Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to Bruker's Q4 and fiscal year 2017 earnings conference call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star and then one. To withdraw your questions, you may press star and two. Please also note today's event is being recorded. At this time, I'd like to turn the conference call over to Ms. Miroslava Minkova, Head of Investor Relations. Ma'am, please go ahead.
Good afternoon. I would like to welcome everyone to Bruker's fourth quarter and year-end 2017 earnings conference call. My name is Miroslava Minkova, and I'm Head of Investor Relations for Bruker. Joining me on today's call are Frank Laukien, our President and CEO, Anth ony Mattaccione, Bruker's Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. In addition to the earnings release we issued earlier today, during today's conference call, we'll be referencing a slide presentation. The PDF of this presentation can be downloaded by clicking on the earnings release hyperlink on Bruker's Investor Relations website. During today's call, we'll be highlighting non-GAAP financial information. Reconciliations of our non-GAAP to GAAP financial measures are included in our earnings release and are posted on our website at ir.bruker.com. Before we begin, I would like to reference Bruker's Safe Harbor statement, which I show on slide two.
During the course of this conference call, we'll be making forward-looking statements regarding future events or the financial performance of the company that involve risks and uncertainties. The company's actual results may differ materially from the projections described in such statements. Factors that might cause such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in today's earnings release and in our Form 10-K, as well as in subsequent SEC filings. Also note that the following information is related to current business conditions and to our outlook as of today, February 8, 2018. Consistent with our prior practice, we do not intend to update our forward-looking statements based on new information, future events, or other reasons, prior to the release of our first quarter 2018 financial results in May 2018.
Therefore, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing our views or outlook as of any date subsequent to today. We'll begin today's call with Frank providing a business summary. Tony will then cover the financials for the fourth quarter 2017 in more detail. Now, I'd like to turn the call over to Bruker's CEO, Frank Laukien.
Thank you, Miroslava. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us on today's call. Bruker had a strong finish to the year with revenue growth and non-GAAP EPS, both exceeding our recently increased full-year guidance. In the fourth quarter, Bruker's revenues increased 12.8% year-over-year. Our 4% organic growth consisted of 3.4% organic growth in our Bruker Scientific Instruments, or BSI segment, and 11.6% organic growth in our BEST segment, net of intercompany eliminations. The stronger Q4 revenue resulted in full year 2017 total revenue growth of 9.6%, including 3.6% organic growth. This was comprised of 2.7% organic growth at BSI and 14.5% organic growth at BEST, again, net of intercompany eliminations.
As our core academic and industrial end markets improved over the course of the year, and with BEST benefiting from strong MRI and big science demand, our 3.6% organic revenue growth rate in 2017 exceeded our expectations. We generated value for shareholders in 2017 as we returned to positive revenue growth, successfully integrated several strategic bolt-on acquisitions, drove additional operational improvements, and invested in our six key high-growth, high-margin initiatives. We also again delivered on our long-term operating margin expansion target of 75 to 100 basis points per year on average on a multi-year basis. Specifically, in 2017, our non-GAAP operating margin improved 80 basis points while absorbing an approximately 45 basis points headwind from acquisitions and an additional 20 basis points headwind from changes in foreign exchange. Looking more closely at our Q4 2017 results on slide four, we reported revenues of $530.5 million, an increase of 12.8% year-over-year.
Acquisitions contributed 3.6% to revenue growth, while an FX tailwind increased revenues by 5.2% year-over-year. On an organic basis, our Q4 2017 revenue was up 4.0%. In Q4 2017, our non-GAAP gross margin increased 120 basis points year-over-year. Our non-GAAP operating margin increased 130 basis points year-over-year, while our non-GAAP operating profit grew about 20%. Tony will discuss the details behind these results. In Q4 2017, Bruker reported a GAAP net loss of $0.02 per share, compared to $0.43 of earnings per share in Q4 2016. The GAAP loss was the result of the effects of U.S. tax reform in the quarter. On a non-GAAP basis, Q4 2017 EPS was $0.51, an increase of 11% year-over-year. On slide five, our full year 2017 revenue of $1.766 billion increased $155 million or 9.6% year-over-year.
Acquisitions contributed 4.8%, while foreign exchange was a 1.2% benefit. On an organic basis, Bruker's 2017 revenue was up 3.6% compared with 2016. As previously noted, this consisted of 2.7% organic growth in our scientific instruments business and 14.5% organic growth at BEST, net of eliminations. Going forward, we expect continued gradual organic growth acceleration in our scientific instruments segment, as more and more of our high-growth initiatives are expected to contribute meaningfully to our portfolio transformation. Full year 2017 non-GAAP gross margin was consistent with 2016, as the impact of higher BEST revenues, unfavorable mix, and FX effects offset volume and operational gross margin improvements elsewhere. In the full year 2017, Bruker delivered non-GAAP operating margin expansion of 80 basis points even with these unfavorable mix effects and after absorbing about 65 basis points operating margin headwind from our recent acquisitions and FX.
Our 2017 non-GAAP operating profit grew a healthy 16%. For 2017, Bruker reported GAAP EPS of $0.49 compared to $0.95 in the prior year. The lower GAAP EPS in 2017 was the result of the effects of U.S. tax reform. Our 2017 non-GAAP EPS was $1.21, a 2% increase from $1.19 in 2016. This was against a challenging effective tax rate comparison in FY 2016 due to the recording of tax valuation and reserve reversals in 2016, as previously reported. Over the course of 2017, we saw further stabilization in our academic and government business, most notably in Europe, as well as improvements in our industrial and applied end markets. Our semiconductor metrology business had an excellent year with a healthy mix of new technology buys and robust semi market conditions.
