Okay. All right, welcome back. I'm Larry Biegelsen, the Medical Device Analyst at Wells Fargo, and it's my pleasure to host this fireside chat with the management team from HeartFlow. With us, we have John Farquhar, the CEO, Vikram Verghese, CFO. Hardest names to pronounce, by the way.
You got it right, though.
I got it right? Okay. Campbell Rogers, Chief Medical Officer. That one's easy. I think John is going to start with a couple slides, and then we'll go into Q&A.
Yeah, great. So thanks, Larry. It's a pleasure to be here, and you did pronounce my name correctly, so thank you for that. I've heard much worse. Right, Vikram?
Yeah.
Okay, I'll give you a quick overview, and then we'll go into the Q&A here with Larry. And obviously with me are Vikram, our CFO, and Campbell, our CMO. Both Campbell and Vikram will share in this discussion. Just to ground everybody, for those that aren't totally familiar with HeartFlow, we're an AI company. We use AI to diagnose coronary artery disease. We're focused solely on coronary artery disease. We've been around. The company was founded in 2010, and we just IPO'd about a year and a half ago. Our current focus right now is the symptomatic market. Okay. The symptomatic market's about a $5 billion TAM, and we've had good commercial adoption through this, but we still have a tremendous amount of upside relative to penetration just in this TAM in of itself.
We've got a couple very attractive growth drivers that I'll speak to. One is Plaque Analysis, and this is Plaque Analysis for the symptomatic patients, and I'll talk about that. That growth wave is underway, so to speak. Then, on the near horizon here, and Campbell will speak to the clinical plan on this, we have a very attractive adjacent TAM of $6 billion, and that's high-risk, asymptomatic patients. So you'll hear themes of this as we discuss, and I presume I'll get some questions as well. I won't get into the financials. I think everybody's probably familiar with that. The one thing I'll say that is core to our story is this theme of data. Okay. This is both clinical data that we really believe is the currency of the realm in working with cardiologists.
We have over 625 peer-reviewed publications, thanks in large part to all the work that Campbell's done over the years. Then the other type of data we have is the data that we use to train our AI algorithm, and we have a proprietary database of over 200 million annotated CT images. We use this data to improve our current algorithms as well as to create new ones. So both of those are really important components of the story here. To ground everybody, so put your brain back in the symptomatic world for a minute, to ground everybody on the problem that we're trying to solve.
Right now, if you're a patient and you have chest pain, dizziness, shortness of breath, some type of a symptom, ultimately, you find your way to a cardiologist, and that cardiologist diagnoses you not by looking at the actual disease, but instead off of symptoms and surrogates. That's the standard of care, and the standard of care has poor outcomes, as illustrated by half of all heart attacks are a surprise. Okay, and that's well understood. Very high false positive rate. Over 55% of patients end up in the cath lab for an intervention that they don't need. Similarly, 30% of patients are told they're okay, only to go home and have an event. So there's a real problem here, and there's a real opportunity to create a new standard of care. We at HeartFlow think we play an important role in creating this.
Okay, in the tail end, just at the end of 2021, here in the U.S., CCTA, so coronary CTA, was put in the guidelines as a level 1A test ahead of all other alternatives. HeartFlow was put in as level 2. This isn't just in the U.S., this is around the world in Europe, U.K., and Japan as well. The clinical data that substantiates this as better medicine is well understood, and we're working to change behavior patterns and practice patterns to change this standard of care. The company's had good success up to now, but we have a lot of road still to pave here. This slide illustrates our platform. We have a holistic AI platform that's end to end, regardless of where the physician needs us on the continuum.
We have a tool that we provide for all CCTAs to help CT readers read it more efficiently and with less variability. We have separately reimbursed FFRCT and Plaque Analysis products that are separate reimbursements for our customers, separate revenue streams for us. We've just integrated our staging platform that allows physicians to manage patients with plaque relative to their risk level. Then we're launching, in the process of launching, what we call a HeartFlow PCI Navigator tool that's intended to bring the best of both worlds from both Plaque Analysis and FFRCT into the cath lab for interventional cardiologists. Everything we do is backed by clinical evidence. We believe in the power of prospective clinical evidence, and the truth, ultimately, we believe, will differentiate us more than anything else out there.
