Good afternoon, and welcome to the Team Internet Group PLC investor presentation. Throughout this recorded presentation, investors will be in listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged, and they can be submitted at any time using the Q&A tab situated on the right-hand corner of your screen. Just simply type in your questions and press send. Before we begin, I would like to submit the following poll. I would now like to hand you over to CEO Michael Riedl. Good afternoon to you.
Thank you for the introduction, and welcome everybody to our trading update call today on the 15th of June, 2026. We're today here, Billy Green, our Group CFO, and I myself, Michael Riedl, the Group CEO, to talk you through the following agenda. First, the business and its strategy. Secondly, the 2025 financials and the current trading update released this morning. Then we will conclude by talking about the value and the outlook for the group. Jumping straight into it. If you remember only one thing from today's presentation, it should be this. The market is still looking at us through the lens of the transition of the Search division that we've gone through the last two years, and not yet on the business that we've built from what we were two years ago.
People might not appreciate yet that today approximately 80% of our EBITDA come from the Domains, Identity & Software division on the one hand, and the Comparison division on the other hand, two businesses that are growing strongly and that are unaffected by the Search division that has caught the attention over the last couple of quarters. The Search business itself has completed the transition. The industry has consolidated dramatically, and we are believing that we are emerging as one of the leading players in a much smaller competitive field in this vast nascent market opportunity. But we'll add a little bit more flavor to that when we discuss the different businesses individually. You will also have taken from the RNS this morning that we've strengthened the balance sheet.
You will have seen that the strategic review is progressing well, and we are also now actively pursuing recovery for historic anti-competitive conduct that has harmed the group and also its peers. The question that we want to address today is simple. Does the current valuation reflect the business of Team Internet today? For those who are new to the story, let us quickly recap what Team Internet does. The first thing that I want to highlight here is how different the group looks today compared to how many investors might still remember us. So we have the three divisions, Domains, Identity & Software, which is running a recurring digital identity infrastructure business. We have Comparison that is an AI-powered consumer decision platform, and we'll talk later about how we're using artificial intelligence in the smartest way for this specific vertical.
Last but not least, we have Search, where we are engaging with users on platforms like on social media platforms and bring them to the merchants where they can then consider their purchasing options. I started with the first slide with one of the key facts. Today, Domains, which is a global super resilient business, and Comparison, which still has a very long runway for growth, given that today we are extracting most of the revenue only from the German-speaking part of Europe, together represent 80% of the entire earnings of the group, and Search presents much more of a future upside opportunity. I'll come to the fact how we get there. Yet, many investors still mentally equal the Search division and Team Internet, even though we've grown past that stage entirely.
With that said, I would now go through the three different divisions to explain to you how exactly we intend to win the game in each of the three of them. In DIS is a high-quality infrastructure business. Everybody needs domain names, and whether you're a small business or a large business, this is how identity is defined on the internet still in 2026. DIS benefits from recurring revenue. You can never really outright own a domain name. You have to renew it year after year. So most of the revenue just walks back through the door again and again. With strong retention, given that we have integrations via so-called APIs with most of our customers, things that our customers tend to never give up on. We've demonstrated pricing power in this business, and we are also growing our value-added services.
Let me go through them one by one. So we've deliberately optimized lower-margin customer relationships during the year, which has led to reduced domain volumes but improved economics. So our value added is that we can procure domain names in any country in the world, and we are being paid good value for that. We are not interested in replicating what some other competitors are doing, trading huge volumes of .com domain names to Chinese network operators. We are focusing on the quality end of the spectrum. Which has then led that the revenue per domain name has increased as it has done over all of the last five years.
It has also led to the share of the value-added services increasing from 16% of the total revenue in DIS to 18% of DIS, and this then, in combination, has led to the entire profitability of the DIS segment increasing. Given that everyone is, or I should say most people are constantly asking about what does AI do to all of your businesses? The most important thing here is domains remain the foundation of digital identity, and in an AI-driven world, identity becomes more and more important. Where can you see evidence of my claim? Verisign, the world market leader on the registry part of the domain name industry, the operator of .com and .net, releases every quarter market research, and this demonstrates that 2025 was the year of the fastest growth of the domain industry in 10 years.
