begun to pay off..?
Congratulations to The Boeing Company! You’ve all worked very hard and stayed focused on the business of building quality airplanes and taking care of the customers.
Even Airbus centric Delta coming back… says everything!
Keep up the good work and don’t forget to stay ahead of the curve.
And Kelly, get the new NB going, don’t wait!
I agree with most of it but why a new NB when all you do is trigger an escalation from Airbus?
If the TTBW worked out, you could have a template for a jump that would be worth it (how people react to a strut is my guess as to why more wing work to eliminate it)
The best you could do right now would be equal to an Airbus A320 type with a new wing. Why disrupt and spend huge bucks on that?
The fact that the MAX competes head up with the Airbus A320 tells you massive amounts about the lack of progress in aerodynamics.
Basically you can only refine pushing air around, you are stuck with physics of air movement and what you can do.
Its not like Boeing does not have a 5 year backlog of 737s. As long as that backlog stays the same or increases, a new NB is not needed (Airbus could pull a trigger on a new A320 wing and Boeing would have to react).
DAL will most lilkely use the 737-10 and 787-10 as workhorses mainly domestic in the US as well as putting pressure on RR not milking DAL too much. Used aircraft values I assume values the GE powered 787 a bit higher than the RR T1000 powered ones now. It aslo put some pressure on PWA as the LEAP-1B powered 737-10 can do many A321neo missions in the US.
Valid point on the RR engines.
Can Delta work on RR engines and can they do it for others via their Tech Ops?
US ops for a 787-10, I don’t see it. I know there is some and Japan does it but its a waste of range. A regional 787-10?
I am more inclined for the Atlantic route for the 787 and shifting the A330/350 over to the Pacific.
I do agree there is a gap for a Trans Con widebody.
Yes. US ‘regional’ 787-10 no way. That would be job of the A330 ceo/ neos plus 767.
On ‘flight aware’ only one A330 ceo was doing transcon while multiple 767’s were , plus to Europe
“typical empty/operating weights around 120-130 tonnes for the 787-10 versus roughly 135-140 tonnes for the A350-900, meaning the Boeing 787-10 is often 10-15 tonnes (or more) lighter than the A350-900″.
Not many routes required the A350 extra range over the IGW latest 787-10, maybe the Atlanta based very long haul, but not needed for Trans pacific from LAX and SFP or North Atlantic between major cities
Most likely TATL, the 787-10 has stupid low CASMs, and the Atlantic routes puts it in its sweet spot to make the most profit for Delta. Delta will have three widebodies of different capabilities. A nice problem to have.
Yes, Delta Tech Ops is a licenced RR maintenance shop for T-7000, T-XWB and did the RB211’s back in the Lockheed Tristar days. They do quite a bit of work for customer airlines as well and is regarded as one of the best US engine shops together with GE Strother
Delta’s press release said they plan to use the 787-10 on Transatlantic and South American routes. https://news.delta.com/delta-adds-boeing-787-dreamliner-widebody-fleet
It looks like Delta has many 767s that are quite old: almost 40 767s at or above 26 years old – some are more than 35 years old – all except three are 767-300s. My bet is Delta is looking for a replacement for its 767s, and it bets that the 767s can at least fly five more years!
Agreed. And various media outlets have also expressed that opinion.
However, a 787-10 is a considerable size upgrade compared to a 767…in that regard, an A330neo would have been a better fit.
There’s something else going on here…
Not all for direct replacements. As I’m not super familiar with Delta’s products, I hazard a guess:
Twenty A350-1000 are coming from this year, if they arrive as planned.
Delta’s A330-300s are going to be renovated very soon. Total seat count may do down.
There’ll be a shuttle, some Airbus will replace the 767s.
The 787s will go to markets big enough to absorb the capacity.
@Abalone
Delta already flies a fleet of A330-900neo. This is not the first time that Delta has played both side of the fence.
Sometimes an airline (of size) has waited too long to freshen up their fleet and no single airframer is going to supply all that lift.
Delta has the following on order (65 A220-300 / 70 A321 neo / 4 A350-900 / 20 A350-1000 / 100 Max10 / 30 B787-10). There is a lot of overlap across that entire backlog.
