Benjamin Gliklich here with me, CEO of Element Solutions. Ben, great to have you. We've had you here before, but maybe just, for people in the room that aren't as familiar with Element Solutions, can you kind of give us a rundown of the c
ompany and its, product offering?
Sure, absolutely. Good to be here. Thanks for having me, Rock. Good to be back. Element Solutions is a global specialty chemicals technology business. We provide critical materials and solutions to enable high-value end markets, customers in the electronic supply chain and industrial supply chains. About 70% of the business is electronics-oriented, and we are selling a suite of technologies that really enable high performance in high-performance applications, from data centers through smartphones, at the very leading edge. Business has been around as Element Solutions for seven years. I'm the founding CEO of the company, delivering on a strategy of what we call operational excellence and prudent capital allocation. Running the high-quality businesses, we have better more days than not, and harvesting t
heir exceptionally strong cash flows to reinvest behind them in high-returning ventures.
That has looked like buybacks at times, debt paydown at times, and more recently, some very interesting M&A. 2025 was a record year for the business. Our end markets inflected positively. We're capturing more than our fair share of that. As I mentioned, a couple of very exciting transactions to add capabilities to the business, and 2026 is off to a great start.
Great. Appreciate the background. Maybe just to jump straight into some of those transactions, EFC Gases and Micromax. Could you kinda speak a bit about how these fit into the company's kind of longer-term strategy profile? In what ways does ESI perhaps make these businesses better, or do they primarily enhance ESI's broader offering?
Yeah, absolutely. The vision for our company is simply to be the best in our markets in three distinct areas: the value we provide to our customers, the opportunities we create for our people, and the value we create for our shareholders. That guides our capital allocation framework. The filter we run businesses through is: Does this business enhance our customer value proposition? Does this business enhance the quality of our company? Can this business be better inside than outside? Do we deeply understand it? Those qualitative criteria are then married with financial criteria, which is simply looking at the cash-on-cash return from the investment in year one relative to our free cash flow yield, and we wanna get a premium on M&A. EFC and Micromax both meet all of those criteria and more.
They were outstanding opportunities to deploy capital and improve our business. EFC is a provider of high-purity gases and advanced materials to fast-growing industrial end markets, namely semiconductor fabrication, satellite systems, electrical infrastructure, and transmission equipment. It's a business you would have thought, well, how are gases relevant to most of what we do, which is aqueous or solid state? They really do what we do. They don't synthesize molecules, they formulate products, they purify products, and they support customers with really great applications know-how. They're buying technical-grade gases, they're purifying them, they're mixing them, they're packaging them in interesting ways, and in some cases, they're actually charging them for a customer. Not charging, loading is charging, loading sense of the word into customer use cases. Very customer-intimate, customer-centric, solutions-oriented company, just like Element.
gives us exposure to fast-growing or enhances our exposure to certain fast-growing end markets with great capabilities. Inside of Element, we can leverage our depth of footprint into some of these supply chains to accelerate growth, to improve the customer network and drive that business faster. Micromax is a bit of a different story, where Micromax is a long-tenured company in the electronic supply chain, selling electronic inks and pastes. This was a business that was a part of DuPont, that became a part of Celanese, and we acquired it from Celanese thereon. The best technology for Thick Film Paste innings in the market, really well-established brands. Been a bit orphaned in its prior iterations. You know, Celanese isn't in the electronics materials space, and that's a market we know really well.
We sell materials that form circuit pathways for our customers and their use cases, and these thick film inks and pastes are a part of that value chain or ecosystem. It really does fill what was a gap in our portfolio with a very high-value set of technologies that we believe we can make better as a part of Element Solutions.
Great. Just with those transactions kind of altering some of the end markets, which you're kinda selling into here, I would just love kind of a maybe broad update on your, what you view as your end market exposure, particularly in consumer electronics is one that's been spoken about a bit more. Maybe as we hone into the electronics segment, how have you seen kind of your growth in both the high-value niches, call it, AI data centers versus kind of more legacy consumer electronics?
I'd say that EFC doesn't really change our end market exposures too much, nor does Micromax, for that matter. They're both broadly defined in the electronic space, and they're not that significant from a revenue contribution perspective to move the needle materially. I think they deepen us and maybe broaden us a little bit, but overall, and we owe our investors an investor data sort of be a bit more precise on our end market exposures, because the last time we did that was in 2022. The theme that runs through what's happened in all of our businesses, particularly on the electronic side, is that the concentration in consumer electronics has declined as our participation in the growth from what I'd call B2B electronics markets, high-performance computing data center applications, satellite applications, has accelerated.
