Good morning, and welcome to Stora Enso's third quarter 2026 results presentation. I am Jutta Mikkola, Head of Investor Relations, and joining me today are our President and CEO, Hans Sohlström, and our CFO, Niclas Rosenlew. There is quite a lot happening at Stora Enso at the moment. Alongside delivering and improving the performance of our businesses, we are preparing for one of the most significant steps in reshaping our portfolio, the planned separation of Bergslagets Skogar.
Today, we will look both at how Stora Enso performed in the third quarter and at the work underway to build two stronger and more focused companies. Hans will start with the highlights of the quarter and the progress we are making on our strategic priorities. Niclas Will then take us through the financial performance. As usual, we will finish with Q&A. With that, let's get started. Hans, over to you.
Thank you, and hello, everyone. As Jutta said, there is a lot going on, and we made further progress on several fronts during the quarter. In the third quarter, we continued to make steady progress with an organic growth of 2% supported by our own actions. AI is increasingly helping us accelerate our value creation programs and identify further opportunities to improve performance. Despite high planned annual maintenance activity, as well as higher costs related to the conflict in Iran, we delivered an adjusted EBIT margin above 7%.
This is further evidence that our strategic priorities and portfolio optimization are gradually strengthening the quality and resilience of our earnings and cash flow. This brings me to another important step in our transformation. We have now formally decided to proceed with the planned separation.
In just a few days, we will host the very first Capital Markets Day of Bergslagets Skogar. Over the past year, significant effort has gone into preparing Bergslagets Skogar for life as an independent company. At the CMD, we are presenting Bergslagets Skogar's financials and showcase a business with a unique asset base, a strong foundation, and long-term value creation potential. The separation will unlock value and sharpen the strategic focus of both companies.
When talking about focus, we also continued to actively reshape our portfolio in line with our strategic priorities. We divested our packaging solution units in Germany, consolidated sawmilling in the Oulu region, and closed the CLT unit at Gruvön, enabling us to concentrate production in our remaining CLT units in the Czech Republic and Austria.
We also announced plans to centralize our packaging solution operations in Finland and reduced our ownership in a Swedish wood supply company. All of these actions follow the same logic, creating a more focused company and directing our resources towards areas where we see the strongest potential for long-term value creation. We are also continuing to develop further growth opportunities. This week, we announced a partnership with Shanshan Technology, one of the world's largest suppliers of battery anode materials.
The partnership accelerates the development of Lignode, our wood-based sustainable battery material, and its industrial scale validation through a demonstration line for lignin-based anode materials. It also supports our long-term ambition to establish large-scale Lignode production in Europe. This is a good example of how our renewable materials expertise can create new high-value growth opportunities over time.
One of our key strategic priorities is to expand margins through business focus, a positive performance culture, and systematic value creation. This has been a core priority throughout the last two years and continues to be so going forward. We have identified EUR 500 to 700 million of value creation initiatives. These initiatives have clear ownership and are already underway. Year to date, our own actions continue to improve performance at a steady pace and will continue to do so.
At the same time, market impacts remained mixed. Lower wood costs were supportive, but this was partly offset by ongoing war-related pressure on energy, logistics, and chemicals, subdued consumer confidence, lower EU ETS allowances, and unfavorable foreign exchange movements. Oulu continued to improve year on year. The key message is that the fundamentals of our margin expansion story remains intact.
We are not standing still, and we are not waiting for market conditions to improve. We continue to drive performance through our own actions. AI plays an important role in that. AI is increasingly becoming part of how we execute our value creation program and identify further opportunities. All our employees currently have access to at least three AI capabilities, including our internal agentic AI library. AI is integrated into our performance culture and systematic value creation work.
We focus on AI value, that is measurable business impact as the main KPI for AI. Today, targeted AI capabilities support around a quarter of our initiatives, particularly across commercial processes, operations, and ways of working, and we expect its role to increase over time. In practice, this range from enterprise AI tools supporting everyday work to our own AI applications and solutions embedded in specific workflows and core business processes.