Maybe Boeing just really wanted this deal worse than Airbus. Here is the real kicker…when exactly are these planes arriving? The best year that Boeing ever had on the 787 was 158 deliveries against a backlog of 1076 or 6.8 year. Taking last year’s numbers of 88 is a 12.2 year backlog…and that assumes they are not taking more orders faster than can be delivered. This feels like the makings of an arms race to get orders in before the backlog is sold out through 2040.
It’s always good to show your car dealer that the company on the other side of the street has also good cars. He’ll notice it especially then you drive off with a new car from the other side of the road.
Remember a coupla years ago- after the two MAXCrashes, but before the MAXDoorBlowout- when Boeing claimed they were going to produce ~+$10,000,000,000 FCF in 2025?
Ahh, memories.. instead, Boeing has produced *negative* FCF and *negative* profits.. winning™, for sure !
PS: any bets on exactly when Boeing requests a waiver to keep producing the 767F ad infinitum?
And rumors of massive order like 500 Boeing… anytime soon? Show me the orders!!
From just 6 months ago:
“Boeing remains optimistic about future growth, targeting $3 billion in free cash flow for 2025.”
https://www.investing.com/news/transcripts/earnings-call-transcript-boeing-q2-2025-beats-revenue-expectations-stock-dips-93CH-4158047
—
Everything depends on BDS.
BCA won’t be generating a profit for a long time, whereas BGS is an excellent earner. If BDS doesn’t perform, then the positive effect of BGS will (continue to) be overwhelmed, with continued losses for BA as a result.
If someone made an efficient 767 replacement they could
sell all they could make..
Boeing has had a good year. Not a stellar year, but a vast improvement over the previous Calhoun regime. Ortberg may not be the guy for the future, but he makes a very good case for being the guy for now. Narrow body production is climbing with raised limits. The expansion into Everett with the North line is slowly coming to life if local info is correct. The 777x is close to cert and there are 35 ish airplanes ready for change incorp now. Sales, especially wide bodies, are currently very good and the potential production hole in the 737 line is filled. It could be and has been far worse. Yes, they need to pay for the Spirit reacquisition, but the good news there is that the loss-making Airbus programs are no longer bleeding the balance sheet. This is all good news. The way Boeing is going is actually encouraging.
Everybody is up gauging. There is a thread on Anet about this order with DL -employees chiming in. This replaces the 767-400. DL also stated the A321NEOs were MD80 replacements. 200 pax to replace 150 pax aircraft. The A330NEOs were d.an upgauge from the 767-300 they replace
Instead of guessing why, just read what Delta told the owners……errrrr……….investors.
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/delta-returns-boeing-widebodies-ordering-first-787s
““I think it’s a natural evolution in our fleet,” Delta Chief Commercial Officer Joe Esposito said of the 787 order. “I think our priorities up until this point was to get critical mass into the A350 and the [A330-900] and we’re well on our way to do that, and that drives great efficiency.” Looking out into the future, “We’re able to do a lot with the -10 version [of the 787] on the premium seating, it’s a great cargo airplane,” he noted to investors on the call. “It’s a natural fit, especially when it starts to replace the 767-400s, which it’s slated to. It’s designed for growth and replacement, and when we think about swapping a [767-400] or [767-300] to a 787-10, it’s a very powerful change and a step function improvement in margin.”
Today, the carrier operates an in-service fleet of 925 aircraft, according to Aviation Week Network’s Fleet Discovery database, a mix of A220s (73), A320 family aircraft (299), A330s (76), A350s (36), 717s (70), 737s (233), 757s (85), and 767s (53). Its widebody fleet averages 15 years of age, Fleet Discovery shows, inclusive of 53 767s with an average age of 28 years. With the 787 commitments, Delta now has 232 narrowbody and 54 widebody aircraft on order.
“This one’s just right,” said outgoing president Glen Hauenstein on Delta’s selection of the Boeing widebody. “We have three fleets: one has long range, one has a lot of capabilities, one is a ‘category killer’ on CASM, and one is kind of our ‘milk run’ airplane that’s going to do most of the spoke services out of our core hubs, so I think we have a really good array, just like we do domestically … this gives us a lot of versatility moving forward.””
That leaves two questions for me:
– when will Delta retire the 767?
– when will Delta receive their first 787-10?
