BOEING (BA)

Sector: Industrials

    Home/Companies/BA/Annual Meeting

2026 Annual Meeting Analysis

BOEING · Meeting: April 17, 2026

Policy v1.2medium confidenceView Filing ↗
For informational purposes only. This AI-generated analysis applies a published voting policy to publicly available proxy filings. It does not constitute investment advice, proxy voting advice, or a solicitation of any kind. AI analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate — always review the actual filing and make your own independent decision.

Directors FOR

3

Directors AGAINST

9

Say on Pay

FOR

Auditor

FOR

Director Elections

Election of 12 Director Nominees

3 FOR/9 AGAINST

Against Analysis

✗ AGAINST
Robert A. BradwayTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2016 covers full underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Bradway has served since 2016, meaning his tenure covers the full 3-year underperformance period; Boeing's 3-year total return of +3.7% trails the company-disclosed peer group median of +67.5% by 63.8 percentage points, which exceeds the 35-point threshold for low-positive TSR companies, and the 5-year record (Boeing -17.7% vs. peer median +80.4%, a gap of 98.1 points) does not provide a mitigating longer-term track record, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
Lynne M. DoughtieTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2021 covers majority of underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Doughtie joined in 2021, giving her tenure that meaningfully overlaps the 3-year underperformance period; the 63.8-point gap versus the peer median exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year data (98.1-point gap) confirms this is not a transient dip, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
David L. GitlinTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2022 covers majority of underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Gitlin has served since 2022, so his tenure covers most of the 3-year measurement window; the 63.8-point peer underperformance gap exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year gap of 98.1 points does not mitigate, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
Lynn J. GoodTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2015 covers full underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Good has served since 2015, covering the entire underperformance period; the peer group gap of 63.8 points far exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year record is equally poor (98.1-point gap), so the trigger stands with no mitigation.

✗ AGAINST
Stayce D. HarrisTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2021 covers majority of underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Harris joined in 2021, giving her tenure that meaningfully overlaps the 3-year underperformance window; the 63.8-point peer underperformance gap exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year data provides no mitigating track record, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
Akhil JohriTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2020 covers full underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Johri has served since 2020, covering the full 3-year underperformance period; the peer gap of 63.8 points exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year gap of 98.1 points eliminates any 5-year mitigant, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
David L. JoyceTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2021 covers majority of underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Joyce joined in 2021 and his tenure meaningfully overlaps the 3-year measurement window; the 63.8-point peer underperformance gap exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year data provides no mitigation, so the trigger stands.

✗ AGAINST
Steven M. MollenkopfTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2020 covers full underperformance periodindependent board chair5yr TSR also triggers

Mollenkopf has served since 2020 and as Independent Board Chair bears heightened accountability for governance outcomes; the 63.8-point peer underperformance gap far exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year gap of 98.1 points confirms sustained underperformance, so the trigger stands with no mitigation.

✗ AGAINST
John M. RichardsonTSR underperformance peer group triggertenure since 2019 covers full underperformance period5yr TSR also triggers

Richardson has served since 2019, covering the full underperformance period; the peer gap of 63.8 points exceeds the 35-point threshold, and the 5-year data (98.1-point gap) provides no long-term mitigation, so the trigger stands.

For Analysis

✓ FOR
Mortimer J. Buckleynew director exemption applies

Buckley joined the board in 2025, which is within the 24-month new-director exemption period, so the TSR underperformance trigger does not apply to him.

✓ FOR
Robert K. Ortbergnew director exemption appliesCEO joined 2024

Ortberg joined the board in 2024 as the incoming CEO, which is within the 24-month new-director exemption period, so the TSR underperformance trigger does not apply; he is also in the early stages of leading the company's turnaround.

✓ FOR
Bradley D. Tildennew director exemption applies

Tilden joined the board in December 2025, which is within the 24-month new-director exemption period, so the TSR underperformance trigger does not apply to him.

Boeing's 3-year total shareholder return of +3.7% trails the company-disclosed compensation peer group median of +67.5% by 63.8 percentage points, which exceeds the 35-point trigger threshold for low-positive TSR companies; the 5-year gap of 98.1 points confirms this is sustained underperformance rather than a temporary trough, so the vote is AGAINST all directors whose tenure meaningfully overlaps the underperformance period. The three directors who joined within the past 24 months — Buckley, Ortberg, and Tilden — are exempt from the trigger and receive a FOR vote.