For example, in sales, AI-powered negotiation support brings together customer, market, and internal data, helping our teams prepare faster, make better-informed decisions, and improve commercial outcomes. In operations, predictive AI helps us identify potential equipment issues earlier and reduce unplanned downtime. With that, I will hand over to Niclas to take you through the financial performance. Niclas, please.
Thank you, Hans, and hello, everyone. Before going further into the third quarter financial performance, I wanted to start with a few comments about the Bergslagets Skogar separation and the impacts on Stora Enso. As you know, we have today made several releases on top of the Q3 interim report release. As part of the demerger release, we have for the first time shared the Bergslagets Skogar financials. This is another big step towards the planned demerger, and you can now see how Europe's biggest pure play forest business looks like.
More to be shared in the CMD next week. Let me now take you through a few points on what the demerger means for Stora Enso after the separation. This slide illustrates the impact on our sales, earnings profile, and balance sheet following the demerger of Bergslagets Skogar. First, the impact on reported sales is expected to be limited. Bergslagets Skogar's sales have historically been largely internal within the Stora Enso group.
Second, on an illustrative basis, excluding Bergslagets Skogar, our last 12 months adjusted EBIT would have been around EUR 400 million, compared with EUR 580 million for the group. This corresponds to an impact under EUR 200 million on our current EBIT margin. However, good to note that adjusted EBIT includes the operational fair value changes in biological assets, which affect adjusted EBIT but are non-cash. In other words, the cash impact will be less.
Third, the balance sheet. Around EUR 800 million net debt is expected to be transferred to Bergslagets Skogar at the completion date. This will reduce Stora Enso's absolute net debt and align the capital structure with the size and needs of the remaining business. While the demerger reduces absolute earnings, it also creates a more focused Stora Enso with a clearer financial profile and a balance sheet aligned with the business.
This is a good basis for continuing to strengthen Stora Enso. Let's look into the Q3 results in more detail. I am pleased with the continued progress of all our businesses and the improved earnings resilience. During the quarter, we continued to focus on our own improvement actions across the company. Organic sales increased 2%, driven by higher deliveries in both Consumer Packaging and Integrated Packaging, and higher prices in Integrated Packaging and Biomaterials.
Reported sales decreased by 2% due to the portfolio optimization, the divestments that Hans mentioned earlier. The divestments included the corrugated board units in Germany and a partial disposal of our share in a wood supply company. We therefore now account for the wood supply company as an associated company instead of a subsidiary. The divestments reduced sales, but had a limited impact on EBIT.
Our adjusted EBIT was EUR 161 million, which was a year-on-year increase of 28% or EUR 35 million. Let's now turn to the next slide for some additional details. On the EBIT bridge, you can see the improved resilience that I mentioned earlier. Adjusted EBIT improved by EUR 35 million year on year, despite continued external pressure. Higher volumes were the biggest positive driver, contributing EUR 31 million, mainly from Consumer Packaging and Integrated Packaging.
This was despite the planned maintenance shutdowns that we had in Integrated Packaging. Price and mix had a EUR 12 million negative impact, as higher prices in Integrated Packaging and Biomaterials were offset by lower external wood sales prices in Sweden. Variable costs improved by EUR 40 million. Lower wood costs and our own cost actions more than offset the cost escalation related to the Iran conflict, especially for energy, logistics, and chemicals.
Importantly, our own actions also more than compensated for fixed cost inflation. Quarter after quarter, we are making steady progress. We remain focused on what we can influence ourselves, and that work is increasingly visible in our results. Let's now move on to cash flow. Cash generation remains a strategic priority.
Cash flow from operations increased to EUR 245 million, and cash flow after investing activities improved to EUR 132 million, compared with EUR 57 million last year. This improvement reflects stronger cash flow from operations and lower cash spending on CAPEX. Due to disciplined capital allocation throughout this year, we have also lowered our full-year 2026 CAPEX estimate from EUR 550 million to EUR 500 million.