If you go back to 2022, we would have said about 25% of the business was in smartphones. That number has come down, and that's been replaced by what we call data storage and computing, which at the time was around 15%, and that's clearly gone up. The, the trend of electronics intensity and higher value, higher, more technically challenging electronics content in these B2B applications is a real one, and it's accelerated.
I see. Just kinda as we understand your outlook in kind of both of those end markets within electronics, I think last quarter, you saw still some strength in the consumer electronics side of things, with assembly, particularly seeing some benefits from that. At the same time, we do have this trend of memory prices, potentially impacting consumer electronics. How do you view that playing out in 2026?
The business accelerated in Q4, and our circuitry business certainly outperformed our expectations. Some of that is driven by a better-than-expected smartphone unit environment, right? Smartphone units grew a bit more than I think was the baseline, data center investment accelerated as well. We're an active participant, enabler of that market. As we look to 2026, what we said is we think that 2026 is a continuation of what we saw in the back half of 2025. I think a tweak to that is that our expectation for the smartphone market is for it to be a bit softer, you know, down a little bit in 2026, year-over-year. The PCB market, right? We were expecting to grow 6% on a volume basis.
It was 9% in 2025. Our circuitry business should outgrow that because we're participating more in the faster-growing vectors of that market, and that side of the market has not slowed down at all. That 6%, why would it be slower than 2025? I think that takes into consideration some of the concern around the memory price dynamic, where memory prices have increased, and the expectation is that consumer electronics will get more expensive, and that'll have an impact on demand. Haven't seen that yet, but I think that there's a bit of consensus around that happening. You can't look at that in isolation, right? Where are the chips going? Where are the memory chips going? They're going into high-performance computing applications and data centers, and our value proposition in that supply chain is greater.
Our volume or our value per unit is greater. As we look out to 2026, we see real growth in our circuitry business, driven by the data center market, offset slightly, but not entirely, only partially by risk in consumer electronics.
I see. Maybe just kinda drilling down into the product level within electronics. Cuprion is an area which we've grown more excited about, as I think you have as well. I think we saw, I guess, the manufacturing ramp up. I believe your first manufacturing site is set to be complete soon. Could you kinda just walk through the opportunity associated with this Cuprion business line? I think previously you've noted kinda demand exceeding production capacity on the last call. I'm just wondering how that may influence your commercialization plan in terms of the timing and scale of a potential second site.
Cuprion is a really compelling materials science, materials technology platform we acquired two years ago, two and a half years ago. It came to us as materials technology. It was a really interesting material that had a broad range of uses. We bought the business for a modest upfront payment with the goal of commercializing it. That's a long journey. When you're bringing new material science to market, you're standing up your own internal manufacturing process, you're helping customers build the capability to use it, and then not just use it, but use it in high volume. That's a complex effort. It's taken us several years. We crossed an important chasm in Q1 of this year, where we made our first external product qualification milestone payment.
The structure of the acquisition was an upfront payment with a series of deferred payments tied to revenue and certain other milestones. One of the most important milestones was, has a customer qualified this product to use in its manufacturing? We crossed that chasm in the first instance in Q1, and we expect to pay another milestone payment here at some point, either in Q1 or Q2. That's two commercialized product use cases for Cuprion. And those are the first two. At the same time, we've been standing up our supply chain, and as you mentioned, we have a mid-scale site that is beginning to ramp production. That production ramp will happen over the next couple quarters. The comment I made was not that demand exceeds production capacity, but the pipeline.
The pipeline is the commercial opportunities that are being developed, which is different than sales, right? Sales are demand. Now, at the moment, we have controlled the number of potential customers because we don't want demand to outstrip supply. As we're ramping this site, we have excess product. We're gonna start doing more sampling, and that will convert more of these qualifications. As you, as you'd expect, we're developing plans for the second site, and, you know, expect that to, to come to become a reality over the next couple of years. Our expectations for this business were always high, but our confidence interval around it was wider as we were, you know, building as we were proving it out, I would say, over the past couple of years.