We integrate seamlessly into electronic medical record systems and PACS systems, and we like to do everything we can to make our physicians' lives as easy as possible. Again, just relative to the addressable markets, in the near term, we've got this $5 billion U.S. TAM comprised of about $3 billion for FFRCT, $2 billion for Plaque Analysis, and we're lightly penetrated. So there's a lot of headroom here to continue to grow and drive a new standard of care. Then I'll talk about our plans for asymptomatic here in a moment. Plaque Analysis, as I mentioned, in the symptomatic world, this is our current growth driver. There's been a number of catalysts in 2026, a couple or one still to come. At the start of 2021, we had a Category I code take effect. That was quite important to us.
Just last July, as I mentioned, we've launched our Plaque Analysis staging tool into our platform. Then in November, we have our one-year data from our DECIDE trial that's reading out. That's going to show both change in LDL as well as outcomes as measured by CV and MACE. So that's an important endpoint to get out in the market. You can see the commercial metrics. We started the year with only about 500 Plaque Analysis and about 500 accounts. We're going to end the year north of 1,200. So really good adoption there. We're guiding to a midpoint of about $30 million in Plaque Analysis revenue this year. This is exponential growth relative to what we did last year. We only did about $1.5 million last year. Commercial coverage is coming online really nicely.
We've got still one big payer left out in front of us in Anthem and a long tail of regional payers. We're very pleased with where we are relative to commercial coverage. Again, that's helping drive adoption as well. Plaque, we believe, again, in the power of prospective evidence. We have that proving our accuracy. We have that proving our reproducibility. We have our DECIDE registry, which is 23,000 prospective patients in a prospective registry. That's reading out the one-year outcomes, again, reading out at the end of this year. These are the 90-day endpoints. We continue to educate the market on how to use Plaque Analysis. One important element of this, again, is our staging system. This is a staging system of 23,000 patients followed up to 16 years. You can see how the risk curves spread by stage.
What this does is this is intended to enable physicians to put a more precise risk profile on their individual patients so they can manage them better. This is early in the market, but we're seeing really good feedback on this. Now, with that, we've got a great Plaque Analysis product in the market. We've got a great FFRCT product in the market. But up to now, we haven't done enough to take that technology and put it in the hand of interventional cardiologists.
Interventional cardiologists obviously are an important stakeholder in the health system ecosystem, and we want every one of them to pound the table saying, "I want a CT plus HeartFlow for every patient that comes to my cath lab." That's part of the strategic rationale behind our HeartFlow PCI Navigator product, and I'll let Campbell sort of speak, and we've got a quick animation in here to show you, and he'll speak to the value of that.
Great. Thanks, John. Just as John said, to reiterate, coronary intervention is one of the very few areas of medical treatment for which there is no pre-planning today across the entire waterfront of medicine. We believe that this Navigator tool provides, for the first time, pre-procedure information that allows interventional cardiologists to go into the procedure knowing what they're going to do, knowing what equipment they're going to need, knowing what complexities might arise during the procedure. Really important on the left-hand side is there are two kind of foundational building blocks to this product. One is the lesion-specific fractional flow reserve, which John mentioned. It's unique in the market in its ability to tell an interventionalist exactly where in somebody's coronary tree, exactly where the drop in pressure is that may benefit from a stent.
That's become a kind of a standard tool for deciding when and where and if to put stents in. We provide that information, and what Navigator does is it takes that and displays it, and you'll see this animation in one second, in a way that interventional cardiologists can digest. Even though they may not be trained to read CT, which is its own kind of training pathway, et cetera, they get the information, and they can use it. This is the first and only PCI planning tool. Just as John said that the FFR component for non-invasive testing, we see as the most highly validated non-invasive test because of the clinical data John mentioned and becoming standard of care. This, we expect quite quickly, will become standard of care in the cath lab, people going in to do interventions.
We expect the interventional cardiologist will feel compelled to say to their imaging colleagues, "I need the FFR, and I need Navigator before I'm going to do a PCI on your patient. Please ensure that that's available to me when the time comes." Final piece in terms of the clinical evidence, as John mentioned, following the same playbook, we are developing clinical evidence. In fact, one of the most important pieces on the lower right of this slide is called the P4 study, which we sponsored, will be the kind of hallmark first late-breaking trial at the TCT meetings in a couple of months' time. Quite a lot of focus on this as an area in the interventional world writ large. If you go to the next slide, John. This is now, and if you click in, this is the user interface.
