Good morning, and welcome to Investor's results call for the third quarter of 2026. I am joined here in the studio by our CFO, Jenny Ashman Haquinius, and our CEO, Christian Cederholm. After their presentations, we will be opening up for questions both on the call via our operator as well as online. With that, over to you, Christian.
Thank you, Jacob. Hi, everyone. In Q3, adjusted net asset value grew by 4%, and total shareholder return for the Investor B share was 1%. All business areas contributed to growth with particularly strong performance in Patricia Industries. At the end of the third quarter, adjusted net asset value stood at SEK 1,258 billion . Let me briefly go through the three business areas: Listed Companies, Patricia Industries, and Investments in EQT.
Starting with Listed Companies. Listed Companies generated a total return of 1% in Q3 with Saab and SEB contributing strongly. As previously mentioned, ABB announced its $5.5 billion acquisition of Rotork, strengthening its position within industrial automation by adding a portfolio of electric actuators for controlling valves. This is a significant acquisition for ABB and a good example of how add-ons can be used to complement organic growth in strategic areas.
Together with AT&T, in July, Ericsson demonstrated drone detection based on existing 5G infrastructure using advanced network sensing and AI. This highlights how Ericsson's leading radio technology can extend into applications also beyond connectivity. Sobi's Guido Oelkers and SEB's Johan Torgeby have announced their departures, and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them both for their significant contributions.
We are pleased that Jonas Ahlström has stepped in as interim CEO at SEB, and in Sobi, the board leads the search for a new CEO. The nomination committees are currently preparing for the 2027 AGM season. Competition for top competence is intense and global, and we will hence continue to push to close the gap between Swedish and international board remuneration levels for Listed Companies. Now over to Patricia Industries, where total return was 15%, driven by strong operating performance, further supported by multiple expansion and positive currency impact.
For the major subsidiaries, organic sales growth was 7%, and adjusted EBITA grew by 26%. This was boosted by M&A, some FX tailwind, as well as a few percentage points from tariff refunds. First and foremost, the underlying performance was strong, with solid underlying leverage in most places. A few highlights then.
Mölnlycke announced its intended separation, creating two even more focused companies, all with the intention to create even better bases for each business to reach closer to their full potential. I will come back to this shortly. Nova Biomedical performed strongly with healthy growth in both bio and clinical and with efficiency improvement as the integration work continues. Vectura announced a major development project for a new R&D facility with Saab in Jönköping, and Patricia Industries invested SEK 500 million to help finance this.
Right after the end of the quarter, Vectura divested two elderly care facilities, all in line with its strategy of focusing on developing, owning, and managing innovation clusters. Sarnova acquired Mercury Medical, a manufacturer of respiratory and anesthesia products, adding a proprietary product portfolio to Sarnova's Acute Care and Emergency Preparedness businesses.
This is another step adding own products to the Sarnova portfolio as a complement to the distribution business. Finally, in July, Permobil distributed SEK 550 million to Patricia Industries. On Mölnlycke, they announced its intention to separate into two standalone companies, Mölnlycke, where the Wound Care and the antiseptics business will reside, and Mölnlycke Surgical, where the ORS and the gloves business will reside.
This creates stronger conditions for both companies and all four business units to reach their full potential and drive long-term value creation through sharper strategic focus, clearer accountability, and even greater speed of execution. Currently, focus is of course on executing the split successfully while keeping momentum in the underlying business. We will revert to this as it develops.
For the major subsidiaries and our 40% in 3 Scandinavia, revenues amounted to almost SEK 73 billion in the last 12 months, and EBITA was SEK 19 billion. Finally, then, Investments in EQT, our third business area. Total return was 7%, driven by both EQT AB and our fund investments. In the quarter, we invested SEK 0.7 billion in the funds net of exit proceeds. Activity remained high, and EQT closed the acquisition of Coller Capital, complementing its portfolio with a strong platform in the secondaries market.
Also, after the quarter, EQT announced the acquisition of Stockbridge, scaling its real estate platform, adding a sector specialist team with a local presence in the U.S. As reflected in our recent acquisitions of shares in EQT AB, we remain confident in their continual ability to generate attractive returns for its investors and its shareholders. As I've said many times, we're confident in our platform.