Overall, the underlying development remains aligned with our priorities. We are reducing CAPEX, we are improving the quality of the portfolio, and maintaining capital discipline. This is also visible in our balance sheet. The positive cash flow in the third quarter reduced net debt further. Net debt decreased by EUR 85 million to EUR 2.5 billion, and net debt to adjusted EBITDA improved to 2.1 times.
The stronger capital structure provides flexibility to execute our long-term strategy and supports the preparations for the planned separation of Bergslagets Skogar. Going forward, we will continue to focus on deleveraging, supported by profitability improvements, cash generation, and disciplined capital allocation. Let me now conclude the financial review with the segment performance overview. What comes to sales, we grew organically in all operational segments.
In Consumer Packaging, EBIT increased by EUR 26 million. The improved performance was supported by higher board volumes, lower wood costs, and our own cost-saving actions. This was partly offset by cost increases related to the Iran conflict, particularly in logistics and chemicals. Looking ahead, the Consumer Packaging fourth quarter will be impacted by significant planned annual maintenance shutdowns. This will result in higher costs and lower volumes.
As the maintenance will affect, in particular, our liquid packaging board production, we also expect an adverse price mix impact. Also in integrated packaging, the EBIT increased by EUR 25 million. The underlying profitability remained solid despite significant annual maintenance shutdowns at several sites. The improved containerboard pricing and successful post-maintenance ramp-ups supported the performance. Higher variable costs, driven by increased costs related to the Iran conflict, were offset by good fixed cost control.
Furthermore, Biomaterials continued to demonstrate strong competitiveness with solid margins despite the challenging operating environment. Adjusted EBIT was EUR 52 million, corresponding to a margin of 14%. Higher eucalyptus pulp prices and good cost control supported the performance. In the other segment, sales declined mainly due to the disposal of the share in the wood supply company, as we no longer consolidate its sales. However, the disposal has no material impact on our operating profit.
The adjusted EBIT in segment other was EUR 13 million. The decline was mainly due to lower prices for external wood sales in Sweden and lower margins in the energy function. The energy business was negatively impacted by the annual maintenance at the Olkiluoto three nuclear plant and lower electricity prices. With that, I hand back to Hans Sohlström for the key takeaways.
Thank you, Niclas Rosenlew. Let me now summarize the key takeaways and our focus for the rest of the year. I am encouraged by the progress we are making, both in our performance and in advancing our strategy. We have many exciting and important steps ahead, with the Bergslagets Skogar Capital Markets Day being the next one. While market conditions remain challenging, we remain firmly focused on what we can control.
We continue to drive performance through our own actions across operations, cost commercial excellence, and procurement, and more and more with the help of AI. These actions are strengthening our competitiveness and positioning us well for the future. We are making good progress, but we also know there is more work ahead.
We will continue to execute with focus and determination, and I would like to thank our shareholders, customers, and other stakeholders for the trust they place in us. Most importantly, I want to thank our employees for their continued commitment, hard work, and determination. Together, we are actively shaping our future and building a stronger, more focused, and more sustainable Stora Enso. Thank you for listening, and we are now ready to take your questions.
If you would like to ask a question, please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your Zoom screen. When it is your turn, you will receive a prompt to be promoted as a panelist. Please accept, wait a moment, and once you have been introduced, you may unmute yourself, turn your video on, and ask your question. Please only ask two questions at a time. If you wish to ask more than two questions, please rejoin the queue. Our first question comes from Gabriel Simões at Goldman Sachs. You may now unmute your audio, turn on your video, and ask your question.