If the user clicks on it, as you see happening here, clicks on the Navigator button, what you see appear is this interface. Just very quickly, you'll see images on the left of the coronary arteries. The color map is the fractional flow reserve, the flow that's being reduced, and where it turns yellow or red is where the stent needs to be placed. When it clicks off and on, the yellow and blue are the plaque itself. Where is their calcium, for example, which can pose particular problems to interventional cardiologists, and for which there are tools now to help manage calcium during a procedure. This has been shown to be very useful in deciding, where do I use such tools? Do I need them in this patient, but maybe not that patient, et cetera.
Finally, there are measurements being made, which you may be able to see on the screen, based on what's happening on the right-hand side. Where is the FFR drop? That's where the stent needs to go. How long does the stent need to be? How big does the stent need to be? All things which will help inventory planning, anticipation of how long a procedure will take, et cetera. All of this factors into efficiency in the lab, better outcomes for patients because the material is available, and a better experience, very importantly, for the interventional cardiologist, him or herself, in terms of being able to serve the patient in an efficient and effective way.
Yeah. Awesome. I should say, we have launched Navigator in a very limited fashion this fiscal year, and that was really by design. We wanted to make sure that the team stayed laser-focused on driving Plaque Analysis adoption, which they have and are doing. Going into 2027, we will have more capacity, and we certainly look forward to bringing this to more of our customers. Just a note on the commercial model here at HeartFlow. We currently have about 300 frontline FTEs. And those fall in roughly three different camps. The first in the middle of this slide are our territory sales managers. We talk about this go-to-market model where we go to accounts that are already up and running, doing a Coronary CTA program, and we sell HeartFlow into them. That is the role of our territory sales managers.
These are the same folks that as Plaque Analysis gets adopted, they are selling Plaque Analysis into those same accounts. That is an important arm of the team. Historically, they have been laser-focused on the imaging physician. That is kind of point of call number one. As we launch Navigator, the interventional cardiologist will also become an interface for them. Once an account is up and running, we have got a second team out in the referring community, and these are our territory account managers. This is a team for those of us that were part of the IPO journey. We talked about expanding this team in preparation for Plaque Analysis demand. They are out there educating general cardiologists on how Plaque Analysis can help them better medically manage their patients, helping general cardiologists understand that a CT plus HeartFlow pathway is available and if they have interest, where should they refer into.
That is a very important arm there. The third piece is our customer success organization. Customer success is forward deployed into our accounts. As we go live, they help implement our technology. They work through any workflow issues that might have, and they integrate into their EMR and PACS system. So another really important part of the commercial model. We like to say if you have seen one integration, you have seen one. Every one is a little bit customized. This team has a lot of local knowledge on how to kind of take our platform and meet the customer where they need us to be. We are growing across all three fronts here. Again, this is in anticipation of strong demand that we want to stay in front of for 2027. Shifting gears here, we just talked about the symptomatic world.
We have been very consistent in HeartFlow's strategy. We want to treat the highest patients with the greatest risk first. We did this in the symptomatic world with our FFRCT technology. We are currently doing it with Plaque Analysis. As we move upwards, we do not want to walk past the next patient set. There are three subpopulations here of high-risk asymptomatic patients. The first is patients with a prior MI or PCI. That is about a $1 billion TAM. The second is patients with prior Plaque Analysis, and the third is patients with prior calcium. All of these subpopulations are already sitting in the healthcare system. We believe with the right clinical data, we can go to payers and expand the current coverage to apply to these populations. We are going to initiate three separate randomized controlled trials over the next couple of quarters that we believe can open up these markets before 2030.
I will let Campbell speak a little bit more to the RCTs that we have planned.
Sure. You want me to go to the next slide? Great. There are three, as John mentioned. They correspond to those three subsets of this high-risk asymptomatic market overall. The first you see on the left is REFINE CAC. That is in patients who have documented coronary calcium through a calcium score or through a chest CT done for other reasons. The value proposition here, of course, is that it demonstrated that calcium, while a marker of disease, is insufficient granularity as to the risk a patient may have. The study will enroll beginning. We will show the timelines on the next slide. Enroll patients with calcium scores between 1 and 299 in a randomized way, and everything 300 and over will be in a registry. The randomization will be in half of the patients.