In particular, I'd like to highlight our portfolio of high-quality companies. In today's complex operating environment, they're doing a good job focusing on improving efficiency and strengthening resilience while investing for the future. Our companies have a strong starting point, with excellent customer offerings and leading market positions. As engaged owners, we remain focused on building and supporting these companies, and we're confident that this will create shareholder value over time. With that, I leave the floor to you, Jenny.
Thank you, Christian, and good morning. Let's move over to the financials for the quarter. In Q3 2026, adjusted net asset value was SEK 1,258 billion, and this implies an increase of 4% compared to Q2. For the quarter, the value uptick was driven by all business areas, but particularly strong performance in Patricia Industries, which was up 15%, followed by Investments in EQT, which was up 7%.
Double-clicking on each of the business areas, starting with Listed Companies. Within Listed Companies, share price performance was mixed, particularly strong in terms of total return for Saab, SEB, and Nasdaq, with exposure to defense and financial markets, but a tougher quarter in terms of total return for industrials and consumer. Total return for Listed Companies portfolio was 1%, which is 1 percentage point behind SIXRX.
As for absolute contribution, we see a similar pattern, although ABB is the biggest drag given weight and size in our portfolio. Moving on to Patricia Industries. Solid performance across the Patricia Industries companies in Q3. The major subsidiaries grew 7% organically, and adjusted EBITA increased by 26%, primarily due to strong operating performance, but also in part helped by M&A, positive FX, and tariff refunds.
Double-clicking on performance across the companies in Patricia Industries, and I will comment on a few of them. Solid organic growth across all companies in North America at attractive margins. For Laborie, organic growth of 13% was driven by all business areas and also this quarter to a large extent by the Optilume urethral strictures product. Profitability for Laborie increased despite continued investments in commercial.
Nova Biomedical grew 14% organically, and profitability increased on the back of efficiency improvements from the ongoing integration. Integration work continues, but performance thus far underpins the potential of this platform. Looking at the Nordics, Piab grew 5% organically, and this was driven by lifting automation and vacuum automation. Profitability increased in part due to tariff refunds and FX, but also on the back of operating leverage.
Permobil saw yet another quarter with muted growth. But despite this and commercial investments, it's good to see solid profitability, and focus for the company is on ongoing product launches to fuel growth. Moving on to Mölnlycke. Mölnlycke had a quarter with 5% organic growth, with growth driven by all four business areas. Focusing on Wound Care specifically, we saw 6% organic growth driven by all regions, particularly strong quarter in Canada and good momentum in China and pockets of Europe.
Wound Care U.S. showed organic growth largely in line with the market, but we are seeing continued tough competition, and that's specifically within prevention. Profitability was largely in line with last year, also when adjusting for tariff reclaims and FX, and this is despite higher raw material and logistics costs. We saw a 15% increase in estimated market values for Patricia Industries comparing to Q2, so from SEK 222 billion to SEK 256 billion.
This increase was explained by expanding multiples, earnings growth, solid cash flow generation, and positive FX. As a reminder, our multiple-based valuation method uses a three-month value-weighted price and not the quarter-end spot price. The positive impact from FX comes from a weaker Swedish krona in Q3 compared to Q2. If we look at value development across companies, all companies contributed positively, and the main positive contribution came from Mölnlycke and Nova Biomedical.
Also worth highlighting is the distribution of SEK 550 million from Permobil to Patricia Industries and the equity contribution to Vectura of SEK 500 million to fund the development of Saab's new R&D site in Jönköping. Moving on to Investments in EQT. Total value change was positive, so 7% in the quarter, and that's driven by both EQT AB and fund investments. As a reminder, we report the EQT fund investments with one quarter lag, so the 9% is based on EQT's Q2 report. On the right-hand side, you see the net cash flow from EQT to Investor, which was negative in Q3, and that's because drawdowns were larger than proceeds. Here we illustrate net cash flow from Investments in EQT to Investor over time.
It's quite lumpy on a quarterly basis, but over the past 10 years, we've received a net cash inflow of SEK 1.5 billion on average per year. Our balance sheet remains strong. Our leverage as of Q3 is 1.8%, and that remains in the lower end of our policy range, and we closed the quarter with SEK 29 billion in cash at hand.
Also worth mentioning is that we, as part of the annual rating assessment, were upgraded by Moody's from Aa3 to Aa2, and that reflects our strong track record, attractive portfolio of companies, clear strategy, and financial strength. Then on to my final slide. Looking at the longer-term perspective, the performance of the Investor AB B share truly demonstrates the strength and the resilience of our portfolio and our strategy. With that, I will leave the word back to Jacob.