As we sit here today, we've got line of sight to real revenue and an expectation of EBITDA contribution next year, and the confidence interval around that is closed. It's tighter. The potential for the business is very, very profound, but the timing of that remains subject to a bunch of variables. We're very excited about it, and we're proving it out here and now, every day.
Sure. Just as you ramp up production capacity over the near and medium term, how do you think about, I guess, the need for, I guess, customer diversification, either in regards to end markets or just kind of being contracted with a specific customer?
I'm not worried about customer concentration here. Basically, all of the customers who we've been willing to sample have expressed interest in the product, and it's more than a handful at this point. They are the leaders, I would say, from a technology perspective. If they're adopting the technology, I'm confident that the rest of the supply chain will be interested when we make it available to them.
Makes sense. I think previously on the call, you had called out, kind of the potential goal of reaching $100 million, or it was $hundreds of millions of sales for Cuprion, kind of in the medium term. Just curious, what the capital requirements may be to hit that goal?
To be very clear, it's not a goal. The earn-out associated with the acquisition is capped at $100 million of revenue by 2030. That has to be certainly, that's the target of the selling shareholders, some of whom are, you know, my colleagues today. We're racing to accomplish that because it's a win for them and for us. It's a high-margin product, and, you know, if we can reach that level, it will be a really meaningful contributor to profits. The capital requirements are not insignificant. You know, the first plant we built cost north of $20 million. The next plant, we're still sketching out, it'll cost more 'cause it will have greater capacity.
In the scheme of, you know, large chemical manufacturing plants, this is not a particularly expensive one. There will be a capital requirement associated with scaling the business, but it should fit within the framework of, you know, 2 to 2.5% of sales and CapEx on a recurring basis. We can support a couple of large projects. For us, this is a large project per year, within that context.
Sure. Maybe just shifting over to Argomax. Can you kind of just explain that technology and kind of the size of that offering in the medium to long term? I understand there's been kind of a recent shift away from EVs and potentially Western EVs, and in the longer term, over to infrastructure and data center systems. Can you kind of speak to that and the trajectory for that as well?
Argomax, you know, taking a step back, you know, Element is not a blockbuster product-type company. Our model is to work closely with our customers to solve their problems, and our customers have a plethora of problems. We've got a lot of different SKUs. Part of the beauty of the business is managing that complexity, being able to come up with niche solutions that create some level of moat around what we're doing. That having been said, we just talked about Active Copper or Cuprion and the potential associated with that. Argomax is another one of these, I won't call it blockbuster, but product brands of scale in the portfolio. Argomax is a silver-based material that's used for high thermal applications around semiconductors.
The first big use case we had was power electronics for electric vehicles. This is for the power module and the power inverter that inverts the energy from the battery to the motor. Using this material allows for less thermal loss, which is to say, less heat escapes the system, which is more energy that can go towards the motor. It gets better range. It can also take higher power densities, so it doesn't melt, like alternative materials might. You can use fewer of these power semiconductors and get better throughput. Really great technology and product capability. It was early adopted by a certain, you know, large EV manufacturer. The second set of adopters were also very nimble. They were Chinese leading EV OEMs with high-performance offerings.
We went from being customer concentrated there to being more and more diversified. We're starting to see some of the Western OEMs adopt the technology as well. The business has been growing nicely, despite the EV market not having had such a great trajectory in the past, you know, 12 months. A bit of a step back, especially from one of our customers. The next market where there's a, you know, high thermal, high power applications is data centers, and we are starting to see adoption of this technology or an ancillary product based on this technology in that market. Today, it's concentrated in electric vehicles, there's a lot of room to run and interest in this from the data center market.
I guess, how is the R&D or, just the process of kind of spec-ing in with this new type of customer been for that product, the ancillary product?
It's been interesting because we thought of the product as really having a great value proposition to the electric vehicle market, and most of our energy and research and resources were dedicated to broadening our penetration of the EV market. Only recently have we pivoted towards other potential applications, and we're finding them, is what I would say. The work is more around applications know-how, and certain incremental product development at the moment, and we have very interested counterparties that are engaging with us in our applications labs to experiment with the material here and now.
Understood. I think one of the other products brought up in the electronic sphere would be Shadow Plus. I think the latest was you guys were trying to kind of spec that in with certain certain OEMs. Just curious how this progress has been going for that direct metallization technology, and what you see as potentially the near and medium-term revenue opportunities there.