Hans, Niclas. Thank you very much for the call and for taking my questions. The first one would be on the forestry side. I know we should have more details on the forestry in the CMD next week, but I just wanted to confirm a few things on the free cash flow calculation for the number you announced today. I wanted to confirm whether this cash flow does not include the interest on the debt and the tax to be paid. If you could confirm how much you are considering for CAPEX, and if that is mostly maintenance, that would be great. The second question that I have is actually on the Consumer Board division.
We started to see some players announcing price hikes on boxboard recently, so I just wanted to understand whether this is something you were following, and how you are seeing the situation on this market currently, given that this was an oversupplied market up until currently, until very recently at least. I just wanted to understand whether the situation has improved on the demand front or if you are seeing further announcements on closures. Thank you.
Yeah. Hey, Gabriel. Niclas here. On the first one, if you do not mind, let us come back to that in the CMD next week, just to clarify, so I do not say anything which is completely off here.
Yes. Gabriel, good morning also from my side. On the second question about board price hikes, yes, we have seen in containerboard several price increases throughout this year. In Consumer Board, we have also announced recently price increases. The market situation in Consumer Board is not as tight, as strong as in containerboard.
When it comes to closures, you are right, there has been a lot of capacity closures taking place. In fact, if you look at the years 2024, 2025, and year-to-date 2026, there is in total 750,000 tons of cardboard capacity which has been taken out from the European market.
Perfect. Thank you.
Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Linus Larsson at SEB. You may now unmute your audio, turn your video on, and ask your question.
Morning, gents. Hello, everyone. First question, maybe on the cost outlook, and you did illustrate how variable costs have developed year-on-year. Could you please also share with us how variable costs developed quarter-on-quarter in the third quarter? And maybe if you could add a little bit of detail on how you see variable cost developments into the fourth quarter, please.
Yeah. Hey, Linus. So, yeah. If we take a step back, the variable costs, we had a tailwind. Of course, it is a combination of two things. I mean, we had the wood prices, and then on the other hand, or actually three things. So, wood costs, we have the Iran-related cost increases, and then we have our own actions. And it is the mix of those.
And of course, Iran moving in the wrong direction, wood costs were kind of a tailwind in Q3, and then the own actions continue. Again, do not want to be too specific about Q3 or Q4, going into Q4, but on wood costs, I would not assume that they continue to go down a lot. Maybe even the contrary, but let us see. The own actions, of course, we continue, and the Iran cost increases are there. Of course, as we know, every day is a new day, so it's a bit hard to say, but do not see any significant kind of easing, at least now going into Q4. Hopefully, that's at least some sort of an answer.
Yes. Good. Then maybe in light of the cost environment that we're in, and maybe especially your continental European competition, could you share with us how you see potential prospects for market share gains or price gains for that matter? I'm talking about Consumer Packaging in particular, but also maybe if you're willing to say something about Oulu, any possibilities, prospects, and opportunities for market share gains overseas or in Europe, and also, like said, what's cost doing to pricing in this kind of environment?
Good morning, Linus. Yes, we continue to grow faster than the market. So we gain market shares continuously in Consumer Board, both in Europe and also in North America, and the same thing also in fresh containerboard, so kraftliner, where the market situation right now is quite good, actually. So that offers growth opportunities.
We had an organic growth of 2% in the quarter year-on-year. Our target is 4% per year, and we are determined to continue growing faster than the market. We have a very strong competitive asset base for that. We have invested heavily during the last few years, so we have a very competitive asset base, huge mill integrates, and now it's time to harvest.
Maybe just to add to what Hans was saying, this is, I'm sure, obvious to you, but when we talk about the cost headwinds hitting the market related to the Iran conflict, for us, it's really logistics and chemicals where we see it. But of course, for the industry as a large also, energy is a big headwind. For us, energy is not a major headwind, as we are pretty much self-sufficient. So in that sense, if you can say so, a good thing from a competitiveness perspective.
Great. Many thanks.
Our next question comes from Andrew Jones at UBS. Please unmute your line by pressing star six on your keypad.
Hello? Hello, can you hear me? Hello?
Morning, Andrew.