It should not be a real surprise because when you think about it, every byte-coded app that should become publicly available must be uploaded to some website, which then requires a domain name, and that's why we are seeing a very healthy business here. While DIS has been our stem cell from which the entire Group has been created in the first place, Comparison is a business that holds outsized potential and continues to be one of the most exciting parts of the Group. We understand that we have seen a certain weakness in the customer engagement in the first half of 2025 due to some algorithm changes that Google, which still is the major channel for customer acquisition worldwide. We've protected the economics through improved monetization. At the same time, we've been able to extract more value from every customer that comes to a website.
The international expansion is beginning to contribute meaningfully. France is now well established, being the lion's share of the international revenue. Italy, Spain, and the U.K. are continuing to scale. What is particularly important here is that we are using AI to industrialize content creation optimization. Let me shortly explain to you why that is. People are asking us, why don't people just go to ChatGPT and ask them what the best product is? I can tell you exactly why. We have chosen the approach to also use large language models at scale to produce the consumer guides out there. However, by pre-building them rather than responding on the fly to a prompt by a consumer, we can guarantee a few advantages.
First, the quality is higher because the result is not depending on the individual prompting skills of the consumer, and we want to reach all consumers, not only a small intellectual elite who are senior prompt engineers. Secondly, it means it is cheaper because we can combine thousands, if not millions of prompts into one and deliver the same answer to the same question. It also takes away the risk of hallucination and data decay to unsolved problems of large language models because we can still review the content before it's being shown to the customer. It also leads to other, more operational advantages. The pages load much faster, and page load time is one of the most important vital stats of any e-commerce business. People just hate to wait for 15 seconds until they see the result.
They want instant gratification, and that's what we are delivering all the time. Again, million times, hundreds of millions of times, I should say, over the course of a year. This is why even three and a half years after the advent of ChatGPT and other large language model-based companies, we are still thriving where others struggle with this new era of the internet. Comparison, huge, massive growth potential given that we are today only addressing about 7% of the global total addressable market through the three predominantly German-speaking countries that we're covering. Let's also speak about Search. The transition is effectively complete as of today. The move away from AdSense for Domains is complete. There is not a single dollar of AdSense for Domains revenue with us anymore in the second quarter of the year.
There were only some remaining revenues in the first quarter of the year, so we can call the transition completed. We believe that we have taken the right choices in how to position us in the market. We are now firmly established as a podium player in this new vast and nascent market opportunity. To our regret, because also personal fortunes are tied to this, about half of our competitors have not made it and have closed their shop. We have not been giving up and are now very well positioned. Through cost optimization, automation, and innovation in how the monetization actually works, we are now in a very good position to have a profitable second half in Search for the second half of the year.
All of this in aggregate now makes us confidently say that we see a significant future opportunity to build one of the few scale operators in the sector. While today the profitability of the group is largely relying on the shoulders of DIS and Comparison, we still expect that going forward, Search will start once again to contribute materially to the group earnings. That is the backdrop to what Billy is now going to present you, which are the 2025 financials and the current trading, where he demonstrates to you that how what I just said translates into actual U.S. dollars. Thank you, Billy.
Yes. Thank you, Michael. Apologies that I'm off camera. Transmission speeds indicate that I should not have my camera on. It's significantly more important that you can hear what I'm saying as opposed to seeing me as I run through the slides. The first slide we have here, a lot of this data will already have been known to people who followed Team Internet for some time. The 2025 financial highlights have been out there in the market for a couple of months. We've all known and seen. We saw and flagged during 2025 that 2025 would be a year of lower revenue and profitability than 2024, an understandable, well-communicated, managed pivot to a temporarily lower level of EBITDA.
$42.7 million in 2025 is already a well-known number. We're confident that there will be a higher level this year. We won't see further years of lower profitability. If you look at the second row there, one of the important metrics to call out is that net debt actually decreased during 2025, illustrating that even in a challenging year for the company from a trading perspective, it is still within not only our aspiration but also within our control to delever slightly. Both gross and net debt decreased during 2025, even as the Search part of the business engaged in the pivot from AdSense for Domains to Related Search on Content. The Comparison and the DIS businesses continue to make good progress. Adjusted operating cash flow, you'll see there a figure of $66 million for 2025.
We'll come back to that in a little more detail later, a very significant level of operating cash generation. This is still a very cash generative business. Even in a year that proved to be more challenging than previous years, we still generated $66 million of operating cash, so that's still a huge amount of cash that we generated. In terms of the income statement in more detail, the top half of the income statement down to adjusted EBITDA, as I said, has been out there for a while already. There's a couple of items I should just point to within the bridge, effectively, from adjusted EBITDA to operating loss. By their nature, the costs within that section tend to be primarily non-recurring in nature. You'll see, for example, we had an impairment of intangible assets, and that relates to our Search division.
