Memory has a famous habit. Prices soar, makers build too much, prices crash, and everyone suffers. A table of memory chip long term agreements from the biggest memory makers suggests the industry is trying to break that pattern.
One note on the data first. Micron’s figures are as of the third quarter of calendar 2026, while the others are as of the second quarter.
Real money is changing hands
Micron reports US$32 billion in deposits and commitments, up from US$22 billion at the second quarter, plus about US$150 billion in remaining contract value from its signed agreements. An unnamed US NAND maker reports US$59.8 billion in remaining contract value at quarter end, rising to US$91.1 billion once contracts signed after quarter end are included. It also cites US$16.8 billion in financial guarantees, but those are mostly held by or through third party institutions, so they are not the same as cash in the bank. Samsung says it has received about a quarter of its prepayments so far, with more expected. SK hynix says deposits are part of its contracts but gives no amounts.
Price floors, and sometimes ceilings
Samsung has set a minimum price floor for mainstream products, designed to reduce future investment risk. The US NAND maker uses a mix of fixed and variable pricing, where the variable part has both a floor and a ceiling, and it says gross margin stays around 80% even at trough pricing. Micron said in the second quarter that it had a guaranteed gross margin above any prior cycle peak. SK hynix describes a pricing band to cope with volatility, but says pricing will not be uniform across customers.
The ceilings matter. Customers are getting protection too, so part of the upside is capped.
How long, and how binding
Micron’s agreements run through 2031, with five years for data center and consumer customers and three years for automotive. Samsung’s are five years but renegotiated annually on a rolling basis. SK hynix averages about five years, and the US NAND maker offers up to five years with a weighted average above four.
How binding they are also differs. Micron explicitly uses take or pay with binding volume commitments. Samsung and Kioxia describe binding contract terms for both sides. SK hynix talks about long term volume commitments plus deposits. The US NAND maker sets supply commitments each year by quarter. So “locked in” means different things at different companies.
Coverage is still partial
In the second quarter, Micron’s agreements covered about 20% of DRAM shipments and about a third of NAND shipments. It expects about 35% of revenue to be covered by 2030, with a goal of 50%. Samsung puts coverage at 60 to 70% of capacity, with agreements finalized with its top five data center customers and five more in final stages. The US NAND maker expects about half of bit volume covered in its fiscal 2027 and two thirds in 2028, and Kioxia targets 50% of shipments by calendar 2028. The spot market still matters.
Where the demand comes from
Most of it is data center and AI related. SK hynix lists server DRAM, HBM and enterprise SSD, Samsung is HBM focused, and Kioxia and the US NAND maker name hyperscale and AI infrastructure customers. Micron also includes consumer and automotive.
What the table does not tell you
It says nothing about whether customers can afford to honor these deals if demand weakens, or how firmly each clause would hold up. It is a snapshot from company data, not a guarantee.
My takeaway
These agreements give memory makers more visibility and some downside protection than they had in past cycles. But the coverage is partial, the terms vary, and some of the upside is capped. I would call it a smoother ride, not the end of the cycle.
Want more on the companies behind these agreements? Here are my earlier posts:
- Micron Technology: Wall Street Keeps Raising the Bar takes a closer look at Micron, the company with the largest contract value in the table above.
- SK Hynix Is Sold Out. Robots May Be Next. covers SK hynix and its high bandwidth memory business.
And for the demand side, the AI infrastructure buildout that these contracts are meant to serve:
Disclosure: The author holds a long position in $MU and $SKHY stock at the time of writing.
Leave a Reply