Our BSI scientific instruments order rates showed momentum over the course of 2017, and we expect further gradual improvement in our BSI organic revenue growth rate in 2018. While Best benefited from softer 2016 comps and some project accelerations into 2017, we expect Best revenue to decline in the low single digits year-over-year on an organic basis in 2018. Please turn to slides six and seven now, where I'll provide further insights and highlights on the 2017 performance of our three scientific instruments groups and of our Best segment on a constant currency basis. BioSpin group revenue of $572 million was modestly above 2016 levels, excluding the impact of currency translation. BioSpin operating margins were lower year-over-year as BioSpin product mix included more low-field NMR systems in 2017, with lower gross profit margins versus more high-field systems in 2016. NMR revenue was similar to 2016 levels.
As a reminder, our 2016 results included a one gigahertz system, and we did not record any 1 GHz systems revenue in 2017. Within BioSpin, and specifically for NMR, the aftermarket and service business continued to post strong revenue growth year-over-year. We also remain encouraged by the recovery in preclinical imaging or PCI markets as we stabilize performance in our PCI business over the course of 2017. In 2017, PCI exited a non-profitable optical molecular imaging product line and had good success in growing its preclinical nuclear molecular imaging business, particularly preclinical PET. Our CALID group reported mid-single-digit constant currency growth with revenues of $499 million for the year. CALID operating margins improved meaningfully year-over-year on better volumes, efficiencies in the 2016 restructuring.
Within the CALID group, our Daltonics mass spec revenue grew in 2017 as European academic markets recovered with strong growth in microbiology, aftermarket consumables and services, in part bolstered by our 2017 acquisitions. The Optics business products had a strong year on improved demand from industrial and applied markets, as well as the European recovery. CALID's detection revenue declined year-over-year with a challenging comparison due to large contracts in 2016. Finally, CALID also benefited from the InVivo molecular biology consumables acquisition in January 2017. Please turn to slide seven now. Bruker Nano reported low teens constant currency revenue growth with revenues of $513 million for the full year. Nano's results included both strong mid-single-digit organic growth and contributions from our January 2017 Hysitron acquisition of nano indenting products. Within Nano, Bruker AXS revenue grew nicely in 2017 following a challenging 2016.
Bruker AXS growth was fueled by higher industrial revenue, China demand, and the European market's recovery. Semiconductor metrology revenues were up strongly in 2017, reflecting the healthy underlying end market as well as new technology buys for our X-ray metrology systems. As expected, Semi recorded a strong finish to the year in the fourth quarter of 2017. Our Bruker Nano Surfaces business grew on the contributions from the Hysitron acquisition, which continues to perform well as part of Bruker. In total, the Bruker NANO Group had a strong finish to the year with strength in demand from industrial markets, excellent performance in Semi, and improved academic markets. Last but not least, our BEST revenue in 2017 was substantially higher year-over-year, driven by both our November 2016 Bruker OST acquisition as well as double-digit organic growth at our core BEST business.
While BEST delivered on strong demand for MRI superconductors and some accelerated big science projects in 2017, we expect BEST revenues to be lower year-over-year in 2018. Next, let me give you a high-level update on our six high-growth, high-margin initiatives on slide eight. Over the course of 2017, we sharpened our strategic portfolio transformation focus on six initiatives, which we believe can result in faster organic growth and continued multi-year operating margin expansion for Bruker over time. As we had projected, we exited 2017 with the five product areas: proteomics and phenomics, biopharma and applied, microbiology and diagnostics, neuroscience and cell microscopy, and next-gen nanotechnology tools, comprising about a quarter or 25% of Bruker's revenue. The high-growth aftermarket initiatives, in this case excluding the microbiology aftermarket because we list that elsewhere, comprised an additional 15% of revenue.
In total, our six high-growth initiatives delivered high single-digit constant currency revenue growth and operating margins that are significantly above corporate average. I think we're on the right track here. Some of these initiatives are already of meaningful scale and are contributing significantly. For example, our microbiology business, our next-gen semiconductor metrology tools, and our aftermarket initiative. Others are now becoming meaningful contributors and for example, our biopharma and applied product revenues grew very nicely in 2017 to where they will begin to move the needle for us in 2018 and beyond. Finally, some other initiatives are still early on the adoption curve, such as our pathology, proteomics, clinical phenomics, and ultra high field NMR initiatives. Looking out over the next five years, we have significant growth opportunities across all of these, and we expect continued strong performance from these high-growth initiatives also in 2018.
Together with a cadence of new product and solution launches, M&A investments, and more regulatory approvals, these are key elements of our portfolio transformation strategy towards faster-growing markets where we believe we can also achieve sustainably higher margins. On slide nine, I show Bruker's key priorities for 2018. For 2018, we obviously aim to position the company for further revenue growth acceleration by continuing the positive momentum in our Bruker Scientific Instruments business and by driving our six key high-growth initiatives. We remain focused on transforming Bruker's portfolio for faster growth and continued multi-year operating margin expansion. I invite you to read the other comments and bullets. In summary, 2017 was a year of continued progress. We returned to revenue growth.
We successfully integrated our acquisitions, quite pleased with that, and once again delivered on our margin expansion commitments and exceeded our revenue growth and EPS objectives. We look forward to delivering another solid year in 2018. On that note, let me now turn the call over to our CFO, Tony Mattaccione.
Thank you, Frank, and good afternoon, everybody. I will now provide some additional details on our financial performance in the fourth quarter for 2017 and the full year starting on slide 11. As you saw in our press release, Bruker's reported revenue increased 12.8% to $530.5 million in Q4, which included organic revenue growth of 4%. We reported a GAAP EPS loss of $0.02 per share. This compares to EPS of $0.43 per share in Q4 of 2016. The GAAP EPS loss in our fourth quarter is entirely driven by the effects of U.S. tax reform enacted in late December this year, totaling approximately $69 million. This charge consists primarily of the transition tax on accumulated foreign earnings and the revaluation of deferred tax assets under the new tax law. We also accrued the withholding taxes associated with our non-U.S. cash earnings that we expect to repatriate.