Given that the short-term profitability of that division is lower than it had been over the previous years of fantastic growth, it's prudent and appropriate to record impairments of the intangible assets and goodwill within that Search part of the business. It means that there's less carried on the balance sheet in respect of the Search business, and future growth in that business is then all upside with less intangible assets to amortize. The other highly non-recurring item within that bridge from adjusted EBITDA to operating loss, you'll see the level of foreign exchange losses there was much, much higher than usual. We typically experience net foreign exchange gains on losses in our operating profit of $1 million-$2 million.
We experienced net exchange gains in 2024. That flipped back somewhat in 2025, and we experienced net foreign exchange losses just over $6 million. In 2026 to date, we've been seeing exchange gains again.
There is a certain amount of exposure within our business to fluctuations in certain currencies. We correctly report in U.S. dollars, we have not insignificant overheads denominated in sterling, EUR and zloty, amongst other currencies, but those are the three material ones. There will be foreign exchange gains and losses from time to time, but the level of foreign exchange losses experienced in 2025 is in no way indicative of any change or decline in the quality of our underlying cost base, which is still very, very competitive. Just taking a quick look at the balance sheet. You'll see that we're looking at slightly lower levels of working capital, so current assets, for example, lower now than they were a year, 18 months ago.
That's mainly because there was naturally a high level of working capital within the Search part of the business. Now that is trading at a lower level, for the next couple of quarters. We anticipate that current assets, for example, remain at that lower level. As I referred to earlier, net debt decreased by $8.8 million, and that was even after returning $6.7 million to shareholders via the company's share buyback program, which was still running in the first half of 2025. Absent that return of cash to shareholders, the net debt decrease within the year would actually have been north of $15 million. Indicative of the level of cash that we are generating. On the subject of cash conversion was very, very strong in 2025. We had already achieved a pleasing level of conversion of operating profits to operating cash in 2024.
We achieved 155% in 2025. Our target every year remains to convert operating profit into operating cash at a rate of higher than 100%. In a year like 2025 when working capital was coming out of the Search part of the business, as we worked through the pivot from AdSense for Domains to Related Search on Content, you could reasonably expect the cash conversion to be very impressive, because we were releasing working capital into the business from the Search business. To get to 155% was a real achievement. That's something that as a business, it effectively keeps the bar very high for us in terms of cash conversion. We target 100% cash conversion again this year. We'll be working very hard to ensure that the high levels of cash generation experienced over the last several years remain at a very impressive level.
The last word I'll say on financials, we decided that given that the 2025 numbers have already been out there in summary for a while, indeed we're already partway through June, we thought it'd be helpful just to give an update in respect of how 2026 has started as a business. The group has experienced a very strong start to 2026 to date. We generated in the first five months of the year, $16 million of adjusted EBITDA. That would indicate an EBITDA run rate that's higher than the level achieved in H2 2025. As a reminder for everybody, the second half of the year tends to be, almost without exception, 2025 was one exception because of the timeframe in which AdSense for Domains gradually wound down. Usually H2 is the bumper half of the year.
Because the Comparison and Search businesses, the e-commerce and advertising industries more generally, because they are so heavily Q4 H2 weighted, H2 we would expect to be the higher of two halves. We expect even better things to come this year. H1 has already started very well, progressing very well. We expect a higher level in H2 again, so that we can hopefully show that we've returned to year-on-year growth this year following the decline we saw in financial terms in 2025. The reasons behind that growth, the DIS and Comparison businesses both continue to grow at a phenomenal rate, really, both individually and in combination. Those two parts of the business have shown very pleasing levels of growth versus 2025.
The Search side of the business, whilst it's contributing less to profitability right now than it was this time last year, it's showing signs of returning to full profitability contribution, in the second half of the year. For three reasons, one of which is the gross revenue of the Search business has been stronger in recent weeks and months than it was around the start of this year when Related Search on Content was still really at its nascent stages. We're also targeting margin expansion within the Search part of the business, gross profit, gross margin expansion. Plus as well, the cost base of the business has been reset at a more competitive level prospectively. Right the way through the P&L for the Search part of the business, We've been successful in effectively rebasing, restructuring the business for a new lower level of revenue generation.