Direct metallization is a circuit board metallization technology that rather than using copper, uses carbon. This is a way of forming circuit pathways, actually more environmentally friendly, less water intensive, less energy intensive than conventional copper. You're in a supply chain that is change resistant, right? Driving adoption of something, even if it's got a really strong value proposition, takes some time and highly qualified. We've been fighting an uphill battle, I would say, to get this new technology qualified. We've got receptive customers and supply chains, but it just takes some time to get that done. Our new product for this is a really nifty new capability that the supply chain is pretty excited about.
Again, these things take a bit of time.
Fair enough. I think you had previously mentioned the expectation of PCBs growing at, I believe you said 6%, in 2026. Obviously, we all have our autos forecasts as well. Just kind of based on both historical levels as well as some of these newer products, maybe Cuprion being one, how do you expect your premium to be over kind of these baseline growths of the end markets?
Yeah. If you go back to 2024, we started doing what we called our electronics roadshow, where we tried to reintroduce our electronics portfolio, which really changed a lot from, you know, the businesses we originally acquired in 2013 and 2014, 2015. We looked at a few indicators as the underlying growth drivers and then explained why we thought we could grow faster and how much we could grow faster. For the assembly business, we said electronic systems value growth was the best driver, and that was, you know, somewhere around 4%. We said we could grow a point or two faster than that, and last year we grew, you know, three points faster.
The circuit board business is driven by PCB square meters, which we thought would be a mid-single-digit grower, 5 to 7%, and we thought we could grow 2 or 3 points faster. Last year, PCB square meters grew 9%, and our circuit board business grew in the low teens. We're outpacing that as well by more than we thought we could. In the semi business, the front-end business, we said would be a high-single-digit grower, that we could grow about five points faster then. MSI last year was up six, and our semiconductor business was up 13, and that also includes our semi-assembly business, which we thought we could grow 5-10 points faster than.
2025, a growth year where our growth, you know, exceeded even our outgrowth expectations, I would say. The industrial business on the other side, you know, was flattish on the top line, but grew earnings in the mid-single digits, and that's operational excellence. That's better sourcing, productivity in the plants, pricing discipline, and, you know, that flattish number is outgrowth relative to the market indicators as well as we see it. As we roll to 2026, our expectation is the PCB market is up 6%, and that's not our internal expectation. That's, you know, the sort of most trusted data vendor on the space's expectation, and we think we'll grow faster than that again this year.
MSI is supposed to be up roughly the same. Again, we think we can outgrow by, you know, 5+ points. Our assembly business is same sort of dynamic where, you know, electronics systems value is growing because of data center applications, and we've got some really great capabilities supporting that. That all translates to, you know, high single-digit overall organic growth for the business, which is what's contemplated in our guidance. We layer in the acquisitions we made.
Sure. You touched on specialties. Just curious if you could speak a bit to the strength that we saw in specialties, specifically in Q4, and just more broadly with the recent kind of shifting around the business, the divestiture of graphics, and now bringing in EFC. On a go-forward basis, how should we think about the long-term growth and margin of this new specialties business?
Yeah. The specialties business is a collection of outstanding businesses. It's three businesses. They provide surface treatment technologies into industrial applications, automotive, heavy machinery and equipment, building products. These are markets that have been really beat up over the past several years. We saw some nice growth in Asia last year. A decline in the West. We're not assuming things get better in 2026. Through the cycle, these are growth businesses. Maybe not like our electronics businesses, but they should be growing in the low to mid-single digits. We should outgrow that between share opportunities, and pricing opportunities, and strong execution.
You've seen us deliver, you know, earnings growth in each of the past three years in this sector, despite a pretty tough macro, and that's offsetting lower utilization in our sites, because volumes have been down. There's a lot to be excited about in the medium term on the, on the specialty side before adding in EFC. Divesting the graphics business, which was a slower growing, more capital-intensive business, lower margin, and replacing that with EFC, which is a much faster growing, high-margin business, tremendous opportunities, getting some help at some point, again, we're not counting on it in 2026, from the macros and the industrial surface treatment business, more of the same from our offshore business, which has been growing really nicely, over the past several years at attractive incremental margins.
It's a growth vector for the company.