On a non-GAAP basis, and excluding these items, Q4 EPS increased 11% year-over-year to $0.51. On a non-GAAP basis, Q4 2017 operating income was up 20% from Q4 2016, and operating margin expanded 130 basis points year-over-year. Q4 2017 free cash flow of $91 million increased $11.6 million, or 15%, compared with the fourth quarter last year. We ended the quarter with a net cash position of $23.6 million, and that compared to a net cash position of $88.6 million at December 31st, 2016. The decrease in net cash resulted from the continued use of cash to fund our dividend, acquisitions, and stock buybacks. We exited 2017 with higher working capital balances, and that was attributable to our revenue growth, recent acquisitions, and the weaker USD. These effects also resulted in a slight deterioration of our working capital to revenue ratio.
Turning to slide 12, I show the revenue bridge for Q4 2017. In addition to organic revenue growth of 4%, acquisitions contributed 3.6%, primarily from the Hysitron, Bruker OST, and InVivo acquisitions. Financially, these acquisitions are all meeting or exceeding our expectations. Foreign currency translation was a 5.2% tailwind due to the declining value of the USD over the last few months. From an organic growth perspective, the 4% organic growth included strong gains at Nano and BEST. Nano Group revenues rose low teens on an organic basis, with significant growth in our semiconductor metrology business and growth in the X-ray and nanoanalysis products for material research, industrial, and academic research applications. CALID revenue increased low single digits on an organic basis, with strong performance in the mass spec and Optics product lines.
This was partially offset by a year-over-year decline in our CALID detection business, which faced a tough comparison due to a large contract in Q4 2016. BioSpin revenue declined low single digits on an organic basis due to customer pushouts into 2018. A highlight within BioSpin remains the continued solid growth in our aftermarket and service business. BioSpin sales to applied markets, including food screening labs and clinical customers, grew strongly in the quarter. However, these positive dynamics were offset by the timing of system installations relative to Q4 2016. BEST revenue increased 11.6% on an organic basis, and this was net of intercompany eliminations and over 30% on a reported basis, including contributions from the Bruker OST acquisition and foreign currency. BEST's year-over-year revenue growth continued to benefit from scheduled deliveries of superconductors to MRI customers and the acceleration of some big science projects in the year.
Regarding BEST, we have modified our presentation of BEST's revenue growth to exclude intercompany shipments, which we view as a better indicator of BEST's underlying growth. From an end market perspective, we saw sustained momentum with academic, industrial, and applied market customers for our CALID and Nano groups. We continue to see growth in biopharma markets, this quarter led by our Mass Spec Biopharma Solutions portfolio. Our microbiology diagnostic business had a strong finish to the year, and semi order rates remained healthy in the fourth quarter as well, although conversion into revenue for semi orders can take multiple quarters. Geographically and on an organic basis, our European revenue increased high single digits year-over-year in Q4, and this was up mid-single digits for the year, reflecting a solid recovery from our European academic and industrial customers.
North American organic revenue was down mid-single digits year-over-year in Q4 and was modestly lower for the full year. Timing of large orders and shipments and flat materials research demand for atomic force microscopy systems were the primary causes. Asia-Pacific revenues grew double digits in Q4, and that included improved performance in Japan and other Asia regions and were up high single digits for the year. China revenue growth slowed to mid-single digits in Q4 but was up high teens for the year. Going forward, we continue to anticipate moderation in our China growth rate on a full-year basis after a very rapid pace of the China business in the last few years. Overall, we are pleased with another quarter of positive organic growth momentum and the sustained end market tailwinds we have been experiencing. Turning to slide 13, I show our Q4 2017 non-GAAP results.
Our Q4 2017 non-GAAP gross profit margin was 50%, and that was an increase of 120 basis points year-over-year. Higher volume and operational improvements within our Nano and CALID groups and the application of a new inventory accounting standard this year drove the year-over-year increase. BEST's margins were also favorable compared to the prior year's quarter. This was all partially offset by a negative impact from foreign exchange movements due to the weakening USD. As a reminder, Bruker has a large cost basis denominated in EUR and CHF. So while weaker dollar had a large positive impact on revenue, this was more than offset by a currency-driven increase in our cost basis. For the quarter, changes in foreign currency translation rates resulted in a 5.2 increase in our revenue, but a EUR 0.03 reduction in our EPS.
Q4 2017 selling, general and administrative expense of $111 million was up 11% from Q4 2016, driven largely by the increased commissions on higher orders and revenues, the addition of the acquisitions, and changes in foreign currency. Our previously announced G&A function initiatives, which include the opening of our new finance shared service center in Central Europe and HR streamlining, are on track. Q4 2017 R&D expense at roughly $44 million, increased 14% year-over-year, and that was driven by the inclusion of acquisitions and the changes in foreign currency. Looking below the line, net interest and other expense was $4.6 million, compared to $2.3 million of net interest in other income in Q4 2016. The difference was caused by higher year-over-year interest expense on higher debt balances and a net loss on foreign currency transactions, foreign-denominated transactions.
For the fourth quarter of 2017, our non-GAAP effective tax rate was 24.5%, and that compared to 21.7% in the fourth quarter of 2016. Weighted average diluted shares outstanding in the fourth quarter were 156.9 million, down approximately 3 million shares or about 2% year-over-year. This reflected our 2017 share buybacks, and that was somewhat offset by stock option exercise dilution. During the fourth quarter, we repurchased an additional 660,000 shares, totaling $20.4 million. Since the initiation of our latest share repurchase program in May 2017 and through the end of the fourth quarter, we repurchased 5.3 million shares, and that totaled $152 million. Finally, Q4 2017 non-GAAP EPS of $0.51 increased 11% from $0.46 in Q4 2016, and that was driven by the higher revenue and operating leverage. On slide 14, I show the year-over-year revenue bridge for the full year 2017.
Revenue was up $155 million or 9.6%, reflecting organic growth rate of 3.6%, M&A of 4.8%, and a modest positive tailwind from foreign currency translation of 1.2%. The organic revenue increase reflects growth in our Nano and CALID groups in the BEST segment. While BioSpin revenue was only marginally above the prior year. Frank covered the drivers of our full year revenue performance early in the call, so I won't expand on them now. On Slide 15, I show the revenue breakdown for our three scientific instruments groups in the BEST segment, as well as our geographic breakdown as of the end of the year. Bruker's revenue remains balanced from a group and geographic perspective, and the contributions of our BEST segment have increased slightly following the OST acquisition, and BEST now comprises 10% of our revenue, and that's up from 7%-8% in prior years.