We're confident that Search's contribution in the second half of the year will be more significant than it was in the first half of the year. With that, I will hand back over to Michael.
Thank you, Billy. We're coming to the last chapter of today's presentation, we're starting with the highlight, the strategic review. The strategic review is progressing very well, as we've confirmed this morning. We are continuing discussions with selected parties so that they can do their final homework, like confirming financing capacity, et cetera. As you know, the board always said we will only pursue a transaction if it delivers fair value. We are under no pressure to transact. The offers that we are in receipt of, as we've now repeatedly confirmed, are materially in excess of, here it says GBP 120 million. Given that we are reporting in dollars, it's materially more than $160 million. Therefore, it also means it will be in excess of the entire gross debt that the company currently holds, also then leave some material spare change for other purposes.
We'll come to that in the Q&A section. The business itself that we are selling here is performing very well, as you know from the first few slides that we presented to you. In terms of timeline, you have all been very patient with us to find the right partner or the right potential partners, plural, for this transaction. We understand it's time to come to a final call here, which we expect to deliver in the first half of Q3. Given that domain names have some level of regulation, subject to customary conditions and approvals, we then expect the transaction still to complete in the course of 2026 if a transaction is finally agreed. The most important point is here we reaffirm our guidance on value and are looking forward to the next update on this topic.
On the last slide, I mentioned that we are under no pressure to sell the business other than our relentless effort to crystallize the value that we've built in this business. We have renegotiated our credit facilities, which now include aligned maturities, so no part of the debt becomes due before about 16 months as of today, which gives us a lot of headroom to find the best solution for the future balance sheet of the group. The banks, being cognizant of the progress that we're making with the business, have rewarded this with a notably widened covenant headroom, which is very much appreciated. We've, at the same time, also right-sized the volume of the loan facilities, given that currently we are rather looking at generating sales proceeds rather than doing material M&A.
We've also downsized the facility a bit just to bring it in line with our current ambitions, aspirations, and needs, which avoids unnecessary cost of financing. The full refinancing is still progressing, but again, now with a slightly improved, well, I should say materially improved timeline until when we need to present you with a long-term solution for the topic. Again, next maturity is only in 16 months, which gives us considerable time as of today. To something completely new. I wanted to address the antitrust claim that you will have read about this morning. This claim arises from conduct of a material intercompany that has already been established by a final regulatory decision. We've also, in the last couple of weeks, either seen court rulings or have seen court rulings being announced for the near-term future.
We now felt that the claim becomes sufficiently substantiated, that we believe this is now the right time to disclose this process. In order to prejudice the process, we must retain the exact amounts, strategy, the exact allegations, the exact party. We can confirm that we are now actively pursuing recovery of the losses that we've suffered, and also our peers have suffered for an extended period of time. The timing, the outcome, and the amount still remain uncertain. This is why under International Financial Reporting Standards, we have not recognized an asset. However, on our best commercial judgment, we believe that a successful outcome could be material in the context of the company's current market capitalization. We will update you on this topic as appropriate when there is any progress on it. Moving to the last part, wrapping it up.
Let me finish where I started. We are cognizant of the challenges that the group has seen, but we still believe that the current view is still too much on the disruption that we are now through with, and too little on the business as it stands today. Again, 80% of 2025 group EBITDA was coming from DIS in Comparison, unaffected by the Search transition and both performing strongly. Search is now through the transition and positioned for recovery. The strategic review is progressing. The balance sheet has been strengthened, and we've now got an additional potential source of value through the antitrust claim. Therefore, we enter the second half of the year with a position of strength, and we've not yet put it into paper, but I want to give that I know it will come up in the questions later.
The question is: What will Team Internet be once the strategic review would finally end with the sale of the DIS segment? Without keeping it simple, in e-commerce, you typically speak of three stages of conversion. The awareness phase, people get aware of your product. They consider it for potential purchase, and they ultimately convert. What the Search division does, it takes consumers from the awareness phase to the consideration phase, and the Comparison division then takes users or consumers from the consideration phase to the actual conversion phase. Over the two businesses, we can then cover the entire conversion funnel, as the online marketers call it, in one single business model. Comparison are delivering high teens million EBITDA contributions, even though we are today only addressing 7% of the global market opportunity.