Thank you, Jenny. Thank you, Christian. We are now ready to take your questions, and we will start with the questions through our operator. Sandra, please.
Thank you. To ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one and one again. We will now take our first question from the line of Derek Laliberté from ABG Sundal Collier. Please go ahead.
Good morning, and thank you. My first question relating to Mölnlycke. We did see the Wound Care growth here accelerating to 6% in the quarter from a relatively weaker first half. I know you mentioned all regions contributing, et cetera, but what would you say has driven this improvement? Is it mainly better market conditions, or are you seeing stronger underlying execution and market share gains? How do you view the sustainability of this growth going forward?
I can start. Thank you for the question. Yes, we are looking at a solid quarter from Mölnlycke and Wound Care specifically in terms of organic growth. I would be careful to draw any two clear conclusions based on one single quarter. We had alluded to before that if we look at the underlying market growth for the more mature Wound Care market, which is the larger share of the Wound Care sales for Mölnlycke, that is low to mid-single digits. So in the context of that, it's a good quarter. I do want to highlight that we continue to see some tough and challenging markets. We have France, which continue to have a lot of pressure on healthcare budgets. In the U.S. specifically, we also see tough competition, and that's within prevention.
Nevertheless, Mölnlycke did grow in the U.S. in line with the market, and I think that comes down to really strong execution. Mölnlycke has a premium product offering and has done really well in terms of execution of go to market. Also, as mentioned, it is a broad-based growth, so it is driven by all regions essentially. We see particularly strong growth in Canada for this quarter and continued momentum in China.
Okay, great. I appreciate the flavor there. Also on Mölnlycke, you obviously announced the planned separation of Surgical, and we also know, and you disclosed the significant profitability difference between the two parts here. So beyond this greater focus, et cetera, where do you see the largest opportunities going forward for value creation in these units? Should we expect the separation to improve profitability in either of the businesses, or is it more about accelerating growth?
Thank you. I'll start then. The intention to separate this basically should be seen as another step of creating even more focus and accountability in each of the businesses so as to ensure that we have the best possible basis for each business to reach their full potential. As you say, the businesses are different in terms of financial profile, et cetera, and that's one of the reasons why we think separating them makes sense. Then in terms of the potential, there's different things to work on in all of the business. I think one common theme worth highlighting is that we want to increase the level of innovation over time in Mölnlycke, really across the businesses.
Perfect. On Nova, obviously, it continues to deliver really impressive growth and profitability. How much would you say this current margin improvement is driven by the integration synergies versus underlying operating leverage, and how much further potential do you see from the integration?
Well, that is a good question, and I think we are in quite early days still in terms of integration. There is a lot more work to be done. As we have alluded to before, there might be some added volatility, but we are seeing efficiency coming from the integration. At the same time, the company is also investing in G&A and will also continue to invest in G&A, in innovation, and also commercial going forward to really make sure that we build a strong platform. So I think we will have to wait and see throughout the integration. At the same time, the quarter really underpins the strength of this platform going forward.
Thank you. Finally, on Laborie. I think we touched upon this previously, but delivering another strong quarter with 13% organic growth. How much would you say that this strong momentum is coming from the established businesses versus the newer Optilume products, for example? How do you see the growth outlook going forward for this product?
In the quarter, we are seeing growth contribution from all business areas, which is great. Also for this quarter, the main contribution is urology, and that is specifically the Optilume urethral strictures. I think when we have these product launches and the new products, growth will likely not be linear. I think we are really optimistic about the momentum going forward, both for Optilume urethral strictures, but I think it is also good to see in this quarter where we see good growth in child and maternal health on the back of the JADA acquisition. The company will continue to be focused on innovation to further fuel growth.
Okay, good. Could you remind us what the status is of this BPH launch for Optilume?
Yeah, of course. The BPH product is in much earlier stage of the launch cycle. I think if you remember, the company received the first reimbursement code in the U.S. earlier this year. The work right now for Laborie is to make sure that you build clinical evidence, and you do that in close collaboration with physicians. That, of course, takes a bit of time because you need to ensure high quality and reliability of that data. That's in line with the plan for the launch, but it's much earlier if you compare to Optilume urethral strictures.
Okay, perfect. Thank you.
Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Linus Sigurdson from DNB Carnegie. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much, and good morning. Starting with a question on Mölnlycke. I wanted to double click on China. You mentioned strength in that market. Is there anything you would highlight in China, and how far along is this Zhende JV that you announced earlier this year?
I can start. Mölnlycke has had a focus on China for quite some time, but quite recently built a manufacturing site. As you mentioned from last quarter, also announced a JV with Zhende, but that is very early days. The growth in China that we are seeing right now, it is not on the back of the joint venture. There are more opportunities within that lies ahead. But we do see continued organic growth, but we are also coming from a relatively low base.
It could be worth just to add there on China. Unlike most of the rest of Mölnlycke, in China, we basically have two businesses. One is the traditional hospital healthcare business, and there is also a rather healthy business to consumer line in China as well.
Okay. Appreciate it. Then, second one on Mölnlycke. On ORS, growth there has clearly lagged the overall group for quite some time now. Now heading into this proposed split, can you just remind us how much of that, say, underperformance is driven by a slower market compared to, say, Wound Care, for example?
I can start. Well, within ORS, typically the growth is driven by the number of procedures, so operating procedures. There is structural underlying growth. At the same time, what Mölnlycke really offers for the customers with the ORS or the surgical trays is to address the efficiency in the OR. I think, based on the healthcare pressure that we're seeing globally, there is a very clear case for Mölnlycke to actually grow beyond that if we're looking ahead. There is tough competition, and I think the moat for Mölnlycke's offering is that it's a high level of customization for the surgeon, which also means that you unlock even further efficiencies in the OR.
I think worth remembering for ORS, it's primarily a European business.
Right. Okay, but would it be fair to say that the sort of penetration level that they've been able to reach has been perhaps below where you had expected?
I would not say that. To Jenny's point, I think there is more penetration to be had. Then, where would we like to be now? Well, always further ahead, of course. But there is a strong case for continued penetration.
Okay. Thank you. Then finally on Laborie, could you quantify what the positive margin impact was from this tariff refunds?
Well, I would say generally for all the companies, it is roughly a percentage point on the margin that comes from tariff refunds.
For those where we have highlighted tariff refunds.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you very much.
We will now take the next question from the line of Björn Olsson from SEB. Please go ahead.
Good morning, guys. Just to follow up what you said earlier, Christian, you said that one of the motivations for the split of Mölnlycke was to increase focus and accountability. Could you give any flavor of which parts of Mölnlycke do you see have been lacking this in the past?
Well, I wouldn't say it's been lacking, but I would say that our experience from separating businesses is that it's hard to capture in PowerPoint or Excel, but the level of focus and accountability that you achieve by providing even more separated P&Ls and separate boards, et cetera, is not insignificant.
Okay, fair enough. If we then look at that situation, having two boards, two overhead functions, two back office staff, that drives costs as well on a very often quite significant manner. Do you see that cost headwind to be mitigated by different baskets of peer multiples near term in the two separate companies? Or do you see this as a potential strategic option as well to divest surgical maybe?
Maybe if I start. On your first question around extra cost, you are spot on. Separation typically means that you will have to duplicate certain costs and functions and whatnot. Again, that is fairly easy to capture ahead of it. The value and the potential is harder to quantify. But over and over again, we have seen how greater accountability and focus drives value. On your second question, in terms of multiples, I am not sure I fully understood it, but let me try to answer and then you guide me if I was on it or not. The motivation for separating is not to sell one or both of the companies nor is it to enhance valuation by way of applying a different peer set. We will obviously come back to and see what the peer group looks like, but that is not the motivation here.
Okay, fair enough. On a performance basis, when would you expect that this will turn into a positive? You will naturally have a short period of higher costs and reorganizations always consume energy from organizations, but when do you expect this to be a net positive from a sum of the parts perspective? Is it end of 2027 or 2028, or when? What is the indicative timeline?
I wish I could give you a clear answer. But I think you are on it in terms of the dynamics here. Focus right now is of course to execute on the split while, and this is important, keeping momentum in the underlying businesses. Then we will see what happens.
I guess, like you say, easier said than done. But good luck with it anyway. Thanks.
Thank you.
Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Oskar Lindström from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.
Yes. You sold, was it 2 million SEB shares? And agreed to sell, I think about 2 million more. Is it a standing policy that you will sell SEB shares to offset SEB's buybacks? Would you plan to do a similar policy, if that is a policy, for your other listed holdings?