On slide 16, our full year 2017 non-GAAP gross profit margin was on par with 2016. Volume and operating leverage in the CALID and Nano groups and the application of the new inventory accounting standard were roughly equally offset by the higher contribution of lower gross margin BEST revenue, negative BioSpin mix, and a small negative impact from foreign currency translation. Our full year 2017 operating expenses increased approximately $37 million or about 7% due to the inclusion of acquisitions, the higher business volume, and changes in currency. All in, our non-GAAP operating profit margin for the full year 2017 improved 80 basis points to 15.6%. This compared to 14.8% in 2016, and that result was in line with our expectations. Our full year 2017 non-GAAP tax rate of 25% was substantially higher than the 15.7% tax rate in 2016.
This was due to the unusually low tax rate in 2016, caused by the previously disclosed valuation allowance and tax reserve reversals. Finally, non-GAAP EPS of $1.21 increased two cents or 2% as growth in revenue and operating income was partially offset by the year-over-year tax effects we just mentioned. Turning to slide 17, we generated $111 million in free cash flow in 2017, which was $17 million or 18% higher than in 2016. This reflected higher cash earnings after adjusting for the effects of the non-cash U.S. tax reform charge we just spoke about and higher compensation and restructuring accruals. These effects were partially offset by the working capital increase I described earlier and an uptick in capital expenditures. Our cash conversion cycle at the end of 2017 was similar to last year, with a slight increase in DSO.
Our cash conversion cycle lengthened somewhat in the fourth quarter due to an increase in DSO as well, largely related to the higher volume of business at the end of the year this year compared to last year. Turning to our full-year 2018 guidance on slide 19, we expect Bruker's revenue to grow approximately 7% on a reported basis. This includes approximately 3% organic revenue growth and approximately 4% from translation effects from the weaker USD. Embedded in these projections is our expectation for another year of modest organic revenue growth improvement in our BSI segment, partially offset by a projected low single-digit year-over-year organic decline in the BEST segment, and that's net of intercompany eliminations.
We expect our fiscal 2018 non-GAAP operating margin to expand between 50 basis points and 80 basis points, and this compares to the 15.6% level we achieved in 2017, while we absorb a significant foreign exchange headwind of 70 basis points on a year-over-year basis, due also to the weak dollar. Our fiscal 2018 non-GAAP tax rate is projected to remain at 25%. For the fully diluted share count, we assume 156 million shares. We expect to spend $50 million on CapEx this year. For foreign currency, we assume the average foreign exchange rates for the month of January, which are listed on this slide. Adding it all up, we project non-GAAP EPS in the range between $1.34 and $1.38, and this represents growth between 11% and 14% compared to 2017.
As in years past, we expect the majority of our profitability and cash flow to be generated in the second half. In summary, during the fourth quarter of 2017, Bruker delivered strong revenue growth in operating results. We continue to be encouraged by the demand tailwinds in our BSI end markets. Our high-growth initiatives are demonstrating promising early results, and with continued focus on leveraging our cost structure, we expect to deliver another strong year of operating leverage and margin expansion and EPS growth in 2018. With that, we look forward to updating you again in our Q1 2018 conference call in May 2018. I now would like to turn the call back over to Miroslava to start the Q&A session.
Thank you, Tony. Jamie, we would like to open the call up to Q&A. In order to allow for broad participation from our analysts, please limit your questions to one and a follow-up.
Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we will begin the question and answer session. Once again, to ask questions, you may press star and then one. If you are using a speakerphone, we do ask you please pick up your handset before pressing the keys to ensure the best sound quality. To withdraw your questions, you may press star and two. Again, we do ask that you please limit yourselves to one question and a single follow-up. We will pause momentarily to assemble the roster. Our first question today comes from Brandon Couillard from Jefferies. Please go ahead with your question.
Thanks. Good afternoon. Frank, in terms of the fourth quarter, could you give us a sense of what areas of the business contributed most to the revenue upside? Anything you can share with us on how the order book developed in the fourth quarter? As you look out to 2018, are there any areas of the business that you think decelerate meaningfully? Any guidance you can share with us in terms of growth between BioSpin, Nano, and CALID would be useful. Thanks.
Okay, Brandon. Those are eight questions. Let me try to tackle it. I think everybody will have the same question. So Q4 was good on the booking side for BSI. We again had solid BSI bookings growth year-over-year, even compared to a decent Q4 of 2016. BEST was weaker, as we had begun to expect, and so that's why we're believing that BEST will have a low single-digit organic decline in 2018. Whereas we expect a continued gradual acceleration of our BSI growth rate. Last year was 2.7%. This year I would expect it to start with a three. I don't think it'll jump to 4%. I think 3 point something is probably what we're looking there for BSI. So gradual improvement. The multi-year portfolio transformation will take time. Looking around the businesses a little bit, we think the industrial businesses are doing really well.
Applied and pharma markets are picking up for us. I think BioSpin will do better in terms of growth in 2018 than 2017. That is more of a timing issue. If you look around the portfolio, detection will still probably be somewhat weak in 2017. It was weak in 2017 after a very strong 2016, and will be also somewhat weak and perhaps a bit weaker in 2018. So that gives you a little bit of granularity. Mostly it is BSI gradual acceleration, and BEST going from a very fast organic growth last year to a low single-digit organic decline in 2018. That is what we see right now.
Thanks. Tony, a couple for you. Congratulations on hitting the 50% gross margin milestone for the first time. As you look out at 2018, how should we think about the margin expansion between the gross margin line and operating leverage? Anything you can share with us on free cash flow conversion expectations for the year?