Search has already demonstrated that this business model, once fully refined and honed to perfection, can deliver double-digit million EBITDA contributions. We hope that this future growth story will be exciting for you to also enjoy being a shareholder of Team Internet more than you did for the last two years. This is the message of today. We are now happy to take your questions.
That's great, Michael, Billy. Thank you very much indeed for your presentation. Ladies and gentlemen, please do continue to submit your questions using the Q&A tab situated on the top right corner of your screen. While the company takes a few moments to review those questions submitted today, I would like to remind you that a recording of this presentation, along with a copy of the slides and the published Q&A, can be accessed via investor dashboard. Michael, if I may now hand back to you to chair the Q&A. I'll pick up from you at the end. Thank you.
Yes. Very happy to. I'll take the questions in the sequence that I see them on screen. Also at first glance, it looks like we can summarize some of them quite well. In the event DIS proceeds at a level that exceeds the debt repayment, what is management order priority for a surplus, buybacks, dividends, M&A or reinvestment? Yes, first of all, the expectation is that the sale proceed would exceed the total amount of debt, so there would be a surplus. While the quantum and timing are yet uncertain, the most likely use for it would be a tender offer, helping the market to rebalance the register based on the strategic pivot, that we would later then be starting the journey with a share register that is very comfortable with the growth story for the remaining digital commerce platform that we are building.
A general dividend strategy and M&A are then steps that come later. In general terms, I should say the board will be more careful on the M&A side, treading, being very selective, looking only into highly adjacent pieces of M&A that very neatly fit into the strategic vision of the digital commerce platform. That is still way out. For now, focus on the topics of the delivery of the strategic review, then the material distribution. Only then we will turn our attention again to growing the new core of the business. Going to the next question. It has the same focus on DIS, but more a question around has the process now moved to a preferred bidder or exclusivity stage? We don't see need to grant exclusivity at this point. We've chosen our words carefully in the RNS.
We are moving on with selected parties who are now allowed to do their final homeworks, including confirming their financing capacity. There is material progress from our last announcement on the topic on the 24th of April. Next question is, now that the AFD to ASOC transition in Search is described as substantially complete, has the Search segment's revenue run rate stabilized in absolute terms through the first part of 2026? Or is there still some sequential decline as the new model scales? I would really like to differentiate here between AdSense for Domains revenues and ASOC revenues. Because it's two different journeys for consumers, for the advertisers. The revenues that we are currently doing with Related Search on Content are already higher than the revenues the business was doing with AdSense for Domains when we took control of it in December 2019.
That's for me the main reference point. The margins in ASOC are not yet quite where they were at the end of 2019, when, of course, the business had already nine years of constant optimization of the AdSense for Domains consumer journey. Whereas for Related Search on Content, we can now only speak about a little bit more than one year of true optimization effort. I understand this is a valid question, and we will consider, because I don't want to make a mistake in now reciting any figures spontaneously. We will consider updating the market on this in more detail when we come out with the H1 trading update, which we hope we can provide you with before the annual general meeting is being conducted in the next month. Next question is. Sorry, I overlooked one.
Depending on what has or hasn't been published this morning, could the board give shareholders a clear sense of how the DIS process currently stands? I think I added detail to what we said in the RNS. Level of interest still very strong. The question ends again with the future distributions. Yes, a dividend policy. We've never canceled the dividend policy that you've seen for the first time in our 2022 annual report published, I think, in April 2023. We've just currently suspended it, for the reason being that to date, liquidity preservation was more important in the phase of this transition. However, in a world where we will have materially paid off all debt, we will have paid off all debt. We would only have fresh debt if we would consider it helpful, for example, tax optimization or other purposes.
We should then also then again reestablish our dividend policy. However, the exact quantum and the exact timing is yet to be deliberated by the board, depending on the progress of the other topics we talked about today. The next point is it would be useful if you could say a few words and update shareholders on the strategic direction and future of the Comparison division. In particular, how do you see the partnership with BestPick developing and scaling in the U.S. market? And does the board envisage retaining the Search division to support that growth? Or is Search also under review as part of the wider portfolio assessment? First BestPick is one of our own brands. We are pursuing a strategy to have dedicated brands for each market, given that product comparison markets individually tends to be rather national markets.
Few people who have their normal residence in one country do a lot of comparison shopping in other countries. The growth of the Comparison business has multiple dimensions. For now, we are talking mostly about the internationalization because this is the first one that we've launched. It is the one that is very live and that is also the largest on a pure numbers play. I mentioned before that the current German, Austrian, and Switzerland market that have been our historical core market only represent 7% of the global e-commerce market. The other vector along which we are expanding is the number of the channels through which we engage with consumers. Here, classical search engines like Google and Bing are still very dominant.