Understood. Perhaps just across the whole enterprise, I know you probably won't get into specific end market breakdowns, but just in regards to the auto exposure, which I think maybe in 2022 was around 25% in either segment. I'm just curious, kinda how should we think about that within both, kinda regional, as well as single OEM diversification, and how that might compare on the EV side versus ICE vehicles?
Sure. Our industrial surface treatment business, about 50% automotive. Our electronics business is less.
It's been a tough auto environment. Our industrial surface treatments business was flattish last year from a revenue perspective, but our electronics business in auto was growing. It was growing because our circuit board chemistries for final finish are performing very well in the Chinese EV supply chain. It's growing because our power electronics business, we talked about Argomax, was gaining share within newly launched platforms in the EV space. You're just seeing a proliferation of content in even ICE vehicles, of electronics content, be it sensors, screens, and compute. We view the automotive market as a growth market for Element overall. It's shrinking as a percentage of the overall electronics portfolio, given the pace of growth in our data center-oriented business, but it's still very good, high-margin growth business for us in electronics.
On the industrial side, it's a coiled spring. We've been able to eke out earnings growth, again, through making the business better, productivity enhancements, offsetting a lack of absorption in the plants, and at some point, those volumes come back, and particularly in the West, where our industrial business skews, and that will translate into pretty compelling incrementals.
Sure. Perhaps, just looking at trends in autos, I think obviously previously, we've seen kind of shift to more EV sales in China, in the US, although decelerated somewhat at this moment. I'm curious, maybe the next big shift within autos would just be the shift towards autonomous driving. Does this have the ability to be as big of a needle mover as kind of the prior shift to EVs for ESI specifically?
Yeah. I think as a general rule of thumb, the more technically challenging and higher reliability the electronics have to be, the more value there is for us, because there's less competition and there's higher risk assigned by the supply chain. When you're talking about autonomous systems, the cost of failure is tremendous, and the circuit density has to be really high, because there's a lot of computations that go into autonomy. That would be a higher value opportunity than a conventional circuit board and an infotainment system in a car. You know, this is the... well, last year, when we started talking about AI as a theme, maybe two years ago, it wasn't simply the software and the AI sort of user experience of that moment.
It was this shift in what people were willing to delegate to machines, and what that meant in terms of the proliferation of high density, high technical challenge, high reliability electronics to the edge of networks. That's autonomous cars, that's robotics. Those are massive addressable market expansion opportunities for Element over the medium term.
Understood. Perhaps just shifting gears to more of ESI's cost structure. I think something which maybe there was a bit more of a spotlight on this past quarter were ESI's raw materials. I think typically you have the metals and the non-metals portion. Could you kind of speak through how these flow through ESI's PNL and walk through some of the hedging impacts that we saw in 4 Q?
We're an asset-light business. We very rarely are synthesizing molecules in asset-intensive manufacturing processes. Most of what we do is formulation. We're buying compounds from molecule synthesizers and mixing them in interesting ways, then developing applications know-how around that product or that set of products. Our costs of goods are not fixed assets. Primarily the raw material. 80% of our cost of goods is variable. It's raws, 20% is fixed. Most of that 80% today, given what's happened in metal prices, is associated with metals, and most of the metals we're buying are pass-through. They have an impact on our margin percentage, but not on our margin dollars. When the price of silver goes up, our sales go up commensurately, right? 'Cause it's captured in selling price.
We're able to offset inflation in many commodities with pass-through mechanisms, other commodities with surcharge mechanisms, and then the rest of our buy is niche raws, really specialty molecules. When those costs go up, we negotiate price increases with our customers. The margins are quite stable. They're not simply driven by volume, and occasionally there's a bit of a lag where we're catching up with our customers when we've seen inflation. Our business is more OpEx intensive than a conventional chemicals company because our workforce is primarily not on the factory floor, running the equipment. They're out with customers, selling, providing technical service or innovating to solve their problems.
OpEx is a bit higher than your benchmark chemicals business, but it's much more variable because most of these people have high incentive compensation percentage of their earnings, and so on tough years, our OpEx flexes down. If you look at the business's trajectory over the past several years and diversity of end markets, gross margins have been stable. They're back close to prior peak, and OpEx has flexed in line with demand, so the EBITDA margin is very stable, and the cash flows are even more stable because when the business is in a, in an end market, in a challenged end market environment, it releases a lot of working capital. Cash flow conversion is better in lower demand environments. The hallmarks of the business are the stable margins and the strong cash flows.