Yeah. Thank you. I would look at the big picture here. We have been able to deliver this 75 basis points- 100 basis points on what is increasing revenue growth in earlier years on very little revenue growth. That will continue in 2018, based upon the acceleration that we are seeing. I think that is the way to think about the gross profit margin.
Some of the volume effects that have benefited us this year will also benefit us in 2018, and we will have somewhat of an offset with the best margins as you are aware of. From a cash flow perspective, we ended 2017 pretty much where I expected. We delivered $111 million of free cash flow. That is a little less than our GAAP net income, but we also had a big flurry of shipments at the end of the quarter, which used some working capital for receivables. The cash generation for 2018 should look like that, somewhere around our GAAP net income, which would likely be around 15% or so more than it is this year.
Very good. Thanks.
Our next question comes from Ross Muken from Evercore ISI. Please go ahead with your question.
Good afternoon, guys. As we think about some of the emerging growth drivers, you highlight a bunch that are growing above the portfolio average. Which are the few or which new products, as we head into 2018, do you think will have the biggest impact on driving. I know you highlight a few here, but just to size it in terms of what will drive some of that acceleration and become a bigger part of the portfolio next year.
Yeah, I would think, Ross, this is Frank, that microbiology, semiconductor, and aftermarket have already contributed nicely, and we expect that they will again contribute nicely. I would highlight that in 2018, we'll probably have a noticeable positive effect from pharma, biopharma, and from the applied markets. As I said, there's some initiatives that probably really will only begin to move the needle in a meaningful way in 2019 and so on. So I would highlight pharma, biopharma, and applied as those that you'll begin to notice more in 2018. And they made very good progress in 2017.
In terms of Europe specifically, just the cadence there in terms of whether you're seeing anything south versus north or the like, or any way you think it's relevant to cut it. That market's been stronger, and obviously, that's a key market for you. How are we just thinking about the sustainability there?
Well, I think Europe, after an unusually weak 2016, caught up a bit in 2017. So the European growth rate in 2017, I think of that as higher than the long-term growth rate. Long-term growth, I think we're probably now the pendulum is swinging probably to a longer-term steady European growth rate that's probably in the low to mid-single digits. Obviously, we hope we can outperform that because of the product areas and the markets that we're pursuing. We actually expect to return to a fairly steady pattern in Germany, in many of the European Union countries. Obviously, still some weakness in Eastern Europe, and U.K. wasn't that strong for us in 2017. But France and Spain, even Italy, many of the smaller countries all did quite well, and Germany did quite well in 2017 after a somewhat inexplicably weak 2016.
I think things are settling into more historical low to mid-single digit growth rates in Europe, is my prediction.
Thank you, Frank. That's helpful.
Our next question comes from Jack Meehan from Barclays. Please go ahead with your question.
Thanks for the question. This is actually Mitch Peterson on for Jack this afternoon. I was hoping to just get some more detail on just the pacing of revenue growth in 2018. Just outside of normal seasonality, is there anything to call out there? Also, if you could provide us an update on the timing of the 1 GHz order for 2018. Is that still expected in the back half of the year?
Yeah, we're expecting 1 GHz in the back half of the year. Obviously, this is always a digital event. It either happens or doesn't happen. But right now, we're aiming reasonably for one in the second half of the year. That is correct. I think the normal seasonality patterns probably will be somewhat similar again in 2018 as they have been in previous years. We obviously have a little bit more visibility into the first half than into the second half. So, nothing really comes to mind that would be very significantly different than what you have seen in the past, perhaps.
Yeah. Just expect more. Just like 2017, expect more of the revenue to occur in the second half, and we always have a very strong fourth quarter. That's going to continue.
Okay. Just as a follow-up, Tony, if you could provide us an update just on your capital deployment priorities for 2018 and how tax reform and maybe some repatriated cash changes your thinking there.
Yeah. Our priorities haven't changed. The best investments are organic investments for us and ones that are in our targeted growth areas. Acquisitions that fit those areas, that makes sense for us financially and operationally, we'll do, and we'll continue to do those. We're thinking through, it's early days with the opportunity that the flexibility with the U.S. tax reform gives us. So we're thinking through that, which could result in some structural considerations that we need to make. So it's really early to really tell you exactly how we're going to deploy that capital. What we have today will likely continue the way we've been deploying capital, with just more flexibility with the access to overseas cash.
Great. Very helpful. Thanks, guys.
Our next question comes from Sung Ji Nam from BTIG. Please go ahead with your question.
Hi. Thanks for taking the questions. Tony, could you talk about the pricing environment and from raw material costs all the way to how you guys are thinking about pricing strategies this year?
Pricing, it is different from business to business and segment to segment, based upon our market positions in the competitive environment, obviously. But price has been basically a net positive push for us in our margins for the last couple of years, and that will continue into 2018. We are not anticipating anything drastically different from a pricing perspective than what you have seen going forward.
Okay, thank you. Frank , I was wondering about, I do not know if this is far-fetched, but something like Apple cutting its iPhone production significantly near term, could that move the needle for your semi business? Near term or longer term.
We are not aware of that. Obviously, that certain company is always very secretive about its supply chain, but I would not think so. At least I am not aware of it.
Okay. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Derik de Bruin from Bank of America . Please go ahead with your question.
Hey, thanks. It's Mike Ryskin on for Derik. A couple questions for you. The slew of recent acquisitions that were completed over the course of 2017 and in 2016, the Hysitron and InVivo, Bruker BioSpin. Can you talk a little bit about expectations for 2018 in terms of as the annualized contribution to organic growth and some of the progression that's taken place there? With operating margin, this was a headwind over the course of 2017, so how's that coming around?
Yeah, directionally, from presently, last year, the M&A was a considerable growth driver, one of the three growth drivers. That will be much less in 2018, unless we do additional acquisitions, which we never comment on. So it'll be 0.5% or less, whereas last year it was considerable. You are correct in the fact that Bruker BioSpin was a gross profit margin headwind last year because of its good growth, which we were delighted by. The fact that it will actually decline in the low single digits organically will help us to also see the other effects of our further efficiencies to improve gross margins. That'll become, again, a contributor, we believe, in 2018 to operating margin expansion. Remind me if there's parts of your questions that I haven't addressed yet. I apologize.