Also here, we are experimenting with engaging with users on social media and in other similar types of websites, which then again holds material potential to engage with users that we currently cannot reach with the way that we interact with the market. The third vector, what would be extracting more of the value that we create in the market for ourselves. We have historically relied very much on commissions from e-commerce partners, which are still the bulk of all our income, but we've also struck partnerships with the manufacturers of the products who now pay us additional commissions on top.
Here we might go deeper and potentially just accept offers directly from the customers and going from a commission-based model to a drop shipping-based model, similar like large American companies like Wayfair are operating this, which then holds even more potential for extracting more percentage margin of the gross merchandised value that has been referred. These are the three main vectors, and we will see to also add to the set of strategic KPIs that we share with the market once these two additional growth vectors have picked up more momentum. The next question is: Has management's confidence in achieving a DS valuation materially above the November market cap? Yes, we're conscious of the fact that the market cap today is lower.
This is why we've always been very specific in our RNS tool to make clear that we're talking about the 11th of November market cap of around $160 million. Again, in the deck today, we have put the word materially in bold. We're not talking about a tiny bit above $160 million. Second sub-question: Following the refinancing, does the board now feel it has sufficient time and flexibility to maximize value rather than being driven by a finance deadline? Yes, absolutely. That is true. Third, assuming a DS transaction completes, how should shareholders think about the value of the remaining Search and Comparison business? Valid question. While I have already alluded to some aspects of it, we have a business, our Comparison business, that is succeeding in what I call the end game of e-commerce.
We can already today put fully paid ads on search engines like Google and Bing and still extract a lot of value from then converting the consumer that has only considered the transaction to make them an actual customer. We take the risk that whether the customer actually buys something, but given that we are really good at converting these customers and actual buyers of the goods, we make considerable money from this operation. In terms of all the business models that you see online, it doesn't get any better than that. If you can make a living from taking the risk of converting a customer who's only considering a transaction into an actual customer, then you're basically unstoppable. That's what we now need to prove, that we cannot only do that in a German-speaking market, that we can also do that internationally.
France is a very good example and proof point that we will get there. Search, on the last slide, I was talking about this conversion funnel, awareness, consideration, conversion. This is another important growth factor. While, of course, we have to concede that this business has shown unprecedented volatility and admittedly also unforeseen moves by our largest trading partner that have been unforeseen by us and everyone else in the industry. The good news is we've now found a floor, and from here on, it can only get better with this business. Many have given up. We have not, and we are now poised to reap the rewards of that bold move. Moving on to the next question. How are you financing your substantial damages claim?
Given the specifics of the case, we determined that doing self-funding would be better than litigation funder, given that there is already regulatory approval or regulatory decision that clearly proves the fact that there was anti-competitive conduct. We feel confidence that it's the economically wiser choice to self-fund, and we're only talking about a low single-digit percentage of the potential award that we're working towards.
I'll take the next one if that's okay, Michael, because it relates to the mechanics of the covenant calculations. The question is: Would you kindly clarify the advised increase in leverage to 2.9x adjusted EBITDA from your RNS of today? How is this arrived at? In practice, the level of all the leverage calculation as is used for our covenants with our banks, it's not calculable from readily available or publicly available information because there are some add backs and restrictions and reductions, as you would typically expect to experience in any facilities agreement. For example, the level of net debt that's used for our covenant compliance is not accounting net debt. It includes, for example, letters of credit, which are correctly off balance sheet for IFRS purposes. Likewise, the EBITDA that's used for calculating covenants for external compliance.
They would include, for example, add backs of rent, which is capitalized under IFRS 16. The figure that's used for covenant compliance is not the same as the accounting level. I think it's important that we enable people to continue to track both an accounting basis and also the actual basis that's currently being used with our lender group.
Thank you, Billy. Next question is, you also mentioned some time ago partnerships in the different business divisions. Are these now less likely, especially in Comparison Search divisions, if you now feel you're on a strong footing? Additionally, what about DIS division if this does not conclude in a sale? We're still pursuing strategic partnerships, but in Search, with the fast evolution of the industry, it's still too early to find the right partners where we wouldn't know that they're the right guys for the next 10 years. In Search, we might identify such a partner earlier than in Search. The question on DIS, to me, it is currently an afterthought because our conviction is that we will come to terms that are acceptable, not only acceptable, also representing the full fair market value for the business very soon.