Morning. I just wanted to ask about the Lignode business. A few years ago, there was a bit of a concern that it would result in a decent boost in CAPEX. What does this actually mean practically? What are your expectations for this business over the next few years? If your work is successful, when do you expect to actually start developing an industrial scale project? If you give us an idea, basically, how you're thinking about that and how imminent any large spending might be.
Yes. Thank you for your question, Andrew. We have continued, of course, actively to develop the whole Lignode business. We have since years a pilot manufacturing unit in place. We have been collaborating with all the world's largest battery manufacturers and also anode material manufacturers. This week, we announced a partnership with Shanshan Technology, who is the world's second-largest anode material manufacturer with a global market share of about 14%.
They are a leading one, and together with them and with this partnership, we can accelerate now the demonstration phase of Lignode. We need to demonstrate to build up a true process, which is about 100 times larger than the pilot scale, as a precondition then for potential investment into a first commercial scale unit. The big advantage here through this partnership is that we can accelerate the development.
Shanshan Technology has a lot of knowledge in anode materials, which we can benefit from and build on. Of course, we are saving a big capital expenditure by using the equipment and the processes that Shanshan Technology has already made in order to now do the demonstration phase of Lignode.
Having said that, I want to underline that building a significant business out of wood-based anode materials, our Lignode, is a longer-term development. It's longer out in the future. We need now to have successful demonstration scale operations and develop further the manufacturing process. If we speak about anode materials today, we are speaking about the market, which is tens of billions of EUR of size. It is a significant opportunity, but really long term in the future. Yeah.
Just, Andrew, to add on the CAPEX point to what Hans Sohlström was saying, again, what we announced now is not any significant CAPEX. Rest assured, capital allocation, managing CAPEX is a key priority, something we look into all the time. You might have seen that we took down the guidance for the year when it comes to CAPEX from EUR 550 to 500 million, and it won't stop this year. We keep a tight leash and make sure that we invest in stuff which gives good returns. Lignode won't pop up on the radar anytime soon as any big CAPEX.
That's clear. Just a follow-up, does Shanshan Technology have any real experience dealing with anode materials from wood-based byproducts. Is this a first for them, or is this something that they've had experience with somewhere else in the world?
No, this is the first experience they will gain through the collaboration with us.
Hmm. Okay, thank you.
Thank you. Our next question will come from Detlef Winckelmann at JP Morgan. You may now unmute your audio, turn your video on, and ask your question.
Hi, team. Morning. Maybe my first one's just on Oulu. If I take a look over the last, let's say, four quarters, it looks like we've kind of landed in the negative EBIT range of minus 15 to minus 30 pretty much repeatedly, and it looks like we're going through the same in Q4. Should I be reading that as kind of the ramp-up benefits, gained operational leverages as being offset by price cost?
Then we have to see how we go from here in terms of price cost. Then my second question, if you don't mind, is just on this CAPEX. Obviously, you've brought it down by about EUR 50 million. Just curious if any of that EUR 50 million is going to show up next year, or if this is permanently canceled, i.e., just timing or strategically made decision there. Thanks so much.
Regarding Oulu, we are improving quarter on quarter in terms of financial performance, and we will continue to do so, and we stick to our earlier guidance that we have the ramp-up completed during next year. Of course, we are focusing on the sustainable product customer mix that also will ensure the long-term profitability for the line.
So, we are continuing to work on the commercial ramp-up with focus on profitability. If you take the CAPEX question- On the CAPEX, no, this is not a shift. This is managing CAPEX as part of capital allocation. You can imagine that within this 500, we have a long, long, long, long kind of a stream of typically smaller items.
So, it's just managing within that bucket, and therefore now taking down from 500 to 550. Of course, we haven't given any guidance on next year, not talked too much about CAPEX next year, but we'll continue to keep a tight leash here.