Thank you for the question. No, it is not a policy. It is driven by regulatory considerations, specifically around SEB. Even in SEB, it is not a policy, but clearly you have seen a pattern, and what we have said before is that we are comfortable staying at roughly the ownership levels that we are.
Good. Thank you. That was my question.
Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Johan Sjöberg from Nordea. Please go ahead.
Thank you, operator, and good morning. Could you talk a little bit more about the tariff impact? You mentioned 1 percentage point on margins. Could you please just give an update, what did you say about the tariff impact in Q2 for that? And also do you expect further tariff impact in Q4 and possibly into Q1 as well? Could you give some sort of guidance on that, please?
Let me start with the forward-looking part. To the best of our knowledge, we have seen the majority of tariff refunds. But again, this is an area that is moving quite rapidly as we all know. So let us see. But to our best of knowledge, we have seen the most of it.
And if you compare the tariff impact in Q3 versus Q2, was that similar? I am just trying to elaborate a little bit about how to estimate next year's margins.
Yeah, I—
—or in [inaudible]?
It was slightly less in Q2 as per my recollection.
Okay. So peak in Q3. Okay, good. All right. Also, I know you're not super keen on talking about your Mölnlycke and Laborie and also Nova Biomedical's future growth rate, but maybe you can give some sort of guidance on the underlying markets. This is a bit tricky for us to have a clear view. So if you could provide some insight, how you view their underlying markets, not the individual companies, but more of their actual markets growing, that would be fantastic.
Yeah. Well, I think Mölnlycke we typically talk about quite a lot, where we have the kind of underlying market growth in the more mature markets of the low to mid-single digit, if we talk specifically about Wound Care. But then, of course, we're seeing higher market growth and more growth markets. If we take Nova as an example, both the clinical and the biopharma, I think if you look at the company in this quarter, we do have a somewhat easier comp because we have the cyber incident from last year. So here it might be more relevant to look at what the historical average has been for the two companies, which has been around 8%, and they've also been able to take some share, if that provides some guidance.
Mm-hmm. Yeah.
On Laborie it's more difficult because here you have a lot of new products that are entering the market. So I think here it will be more volatile. So I think it's hard to provide. I think also referring to the Capital Markets Day, which is upcoming, I think it's also a really great opportunity to have that dialogue with the CEOs, and we have all of the North American companies presenting and also Mölnlycke.
I think that is a fantastic thing, actually, because I think this is something which is on everyone's mind here, and what is the underlying market drive? That is fantastic if they could provide that, especially for the larger ones. It is also very nice to see that the size of the other companies in Patricia, they are growing. So of course, Mölnlycke is by far the biggest one, but it is catching up with that. So that is very good. Last and final thing, just on the tariff. Obviously, you have raised your own prices to offset the tariff. Was that some sort of surcharge here, or if that could come back now when tariffs are disappearing, or is that just pure actual list price increases?
It is a great question, and it is a mix, but we do not foresee any major reversals as of now.
All right. Thanks a lot.
As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one and one on your telephone. Our next question comes from the line of Hannah Leivdal from Citi. Please go ahead.
Hi, guys. Thank you very much for your presentation today. Just one question from me. On the back of the increased stake in EQT today, just kind of a bigger picture question, looking forward, where do you see the largest incremental contributors to your NAV growth over the next three to five years? What areas are you most excited about? Is it the listed holdings at Patricia Industries or the continued growth in the EQT platform? Obviously, you have a very strong balance sheet position right now, so there's a lot of room and runway. How do you think about that, and where would you prioritize? Thank you.
Thanks for the question. We love all our children equally. In terms of capital allocation priorities, what we've said clearly is that number one is to continue to build and support the existing companies. Number two is to pay a steadily rising dividend. Then number three, but still important, is to find new platform companies over time. Now, if you look at this in a slightly longer perspective, you will see that there's been quite significant investment in all three business areas. Now, of course, quarter- to- quarter and even maybe year- to- year, it will vary. We have deliberately not set a target where we sort of allocate X to one business area or the other, but rather we want to have all the good opportunities surface, and then we pick from there.
That's very clear. Thank you.
Thank you. There are no further questions on the phone at this time. I would like to hand back over for webcast questions now.