No, that is helpful there. A quick follow-on, actually, for the earnings growth in 2018. You commented on that you are expecting a 4% effects tailwind on revenues. Am I right in thinking that should be a, let us say, EUR 0.08- EUR 0.10 headwind on EPS for the year?
No.
Okay.
For us, there is some dynamics once in a while where in some of the currency transactions that cause some ups and downs. But generally, that very significant revenue tailwind that we get has very little effect on the EPS line, and that will be the case as well in 2018.
Okay.
Tailwind on the revenue, headwind on the margin, significant headwind on the operating margin, and a minor headwind on EPS. Because if it is mostly between EUR, CHF , and USD, then on the EPS line, we are not affected as strongly as on the other lines.
Okay. That is helpful. Thanks.
Our next question comes from Tycho Peterson from JP Morgan. Please go ahead with your question.
Hey, guys. This is Tejas Savant for Tycho. Just one quick question on Japan. Frank, I think you called out a little bit of strength there in the fourth quarter. Can you just perhaps elaborate on what drove that strength? Is that what you're factoring in into your baseline 2018 forecast? Are you expecting continued weakness there and anything on the growth side would be upside?
That's a good question. It was encouraging to have a little bit of an uptick and an improvement in Japan. We had not seen that in a while. Clearly the industrial recovery and industrial research as part of the industrial recovery made a difference there. I don't want to read too much into it yet because let's see how that goes, whether that is sustainable for several quarters, but as you point out, that's not necessarily something we had expected. Perhaps Japan coming back a little bit on the industrial and industrial research side would be nice. I don't want to call it a trend yet, but we're somewhat encouraged.
Got it. Along similar lines, in preclinical imaging, obviously since 2Q, you've seen some improvement in that business. Are you now comfortable calling for an inflection point there? Finally, any color that you can share in U.S. academic spending trends in light of yesterday's little bit of incremental uplift in the budget and just customer sentiments that you're hearing about in the last couple of months would be great.
Yeah. At preclinical imaging on the order side, I would call it an inflection point. I think for multiple quarters, that's been clear enough. Our competitive position in nuclear molecular imaging and PET/SPECT, particularly PET, has really improved very nicely with some nice key competitive wins recently. That doesn't immediately make for a huge 2018 because some of these deals, literally because of site planning, very often is considerable. Sometimes new buildings have been finished. Some of that will actually go into 2019, but it'll help in 2018. Both MRI and micro-CT and then our new PET business or relatively new PET business in particular are nicely improved. I'll call an inflection point there. We're doing better and that will help both 2018 and 2019. To U.S. academic spending, we're very positive.
The news we got yesterday on two more years of apparently reasonable, good NIH spending, the trickle-down effect that it has on everyone else at universities is positive. Orders were reasonable. We're optimistic about U.S. academic spending. It's great that there seems to be bipartisan consensus that NIH research is really important and continues to get funding. Obviously we haven't gotten any feedback yet there. We're reading the newspapers or whatever, just like you do. I think there was a lot of negativism a year ago in U.S. academic circles about scientific spending, and I think that's largely gone away, and it may just really evaporate now with sort of a two-year budget deal apparently getting solidified. Yeah, I'm already optimistic, and I think that solidifies that. I think the U.S. will be all right.
Thanks, Frank. Appreciate it.
Our next question comes from Puneet Souda from Leerink Partners. Please go with your question.
Yeah. Hi, Frank. Actually, another follow-up on pricing. I was wondering if you can elaborate a bit on the pricing and your thoughts on the NMR segment and essentially on the magnets and what is embedded into the guidance for 2018. Do you think there are certain segments of the market which are more amenable to price increases, versus what you have in past, or is it going to be more steady? And I have a follow-up.
Puneet and others, I do not want to disappoint anyone, but pricing, when we took a bigger step in NMR pricing, was a big driver there for a couple of years. It is now a rather modest supporting measure that we take in most businesses where we can. I would not call it out as one of the bigger drivers these days. I think it is pretty steady state. We try to improve in the low single digits where we can. Some of that gets traction.
There is some other parts in the business where every once in a while there is pricing pressure. It is not that pronounced right now, at least not in the scientific instruments business. But overall, pricing is not one of the big deals for 2018. Maybe that is sort of a very casual way of saying it. So a slight help from pricing, but it is not one of the bigger drivers.
Okay. That is very helpful. And just on the product end, you have highlighted timsTOF quite a bit on the top-down end and proteomics end, and trying to get a sense of that and a couple of other products that are really designed for proteins and the high molecular structure. So, what is your sense there in terms of growth in 2018? You are already seeing some growth from pharma here. What is the expectation for those types of products and in biopharma specifically? Thanks.
So, multiple pieces. timsTOF Pro for proteomics is more for academic and medical school researchers rather than for pharma. Sometimes pharma buys into it as well, but it is more of a academic and government sale. I think we will see some nice adoption there this year, but starting at a lower level, so it is not going to be needle moving, but I think we are going to make good progress in 2018 to where it could become needle moving in 2019 and 2020. That is how I would position it. But technically, in terms of demos, we are very pleased. We think that is really going well and looks very promising. So we seem to be on track there, but it is not going to be needle moving in 2018.
Somewhat similar structural biology in intrinsically disordered proteins, GHz, NMR, a little bit in 2018 in the second half, but really more of a 2019, 2020 story as well. On the other hand, pharma, biopharma, both NMR and mass spec solutions have done well. We think they'll continue to do well and make a bigger difference in 2018, and they've actually developed quite nicely in 2017 already. That's not the TIMS stuff so much. Those tend to be other solutions, MALDI PharmaPulse, MALDI imaging for metabolite imaging, for high-throughput screening, and various other mass spec tools for biologics in particular, as well as NMR tools for a number of pharma applications. I think that's developing very nicely, and I think that'll begin to move the needle in 2018 as it has become bigger last year. Sorry, a bit of a long-winded answer, but I hope it's helpful.
