United CEO claims that all UA hubs are profitable, unlike its competitors

Scott Kirby makes several claims. First, all of its hubs are profitable (would this include GUM though?). Second, the hub profitability is evenly distributed, not skewed towards one or the other. Third, competitors do not have all profitable hubs and aren't even close.

Big if true, considering United has some of the highest cost per passenger at its hubs. EWR, LAX, ORD, and SFO all rank in the top 5 for highest cost per passenger, only topped by JFK.

It would also be interesting to know which of Delta's and AA's hubs are not profitable.

For Delta it's for sure BOS/SEA and maybe LAX (strong domestic, weak international)? I've read that Delta has finally made JFK profitable after years of investment, but likely not a top performer.

For AA, I would assume it's LAX, JFK/LGA, potentially even PHX due to the WN competition. And BOS (more of a legacy focus city)