Thank you, Sandra. Let's take the question from the web. We start with one from Michael Gielkens. ABB is an important position which benefits from the optimism around the build-out of AI. Would Investor AB be willing to actively manage the position and trim when it becomes too large or expensive, similar to how Investor buys during market drawdowns?
Okay. Thank you for the question. The short answer is no. Selling on the margin is not really a tool in our toolbox as we see it. We think that this is not really helpful for our strategy of being a long-term and engaged owner. On ABB, they've clearly done well. I would say it represents maybe 20% or so of our net asset value today. I would emphasize, though, that ABB is of course not one business, but underlying ABB is a number of different businesses.
Thank you. Then we had a question from Kane Slutzkin at Deutsche Bank that I think has been covered because it was around Wound Care market conditions. Next one, Alexandre Depres. Is the Mölnlycke split a second response to increasing Chinese competition?
I can start. I think Christian explained it very well, the purpose of the separation, to increase focus and to create even better prerequisites for full potential of both the businesses going forward. In part, we see an opportunity to accelerate innovation even further, and that is, of course, to make sure that both businesses remain competitive over time. So I wouldn't say that it's linked to Chinese competition specifically, but I think overall, a competitive global market.
Thank you. Then we have another one from Michael Gielkens. Europe seems to be falling behind on important economic growth themes like AI build-out relative to China and the U.S. The Draghi report is still not finding momentum within the continent. Does this impact your ambitions with regard to portfolio composition, particularly within Patricia Industries?
I can start. Thank you for the question, and I would largely agree with your description of where we are. I would also highlight, though, that Europe remains a very important market for many of our companies. If I see the glass as half full, the Draghi report, as you say, and the Letta report, points out a clear direction. In our view, we feel that there is great momentum and alignment around what needs to be done. Of course, doing it will require a lot of work and compromises and whatnot. If or as we get there is also a lot of potential in Europe. If I had to pick one factor, it is if we can create more potential and realize the full potential of the single market, be it around services, goods, capital, labor, et cetera. That's a great potential.
We need to be wary that it's a highly competitive world, and at the moment, to your point, Europe is not in the lead.
Thank you. Then we have a couple of questions from Holger Bergsten. I think the first one regarding the Mölnlycke split has been covered already, so I'll jump to the second one. There is now a wide dispersion in operating performance within Patricia, with Nova and Laborie performing very strongly while other businesses are more challenged. How do you think about allocating incremental capital between the strongest compounders and the businesses that require more operational improvement?
Thank you. I can start. I think generally, our way of approaching growth in general and in particular maybe M&A is we always look for stability, profitability and then growth. To the extent we have businesses or parts of businesses that are not performing the way we want, then the focus is typically on making sure we get to the right level before we push the accelerator further.
No, maybe just adding to that, if we look at the quarter, I agree Nova has a good quarter, Laborie the same, but I would say BraunAbility is also performing well this quarter and also Sarnova, so looking at the full North American portfolio. In terms of the Nordic portfolio, we have a good quarter from Mölnlycke, also Piab. If we single out Permobil, then maybe for this quarter, there are a few reasons for why growth is muted. We do still the decent profitability, but for Permobil, there are a lot of focus on ongoing product launches to also fuel growth. I think for the context for this, I think we are seeing a broader kind of performance than maybe what the question is alluding to here, but I agree with your point.
Thank you. The final question doesn't have a name attached to it, but I'll make an exception since it's a short one. Will you consider making more buyback returning to shareholders?
I can start. I think Christian has partly already answered that. Our capital allocation priorities are very clear, and they are very firm. First and foremost, we are to invest and support and grow our companies that we have in our portfolio today, then paying a steadily rising dividend and also looking to add new platforms to the portfolio. So that's our main focus. We do have a strong balance sheet, and I think we're very glad that we do. It's a quite volatile environment, and we want to always have the opportunity to act when we find really attractive investment opportunities.
Good. Then I cannot see any further question, and that means it is time to conclude. Many thanks, Jenny. Many thanks, Christian, and all of you who participated. Our next report is the full-year and Q4 report on January 22nd next year. However, as we mentioned, do not miss our Capital Markets Day update on November 4th, where we will deep dive into a number of the companies in the Patricia Industries portfolio. All the North American companies are here with their CEO as well as Mölnlycke. So hope to see you here, and until then, thank you and goodbye.
Thank you.
Thank you.