Models

CoreValue Research · Model v2026.Q2

Microsoft revenue scenarios to 2030

MSFT · Data as of · Reviewed quarterly

Bear case
$545B
13.4% CAGR · $248B EBIT
Base case
$565B
14.4% CAGR · $256B EBIT
Bull case
$585B
15.4% CAGR · $264B EBIT

Projected revenue by year ($bn)

Scenario 2027 2028 2029 2030 CAGR
Bear 374 423 479 545 13.4%
Base 377 430 492 565 14.4%
Bull 381 438 505 585 15.4%

Assumptions

Segment FY26 revenue Op. margin Bear Base Bull σ measured
Intelligent Cloud $137.8B 42% 18.7% 20.0% 21.3% 5.2pp
Productivity $140.0B 55% 11.6% 12.0% 12.4% 1.5pp
Personal Computing $54.1B 25% 0.2% 2.0% 3.8% 7.3pp

Method

Each segment is compounded from its FY26 actual at a constant annual rate, and operating income applies a fixed margin per segment.

The base case is CoreValue Research's estimate. It is the analyst's own forecast for each line, not an output of the range — everything below only describes how far either side of it we draw the bear and the bull.

The width of the range is measured, not chosen. For each segment we take its realised year-on-year growth over FY2024–FY2026 and compute the sample standard deviation — how much that line's growth has actually varied, in percentage points. That figure is the σ column, and it is printed unmodified so you can always check our arithmetic or rebuild the range at any width you prefer.

Bear and bull are the base case minus and plus a quarter of that σ (FY2024–FY2026). So a segment whose growth has historically swung by 20 percentage points is shown 5 points either side of its base case. We publish a deliberately narrow band: a full standard deviation priced several of these segments at a multi-year decline, which measures how violently a young industry has moved rather than describing a path we would defend. Growth decelerating hard from an exceptional base is the risk we are willing to put our name to; the industry ceasing to exist is not.

These are scenarios, not confidence intervals. The band is not a probability statement, nothing here is calibrated to say the outcome falls inside it 70% or 90% of the time, and a quarter of a standard deviation is a house convention rather than a statistical threshold. It is a disciplined way of saying “this much variation is normal for this business”, and it should be read alongside the assumptions rather than instead of them.

Microsoft recast its reportable segments in FY2023, so earlier years are not comparable and are excluded. The range is therefore measured over three growth observations (FY2024–FY2026) — a narrower evidence base than we would prefer, and the Productivity band is correspondingly tight. It will widen as post-recast history accumulates. The operating margins shown are the projected FY2030 margins, set against where each segment finished FY2026: Productivity 55% against 59.9%, Personal Computing 25% against 26.6%, and Intelligent Cloud 42% against 41.3% — so two are assumed to give ground and one to hold roughly flat. Productivity is marked down deliberately — the inference cost of Microsoft 365 Copilot is charged to that segment, so the operating leverage that lifted its margin from 53.2% to 59.9% over three years is assumed to stop rather than continue. Intelligent Cloud is held roughly flat because the depreciation on Azure's build-out has already pulled its margin down from 43.2% in FY2024 for two consecutive years. Together these give a company operating margin of 45.3% in FY2030, against 46.8% reported in FY2026.

Citation — CoreValue Research, “Microsoft revenue scenarios to 2030”, model v2026.Q2, August 8, 2026. Base case: $565B revenue and $256B operating income in 2030, assuming Intelligent Cloud grows 20% a year, Productivity grows 12% a year, Personal Computing grows 2% a year.