Okay. Yeah, that's very helpful. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Brian Kipp from Citigroup. Please go ahead with your question.
Hi, guys. Thanks for taking the questions. Frank, quick one on the semi business. You guys seem to see some strength in bookings in the back half of the year and continued strength in 4Q. It seems like there were significant inventory builds in 2017 that might not materialize in 2018. I just want to get a sense of where you guys think you are in the cycle, one, and then two, where you guys really play in this end market, whether it's DRAM, NAND, flash, or analog, et cetera.
Yeah. So that's always a very good question, and we don't have the crystal ball either. 2017, including the back half of 2017, was very strong for us. There's now some debate. Nobody expected to be as strong in growth in 2018 as in 2017. We are only partially exposed to the cycle. We have a lot of new technologies where it's more the technology adoption and trying to become the tool of record with various memory and foundry logic vendors, so we're making good progress on that. I'm sure the cycle will not continue at the rapid growth that we had in 2017. Then there's just the general debate to which we really are too small to have a meaningful answer. Some people are predicting a slowdown or a slowdown in the second half.
Some people think the strength of the manufacturers is so that we'll continue to have faster growth. Quite honestly, our data point is too small to really be able to tell something from that. The good news is, even if the cycle is slowing down or perhaps were to reverse, we're only partially dependent on that cycle, and a lot of the new technologies and technology buys would still make us pretty optimistic of our multi-year progress in semiconductor, because we think our X-ray and AFM tools just will be needed more and more by both memory and logic manufacturers. I think good long-term trends and not a lot of insights beyond what you can read elsewhere into what the macro drivers are in semi. We just observe those like everyone else.
All right. Helpful. It's fair to characterize then that you think that the semi cycle, or at least be supportive of accretive growth from your semi end market growth, will be accretive to overall Bruker next year. Then a quick follow-up on the PharmaPulse. I think you gave a number last year at Pittcon on what you think contribution could be in two to three years out. Is it still pacing to that number? Or have things slowed down a little bit?
I think we've seen a little bit of an initial settling as a lot of these solutions are being adopted. I think there is a lot of reporting this week at the SLAS conference in San Diego. I hadn't been there personally, but I hear that a lot of our customers are showing nice results. I think we had that first adoption or first acquisition phase of early adopters, perhaps courageous early adopters. We try to make them really happy and successful, and I think that's succeeding. So it remains to be seen now whether we get now into a broader adoption cycle, sort of not only the pioneers, but really those that now read what the pioneers have been doing, and I think they've been successful.
But as is often the case in these technology adoptions, it is not just one linear ramp, but I would say the first initial pioneering adopters are successful with it. I am encouraged that this will continue to drive a second wave of adoption for people that do not necessarily want to be at the leading or sometimes bleeding edge. It is going well, but it also has these dynamics that often new technology adoptions have. Early adopters seem to be getting good results and be successful.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from Amanda Murphy from William Blair. Please go ahead with your question.
Hi, good afternoon. Thanks. Just a question on the AVANCE NEO console. I was just curious, I know it is early in that launch, but can you give us a sense just in terms of, I do not know if the right way to think about it is just the install base and how many have purchased the console? Just trying to get a sense of where we sit in that adoption curve.
Yeah. Amanda, that is definitely going well. Obviously, we are hopeful on that, and as we look at the number of console orders, upgrade orders since we have launched the AVANCE NEO, it is clearly seen a meaningful uptick compared to normal years when people also upgrade some older consoles. But the AVANCE NEO is such a new architecture and such a new platform that obviously a more significant number of customers are trying to get funding for it.
There will be a multi-year process. It is not all incremental, because in normal years, we also have some of that business, but there is a clear positive uptick, and customers are excited about the AVANCE NEO because it kind of opens up the next decade plus in NMR capabilities and experimental fundamental capabilities. So that is going well. Will play itself out more in 2018 and 2019, but that is clearly clear evidence of a meaningful uptick.
I was going to ask you a similar question, just thinking about your efforts to expand service. I think you talked in the past about maybe kind of captions and low-hanging fruit there. Again, not sure if it is the right way to think about it, but maybe thinking in terms of an install base, how many of those existing platforms now have some sort of service contract? Then just in terms of new platforms, are they pretty much now with service or not at this point?
Well, in the NMR side, if that is what you are referring to, I think we still have a number of years of above-market growth expectations there. There are still some markets that are under-penetrated. We will never get 100% of the academic and government customers under service contracts, but an increasing number finds it useful, especially as we also offer additional services that they find valuable. I think we will continue to look forward to another three to five years of pretty good growth rates in that aftermarket business in NMR and Bruker BioSpin. By the way, we are replicating that now also in the CALID group, in Bruker Daltonics and the mass spec business and Bruker Optics. So you may see an uptick there as well as we are learning a little bit from benchmarking within the businesses or within the overall Bruker group and between the groups.
What I wanted to add is that one of the highlights of our growth has been the consumables growth and aftermarket growth in the microbiology business. That, along with some of the acquisitions in molecular biology consumables and software and so on, that is really working out well, and we expect that to be an important driver of our microbiology and diagnostics business in the years to come. That is on a really good trajectory.
If you take service and aftermarket and aggregate sustainably for thinking about it in terms of high single-digit growth, I think you said, right? Over the long term.
Yeah, that is not bad. Yeah. Not in every single business. I mean, BEST doesn't have much aftermarket. Nano doesn't have the same growth rates. But yeah, in the life science markets, in particular, of course, in the diagnostic microbiology markets, those numbers are good numbers. Yeah.
Okay. Thank you.
Our next question comes from Steve Willoughby from Cleveland Research. Please go ahead with your question.