Okay. Then if I can squeeze in one more, just in terms of, it's a technical question, just regarding your forest assets in Sweden. Normally, tax rates for this kind of asset, are we just thinking normal corporate tax rates, or are there any relief benefits or refunds or anything like that we should be thinking about for having a forest asset? I'm not an expert in that at all.
Yeah. Again, let's talk more next week in the CMD, but to my understanding, it's normal, whatever that means, but normal. It's not the kind of REIT structure like we have, or what you might have in the U.S., for instance.
Okay. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Cole Hathorn at Jefferies. Please unmute your line to ask your question. Cole, your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Morning. Morning. Thanks for taking my question. I'd like to start with forest. I understand we've got the CMD coming up on the 3rd, but some color would be helpful here because you sold EUR 1 billion of forest a year ago closer to book value, but a year ago is a long time in the current world.
I'm just wondering, as we go into the forest spin, is there any plans or thoughts to dispose even a small amount, be it EUR 100 million, EUR 150 million, EUR 200 million, closer to book value, just to demonstrate a proof point to the market that you can actually sell a decent size of forest closer to book? And then the second one is following up on the free cash flow for the forest entity.
You've given some disclosure today, roughly EUR 90 million of free cash flow, but I'm just wondering, what you didn't give in the release is a defined target of where this could ultimately go to. Could you give us a little bit of a preview for the Capital Markets Day of some of the actions that might be taken to improve that free cash flow to get towards the greater than 2% free cash flow yield? Thank you.
Yeah. Good morning, Cole. First, yes, you are right. We sold 12.4% of our Swedish forest assets last year, a very representative, actually, part of our Bergslagets Skogar. Yes, we sold it at exactly book value, so enterprise value, EUR 900 million for the 12.4%. But in addition to this, we are all the time doing smaller sale of forest land and some swaps, and also some acquisitions to optimize and increase the value of our forest holding.
We can see that, in fact, the book value is a very good indicator for the true value of the forest asset that we have.
Yeah.
Then maybe on the cash flow and the kind of forward-looking, what's the potential. Again, that's a key theme, actually, next week, so I won't steal the thunder from next week.
But, of course, it's kind of one of the core ideas with the whole transaction that we kind of unleash the potential of this company. So what you kind of got now, and I'm sure you haven't had too much time to look at it, is kind of a first glimpse on the history, but not necessarily a kind of a full download on what this can be in the future. Of course, the whole idea is to strengthen the business and continue to develop it. But again, don't want to steal the thunder, so let's be a bit patient and come back early next week.
That's fair enough. Maybe just following up, Hans, on the first point is, you saw the previous forest, but is there any view to sell a small little bit more? The reason I ask that is, it allows the new spin forest entity to have a bit of cash for the forest that they sell.
If the discount to book value where it starts trading gets too large, maybe they can deploy it within their own share buybacks to make sure that the share price kind of reflects what you think the forest valuation is. Is there anything like that or kind of flexibility for the new entity to have the cash to do buybacks if they need to? Or is that something we're still going to have to wait for next week?
We don't have any plans now to do any further major divestments of forest land within the Bergslagets Skogar perimeter before the demerger. We think that the big deal that we concluded last year is a very relevant, valid benchmark, in a way, for the true value of the forest land, and we are happy that we could confirm also the book value of this huge asset.
But then, of course, for the longer term, Bergslagets Skogar has in their toolbox, they have the possibility also to either divest forest land or buy forest land or swap forest land. Their one way of value creation is, of course, to constantly improve the value of their forest holding. Of course, they will have the same objective as we have, to maximize shareholder value.
Thank you. Just on containerboard, on the underlying sort of business for integrated packaging, with gas prices up at EUR 100 TTF, we've almost crossed a Rubicon now where cost pressure might incentivize a further recycled containerboard price increase. Can you give us any comments of how you're thinking about pricing for your Poland, Ostrołęka mill, and how higher prices or further price increases might benefit you for your virgin containerboard business in this integrated packaging? Thank you.