On the capital allocation side of things, I mean, we've spoken this a bit in regards to, the two acquisitions. Just coming out of those acquisitions, leverages and what I would say is a relatively still favorable position. How should we think about M&A priorities and, cadence, over the medium term, say, next, 3 to 5 years or so?
We talked about M&A earlier and what our criteria are. Our leverage ceiling is 3.5 x. We sit here today with three turns of leverage, and that gives us some capacity. We don't like to run the business bumping up against that leverage ceiling. It reduces our flexibility and optionality. Our filter, our hurdle for M&A is high, right? We've got outstanding businesses. There's a scarcity of businesses of this quality in these end markets, so we have to be opportunistic, positioning ourselves to act when these opportunities become available. We don't get to choose when these opportunities become available. As we sit here today with three turns of leverage, the door isn't closed on incremental M&A.
The bar is a little higher because of our bandwidth, and I would say a little bit less capacity than we had a year ago at this time. By the end of this year, leverage, you know, is trending down back towards 2.5 x. You know, we'll be positioned to continue. I wouldn't say the pipeline is particularly robust at the moment, but we're not also actively trying to catalyze transactions. Sometimes we're surprised by when great assets become available, and we believe we can be the home of choice for the types of businesses that fit our model.
Sure. On the other side of things, just following the divestiture of the graphics business, when you look at your remaining, your current businesses, are there any that you would view as either non-core or less core that you'd be willing to sell at a, at the right price, of course?
We've always characterized or we historically characterized the graphics business and the offshore business as less core, which is to say there's less overlap from a facility perspective, technology perspective, and so forth. The graphics business we sold. We didn't actively sell it. We didn't seek a seller. We were approached. We're not emotional about any of our businesses. If someone is excited about, you know, paying us more than what we believe to be fair value for one of our businesses, we'll entertain that. We will not seek to sell any of our businesses. They're great businesses. They're contributing nicely. There are opportunities to make each of them bigger and better over time, and that's where we're spending our time.
I'm happy to open for questions from the audience. Maybe just one more on my side. Just given the recent spin of an electronics materials pure play in this space, could you just provide an updated view of ESI's competitive peer set, maybe across both the major end markets as well as the two segments you guys serve?
It's a good question. You know, the differentiating things about Element Solutions Electronics business is the complementarity of the businesses we're in. There are bigger electronics materials players out there that have broader portfolios, but everything we do fits together nicely. We form the circuit pathways in electronics, whether that's in a printed circuit board, that's the assembly materials or, you know, in the package and semiconductor. We can sell and provide transparency to key OEMs and end markets on systems-level performance. If you use this suite of products, you get this systems-level performance, which is really different than selling product performance. By virtue of this breadth and this, what, we're not competing with any one company in all of our markets.
In our circuit board business, we see Qnity, we see a business that was called Atotech, that's part of MKS. In our semiconductor business, we see a completely different set of competitors. In our die-attach business, it's a completely different set of competitors. In our assembly business, different set of competitors. There's no one in the market who can do all of the things that we can do and build the data and collateral to show systems performance the way that we can. That's highly differentiating and increasingly important as innovation in electronics is moving from scaling down transistor size on node size on semiconductors into packaging applications and into the back end, which is where we, which is where we thrive.
I can definitely see the value of kind of being a systems solutions provider. I'm just curious that as you kind of go down this path, what level of kind of additional synergies can you see just from kind of bundling in these offerings to the customers you're already with?
You know, bundling is a bad word, because we're value selling each component, and it's to a different customer, specifically. What we're trying to do is show how the products work together to the OEM, who will then specify these products to their suppliers, and then we're interacting with each of their suppliers, who are our direct customers, on a product-by-product basis. The opportunity here is to capture value by providing value to the OEM on the systems level and driving preference through their supply chain for our offerings.
Sure.
That translates into, you know, better pricing, more market share, and more at bats, because the bigger our seat at the table is, the more exposure we have to emerging customer pain points, which then drives our innovation, right? There's a flywheel here. By being a preferred supplier, you're not just capturing value today, but you're a partner discovering and co-developing solutions to future, to future pain points, right? Which drives growth for the business over time.
Understood. Appreciate that. Fahd, looks like we're pretty low on time, so, please join me in, thanking-