Good evening, everyone. Two questions for you. First, Tony, I was wondering if you could provide us some insight. You commented that your recent acquisitions were a 45-basis-point headwind to margins in 2017. I was wondering how you're thinking about those acquisitions and their impact to margins in 2018. Secondly, if one of you could comment about the order push-outs that you mentioned in the fourth quarter. Is there any way to quantify those? How much was potentially pushed out? Also, is that something you expect to see come in in the first quarter, or is that something that's pushed out longer than that? Thanks, guys.
Okay. The acquisitions are fully embedded in the businesses now, and we are through the first year of integration, and obviously, they will not be dilutive like they were in 2017. They will be contributing to the overall volume growth in the businesses that they are part of, that will add to our profits going forward. As I mentioned, most of them, the bigger ones that can have an impact, are all meeting our deal model expectations. InVivo is doing very well. Hysitron is doing very well. OST, we have already talked about, but they are embedded in the business now, and they are contributing to the overall growth. Net accretive, I would say. No margin headwind in 2018 anymore from those acquisitions.
No margin except for
Nothing significant.
Except for OST, but right. On the pushouts, the pushouts were. We always talk about this, right? We talk about a quarter doesn't make a year. NMR can be very lumpy. We can expect to have something installed in one quarter, and it can be two quarters later. It can be the next quarter. I'm not prepared to quantify that because it's part of our business. It's part of the dynamics for Q4. That's why we called it out. But there'll be other things that replace it as well as we move forward in the year. What I can say is those pushouts are in our guidance, and they're expected, obviously, to revenue in 2018, and that will be in the first half, whether it's the first quarter or not, I can't tell you right now.
It's not necessarily all in the first quarter.
Yeah.
By the way, we all said a little bit of acceleration into 2017 in the BEST business and some of the big science projects there. So that might be a wash.
Okay. Thanks very much.
Our next question comes from Patrick Donnelly from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead with your question.
Hey, guys. This is Charlie on for Patrick. Appreciate the acceleration in BSI going into 2018. I just wanted to get some of your thoughts around some of your prior commentary in terms of getting towards market growth rates. Could you talk about how you think about those market growth rates and kind of how you view your progress towards that in 2018, in light of a potential GHz sale in the back half?
Okay. Yeah. We expect to have a modest and gradual further increase in that market, in the BSI organic growth rate. As I said earlier, we do not expect any jumps or any big steps forward. We are taking into account the plan for one of the 1 GHz is to probably make it into revenue in the second half of the year. We think by, hopefully, the way things are trending with our high growth initiatives, we hope to get some further gradual acceleration in 2019 and beyond. It may well be that by 2019, whatever the market growth rate will be, obviously in Q4 it was pretty high. We will see what it will be overall in 2018, and we hope to reach that in 2019.
In 2018, looking what the market growth rates are likely to look like, we are making very good progress and further modest improvements, but we are probably still at the lower end of market growth rates in 2018. With continued good margin and EPS expansion and obviously good investment, organic and inorganic, in our high growth initiatives, that will move the needle more and more. That is the overall plan.
Great, thanks. Just one more on BEST. If you could give us a sense of pacing throughout the year, given that there is a little bit of a softer comp in Q1, but we expect that to kind of decelerate as we go out through the year. If you could give me color on maybe underlying growth outside of some of the bigger project accelerations that happened in 2017. Thanks very much.
Yeah, I do not really have any comment on pacing, quarterly pacing on BEST. There is nothing remarkable that I could share with you or that comes to mind. The underlying markets for MRI and other markets are steady growth markets. We have seen an organic decline in 2016, a significant organic growth in 2017, and a maybe low single-digit organic decline in 2018. You kind of have to average that over multiple years, and then you end up at low single-digit growth rates typically for that business. Superimposed, you sometimes have these big science projects, which can be bigger in one year versus another. Maybe that helps you a little bit, but it is a little bit confounding because the end markets for the MRI OEM major customers that we have, they are not going up and down so quickly.
It's more that we get the second derivative of that, so you have a little bit of more fluctuations in the Best business from year to year. But you'd literally almost have to take like a three-year average to get a long-term growth, market growth. That's a reasonable growth, and we've obviously been gaining in market share there, but more like a low single digit to mid-single digit long-term growth.
Great, thanks.
Our next question comes from William March from Janney. Please go ahead with your question.
Hey, guys. How are you? I just got one quick one. Could you talk about what you're seeing in Asia, specifically the slowdown in China in 4Q? Is this kind of the new growth rate to expect? Then what are you seeing specifically within product segments? I know MALDI had seen a little bit of slowdown prior. So just any updates on what's going on in that end market, and any products specifically. Thanks.
Just like Japan, in China, the growth rate overall for the year has still been good. We have been cautioning that nothing grows at 15%-20% forever. We expect China to slow down from those very high growth rates a little bit. I would not read much into a quarter. That sometimes has to do with our sales cycles and whatever deals close early in Q1 versus late in Q4. But longer term, as we have been saying, we would not expect China to grow at 15%+ for us on an ongoing basis. We expect some moderation in our China growth just as Europe has come back and maybe settles now a little bit, as the U.S. looks pretty promising, and maybe we will get a little bit of an improvement in Japan if that becomes sustainable. To the MALDI question.
Yeah, MALDI had sort of taken, it used to be a premier proteomics technique. It is not these days. It is now used for mass spec imaging. It is used for microbiology. It has a number of specialty applications like the MALDI PharmaPulse, ultra-high throughput screening, which are very exciting. But MALDI has kind of grown nicely, actually, but it is very different in the applications and markets today than it was five years ago. MALDI is healthy, but in a different way than it was five years ago. It is really serving different market niches that it has found where it has very unique capabilities that are not matched by other mass spec technologies.
And with that, ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the end of the allotted time for today's question and answer session. At this time, I would like to turn the conference call back over to management for any closing remarks.
Thank you for joining us this evening. During the first quarter, Bruker will participate in the Leerink Healthcare Conference in New York City, Cowen Healthcare Conference in Boston, and Barclays Healthcare Conference in Miami. We invite you to meet us at these conferences or visit us at our headquarters in Billerica, Massachusetts. Thank you, and have a good evening.
Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today's conference call. We do thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.