Yeah, Cole. During this year, we have executed several pricing increases in containerboard, especially in kraftliner, but also in testliner. Yes, we are 74% energy self-sufficient, Stora Enso, as an average. Oil is representing less than 1% of our energy, and natural gas less than 2% of our energy.
So, we have a strong competitive situation in general compared to many Central European, American, and Asian competitors, thanks to energy self-sufficiency and a very small, almost negligible impact of oil and gas in our energy basket. The main impacts from the conflict in Iran and high energy costs comes through higher logistic costs and some higher chemical costs.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from Joni Sandvall at Nordea. You may now unmute your audio, turn your video on, and ask your question.
Yeah. Thanks, Hans and Niclas. Couple of questions from my side. First of all, still coming back on Oulu, could you give any indication how the qualification processes have developed and any surprises here? Additionally, any indication of the geographical, say, split of sales from Oulu currently?
So, thank you for the question. The technical and the quality performance of Oulu has been good already for a long time. We have been very active, of course, in the marketplace, doing trial runs and tests. We have also introduced new products to the market. We have expanded, for instance, the product range, the basis weight range, and the feedback from customers has been really positive.
So, we have a very competitive, good, high-quality asset here. We can, through Oulu, also offer several yield advantages to our customers compared with the existing products in the market. So, the products have been very well received by our customers. We continue with our work to fill the line and ramp up the line.
Okay. Thanks. Secondly, still coming back on the Ostrołęka, following the clear increase in European gas prices, could you give any indication, are you still profitable in Ostrołęka currently?
Yes, we are.
Okay, thanks. That is all from me.
Thank you. Our final question of today comes from Martin Melbye at ABG. Please unmute your audio, turn on your video, and ask your question.
Yes, good morning. Two questions about 2027. What do you foresee on, say, liquid packaging board pricing and upcoming negotiations, and how much of your portfolio is up for renegotiation? The second question is on maintenance. So this year lands at EUR 380 million, if I am not mistaken, which seems to be a pretty low number compared to the history. How will that number progress into 2027, please?
Thank you, Martin, for the question. We do not guide and give any forward-looking statements here on the pricing. What I want to say is that we are the world's largest and leading liquid packaging board producer. We have high-quality assets in production assets in three countries. We are serving the leading and the most demanding liquid packaging board customers, and we have really strong positions, both in terms of customer relationships as well as also in terms of product quality and service, as well as asset cost competitiveness.
We will continue to be leaders in this field also in the future. Yes,
I can comment on the maintenance. It's a favorite topic. Hey, Martin. Again, it goes into the same basket of capital allocation and managing it. Also, the maintenance is part of that. The teams have been doing a lot of work on how to run efficient maintenances, and also from a cost perspective, how to manage the cost tightly there. I would say that it's no difference there, whether it's kind of maintenance, keeping the current assets in great shape, or then putting in new assets. It's the same theme throughout, and we will continue to do that also in the future.
I see. Thank you.
Maintenance, just to, as this is the last question, just want to highlight that we have big maintenance coming up or actually ongoing in Q4, especially now in Q4, it's our consumer sites which are under maintenance. For instance, Imatra, Skoghall are both in maintenance in Q4, which of course then will have an impact on the Q4 performance.
Thank you. There are no further questions. I shall now hand back to CEO Hans Sohlström and CFO Niclas Rosenlew for closing remarks.
Thank you very much all for joining in, for your interest. I mean, we do whatever it takes to maximize shareholder value. We continue our work to systematically, diligently, with determination to improve the performance, the profitability of our business, but we are also working on the structures of our company. Here, the Bergslagets Skogar separation is a great example.
We are certain that this is unlocking a value, this is creating shareholder value, and this is creating two leading companies in their field. Europe's leading pure stock-listed forest company, as well as also the renewable materials company with a strong focus and growth opportunities in packaging. Thank you very much for your attention, and have a good day.