Say on Pay

✓ FOR

CEO

Robert K. Ortberg

Total Comp

$23,581,389

Prior Support

85%%

The prior year Say on Pay vote received 85% support — well above the 70% threshold — indicating strong shareholder endorsement of the compensation structure, and the company made meaningful program changes in response to ongoing shareholder feedback including re-introducing performance stock awards tied to pre-set financial targets and relative shareholder return in 2026. The proxy discloses that approximately 93% of the CEO's target pay is variable and performance-contingent, which satisfies the pay-mix requirement that at least 50-60% of pay be at-risk, and the 2023-2025 performance stock awards paid out at 0% due to below-threshold free cash flow results, demonstrating that the incentive structure actually withholds pay when performance falls short. While Boeing's 3-year stock performance significantly trails its peers — which is a concern addressed separately through the director election votes — the CEO (Ortberg) joined in late 2024 and his $22 million target pay was set at hire at approximately market median for the role, meaning the pay level itself is not above benchmark, and the plan structure and outcomes are reasonably aligned with shareholder experience.

Auditor Ratification

✓ FOR

Auditor

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Tenure

N/A

Audit Fees

$39,100,000

Non-Audit Fees

$4,500,000

The non-audit fees of $4.5 million (primarily related to carve-out audits for the digital aviation solutions divestiture, which were reimbursed by the buyer) represent approximately 11.5% of the $39.1 million in audit fees, which is well below the 50% threshold that would raise independence concerns; Deloitte is a Big Four firm appropriate for a company of Boeing's size and complexity, and no material restatements attributable to audit failure were identified. Auditor tenure is not disclosed in the proxy, so the tenure trigger does not fire per policy.

Stockholder Proposals

2 proposals submitted by shareholders

Proposal 4

Shareholder Proposal — Board Committee on Disability Access

✗ AGAINST
Filed by:As disclosed in the proxy filing (proponent identity per Item 4)Ideological — ProgressiveGovernance
Board recommends: AGAINST
ideological filerproposal serves advocacy goals not shareholder interests

Based on the context available, this proposal calls for creating a new board committee focused on disability access, which is a social-advocacy objective rather than a mainstream governance improvement that a neutral fiduciary investor would typically prioritize. The proposal appears to serve advocacy goals rather than directly protecting or enhancing shareholder value, and the board's existing committee structure — including the Compensation Committee's oversight of human capital management and the GPP Committee's oversight of public policy — already addresses workforce-related issues through established channels. Without evidence of a credible institutional filer or significant prior-year support that would signal a genuine shareholder concern, the vote determination is AGAINST.

Proposal 5

Shareholder Proposal — Action by Written Consent

✓ FOR
Filed by:As disclosed in the proxy filing (proponent identity per Item 5)Individual ActivistGovernance
Board recommends: AGAINST
mainstream governance improvementshareholder rights expansion

The right to act by written consent is a well-established shareholder rights improvement that allows shareholders to take action between annual meetings without waiting for a formal meeting to be called, giving shareholders more timely recourse when governance concerns arise. This is a mainstream governance request consistently supported by major institutional investors and proxy advisory organizations, and it is particularly relevant at Boeing given the company's multi-year operational and safety challenges where shareholders may need to act quickly between annual meetings. The board's existing governance highlights note that shareholders already have the right to call special meetings at 25% ownership threshold, but written consent rights provide a complementary and lower-friction mechanism that further strengthens shareholder accountability.

Overall Assessment

This is a consequential ballot for Boeing shareholders: the company's stock has delivered only +3.7% over the past three years while its own peer group averaged +67.5% — a 63.8-point gap that triggers AGAINST votes for nine of twelve director nominees (all those with tenure exceeding 24 months), while the three newest directors receive FOR votes given their limited time on the board. The Say on Pay vote receives a FOR based on a well-structured variable pay program with genuine pay-for-performance outcomes, the auditor ratification is clean, and the written consent stockholder proposal merits support as a mainstream shareholder rights improvement.

Filing date: March 6, 2026·Policy v1.2·medium confidence

Compensation Peer Group

19 companies disclosed in 2026 proxy filing

MMM3M
TAT&T
CATCaterpillar
CVXChevron
CSCOCisco Systems
XOMExxonMobil
FFord
GDGeneral Dynamics
HONHoneywell
IBMIBM
INTCIntel
JNJJohnson & Johnson
LMTLockheed Martin
MSFTMicrosoft
NOCNorthrop Grumman
PGProcter & Gamble
RTXRTX
UPSUnited Parcel Service
VZVerizon Communications