If, however, there was some negative surprise and bidders would start chipping the price for which we have absolutely no indication that that would happen, we still have a very decent performance plan for the division that we'll let it continue on its earnings growth trajectory, and then see whether we'll find a solution in a year or two from today. Again, let me just reiterate, I'm just saying this because the question was asked. To me, it is too improbable that there will not be an outcome that I would make this my main priority, that I would reoccupy myself of that too much at this point in time. Next question. Margins are clearly improving. Do you have a target for margin improvement across the group? I think we'll rather guide to margins for the different businesses.
The blended rate will always be the function on the exact growth rate of the different businesses. Food for thought, maybe for another update for our H1 trading update or the H1 results roadshow. Any updates recouping funds from previous owners of Shinez? Yes, this is still ongoing, and there will be, of course, the warranted disclosures in the annual report. However, for now, there is no material movement that would make us believe that we would get more or less money than we always anticipated. That's why we've not included it in today's update. Yes, we're still pursuing this. However, compared to the antitrust case, this is a rather smaller amount. Coming to the antitrust case, what does the board consider material in terms of the current market cap?
Again, we will not disclose the amount that we are looking for, given that that was prejudiced the amount. Material, we've been told by Citi investment bankers, material is generally considered 20% or more. We've, of course, carefully thought about every single word in the trading update this morning. 20% of our market cap today is something that everyone in the team would be very disappointed in if we could not comfortably jump over that hurdle. Again, timing unknown. As always, when you go into a courtroom, there's always some risk that some of your assumptions don't hold true. With our best judgment today, we confidently stand behind the word material. Moving on to the last few questions. What will be the action plan if the sale will not go through? I think I already mentioned that.
We have our own plan, what we will do with the business if it remains under our watch. Where we have a good plan to let it continue on the now five-year trajectory of profit growth from 2022 to today. Let me also be clear. The domain business is a great business. I love the domain business. I left my investment management career many, many years ago to build a business in the domain industry. I've consistently said that while Comparison is a great business and Domains are a great business, they give us a conglomerate discount on the level of Team Internet Group. It's just two businesses that have very different reasons why they are great businesses to be invested in.
I've also been clear, I think, for the last three years that there would be one point in time when they would split. If the point in time would not be this year, then it will be 2027 or 2028. I still stand behind the conviction that both businesses individually would be more valuable than with a public company umbrella over them. A few questions I think have come. Sorry, something has just moved here in the Q&A bar. I think the last question is any further update on the Shinez legal action? I think I've addressed this before.
Sorry to interrupt, Michael, while you're reviewing one or two, there's one question that says, when you say you expect Search to be profitable in H2, do you mean on EBITDA basis? Yes, of course, we do. When we say profitable, we're not just talking about generating more revenue or generating a gross profit for Search. Search needs to be and will be profitable on an EBITDA level. Right now it's effectively breaking even, but it will contribute more to profitability in the second half of the year. That's real profitability, EBITDA, not just gross profit.
Thank you, Billy. Right. Here there's still one question, again, about the level of valuation for DIS, asking whether it is in line with the sum of the parts level implied by sell side research for DIS. Billy, do you remember from the top of your head the bandwidth in which these estimates are?
Would that bring it fair to the valuation points?
Well, we'll have to come back to that. Again, the guidance of materially above stands, and we've made this reconfirmation today confidently. Again, let us get back to that. We still plan for an trading update, including the full H1 figures this year, and would then update the market shortly. Until the day that an SPA has been signed, this is all optional, but we are very confident that based on what we currently have in our hands, that we will have a satisfactory outcome of this. Looking at the clock, we're also now arriving at the full hour. Thank you again for all your thoughtful questions, and we're looking forward to the next time that we will meet. In the meantime, remain available for any further questions, either through the IMC channel or through your brokers. Thank you very much.
We are looking forward to deliver you more proof point of our conviction that H2 will be the final pivot, moment of pivot for this group very shortly.
Fantastic. Fantastic, Michael, Billy, thank you for updating investors today. Could I please ask investors not to close this session, as you'll now be automatically redirected to provide your feedback, which will help the company better understand your views and expectations. On behalf of the Team Internet team, we would like to thank you for attending today's presentation. Good afternoon.