Some 767-300 are over 35 years old while most of the -400 are around 25 years +/- 1.
I can imagine that the switch from LD2 up to LD3 is nice for Delta. 38 LD2 vs 40 LD3 or about 35 % more volume.
Delta has telegraphed 2030 as the retirement for the -300 with B787 deliveries starting from 2031.
William:
I am not buying the statement from Delta. I can see it as least partly as a balance between Airbus and Boeing. to keep prices competitive.
When the ordered the A330 (A360 as well?) they used Boeing bid for 787s as a negotiation tactic. The 787 at that time stood no chance. Its Delta’s business who they like, Boeing is a big boy Corp.
The U Turn here is sudden. No previous talk of added aircraft and that so called strategy . No announced competition.
I do keep in mind that Delta has a 737 fleet. That too is an overlap/duplicate of the A320s.
I do not think its a deep fake. They clearly are going for a viable fleet with the options up to 60 total.
The 767-300 are domestic I believe, but that is a size under even a 787-8.
Some consideration that with the 767 on the way out the 787 is the closest air frame.
There were rumors over the years that Delta was talking to Boeing about the 787. So , it’s not a surprise. They bought the CASM king 10 version. Again perfect for TATL flights.
Plus Trans Pacific and not only to West Coast.
Chicago- Tokyo is done by United.
Europe to South America by KLM
Some inconvenient new details have emerged in an NTSB update to the recent MD-11 crash investigation:
“In its latest update, the NTSB said it found evidence of fatigue cracking on the interior surface of the bearing race, originating in a specific area of the race. The board said the assembly’s design and failure mode appear to be consistent with a 2011 Boeing service letter that informed operators of four previous bearing race failures on three different airplanes.”
“As a part of that service effort, the plane maker, which inherited the MD-11 product line in 1997, moved to include visual inspection of the part in a regular 60-month maintenance cycle and “recommended” installation of a new part design to mitigate the issue. However, Boeing did not require the installation of that new design, having previously determined that failure of the bearing race would “not result in a safety of flight condition.” ”
https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/ups-boeing-md-11-ntsb-update-engine-mount/
How likely will the MD-11 fly again?
> The NTSB previously said investigators found cracks in some of the parts that held the engine to the wing. Those cracks hadn’t been caught in regular maintenance done on the plane, which raised questions about the adequacy of the maintenance schedule.
> But former FAA and NTSB crash investigator Jeff Guzzetti said that a service bulletin McDonnell Douglas issued in 1980 did identify failures of the spherical bearing race as a “safety of flight condition,” so it’s surprising that Boeing didn’t call it that in 2011. He said that American had removed the engine of that plane so it could inspect that bearing.
“I just think it raises questions regarding the adequacy of the severity of the 2011 service letter, and it also raises questions about how UPS incorporated that information and acted upon it,” Guzzetti said.
[There’s egg on everyone’s face.]
> Former federal crash investigator Alan Diehl said the notice from Boeing recommended replacing the bearings with a redesigned part that was less likely to fail, but it still allowed operators to replace defective bearings with another older bearing that had demonstrated it was prone to failing.
“As the investigation continues, the NTSB will have to address whether this service bulletin was an adequate solution to a known problem which could have had catastrophic results,” Diehl said. “The UPS crash highlights the need for increased maintenance measures on older airframes.”
NTSB didn’t say whether there had been additional documented failures of the spherical bearing race since 2011.
> Cosgrove said he thinks it will eventually become clear that these MD-11s “probably should have been retired and that they had exceeded their shelf life.”
Are we about to hear some good news from AB?
==============
Welcome to the new, new world order
> Jeppesen ForeFlight CEO cites automation and AI in justification for layoffs
==============
Does United have a 777-sized problem?
This opinion piece speculates on further possible widebody orders at Delta, due to a 2028-2031 “delivery gap” and relatively aged existing fleet.
Delta has 101 widebodies over 17 years old, but currently has only 54 (or 34, if you count differently) widebodies on order.
https://onemileatatime.com/news/delta-planning-wide-body-aircraft-order/
Everyone: The LNA website has been having technical problems since Friday (today is mid-day Saturday). IT is working on it, so please be patient. There may be addition times in which the site goes down for a while.