We will show them their plaque results and show it to their physicians in a way that will help manage care. In the other half, they will undergo a CT, and that will be blinded. The primary endpoint is, does the decision-making change in the physician's part over the first several months of the study? Really importantly, these patients will be followed out for a year and a half looking at two things. Does their lipid management, their cholesterol become better managed? Is their LDL lower if they have the plaque? Second, does their plaque itself change? They will be re-CT'd after 18 months to look for an interval change in plaque. So that is the first. The second
is, as John mentioned, patients who had plaque identified before and now they are asymptomatic, yet we know they have plaque, we know they are at high risk. This is a study looking very specifically at will aggressive LDL lowering with PCSK9 inhibition modify plaque over, again, the same 18-month period? Then finally on the right, fascinating study, is REWRITE CAD. The third of these populations is people who have had a prior stent put in or have had a heart attack. Yes, they are asymptomatic, but you know they have coronary disease, and they are known to be at very high risk. Our thesis is showing them their plaque, showing their physicians their plaque, even though they already had a stent put in, will compel better lipid management, better adherence by patients, lower LDLs, and better plaque healing over, again, the same 18-month window.
Three very similar studies, acute changes, also looking at longer-term outcomes.
Want to speak to the timeline?
Yep. The timelines you see here, the first two, the post-MI study, post-PCI study, REWRITE, will begin later this year. The same for the calcium score study later this year, and the serial plaque study sometime in the very first part of 2027. The primary endpoints for the first two are decision-making at 90 days, and then you see the later time point of changes in plaque and changes in LDL. The serial plaque study, because we're specifically studying a management we are imposing, which is PCSK9 inhibition, only has that later time point when the second imaging procedure is done 18 months out.
Yeah, perfect. Again, the large adjacent TAM that we really think we've got a good chance and a good strategy to get into around kind of 2028, 2029 timeframe. One of the reasons we really like this strategy is it's a play or a playbook that we've executed before. If you think about what we did with FFRCT, establishing coding, payment, and coverage, driving installed base adoption, putting the clinical data behind it, we did that with FFRCT, and we sort of learned how. We're doing that same playbook now for symptomatic plaque, and the similarities between that and what Campbell mentioned, entering in this high-risk asymptomatic make a ton of sense. It's a very practical way, in my mind, to get into a pretty attractive TAM in short order. The other reason we really like this is this leverages our existing technology.
This is our Plaque Analysis technology that we already have. It's the same algorithm. It's the same call points. All these same customers that we're already engaging with, we're going to sell through them. They're already managing these patients. They're under their care. Of course, it's our same commercial infrastructure. We really like this as a solid way to expand to ultimately give us an $11 billion TAM up from the five that we're in right now. Lastly, we reported Q2 results just a couple of weeks ago. I'll let Vikram speak to the financials.
Yeah, real quick. Pleased with our results in Q2. We reported revenue north of $64 million, which represented 48% year-over-year growth. We've had this consistent track record of revenue growth over the last few years. We've paired that with consistent gross margin expansion as well, about 30 points of gross margin expansion over the last five years. We've talked about the architecture of our gross margin expansion. It's really driven by the autonomous processing initiative Plaque Analysis, which is highly margin accretive, as well as economies of scale as we're able to scale revenues and spread those fixed costs and cost of revenue over larger volume bases. Of note, on OpEx, we're disciplined but growth-oriented, continuing to invest in sales and marketing as well as R&D. But we're continuing to keep track of OpEx as a percentage of revenue, as well as narrow EBIT losses year over year. We're well capitalized.
We've got close to $250 million on the balance sheet, sufficient to fund the P&L, as well as get the company to profitability in that mid-2028 timeframe.
That's it. All right.
Thank you.
Thank you. All right. Great overview. Thanks for the update. I think some of the information on the asymptomatic trials was new.
Mm-hmm. Yeah. Share that with you.
So a couple of questions here. John, maybe at a high level, you have two multi-billion dollar opportunities, FFRCT and Plaque Analysis. FFRCT is clearly larger today, but Plaque Analysis is growing faster.
Right.
If we fast-forward five years, how do you see the split between the two?
Yeah. Thank you for the question, and thanks again for having us. I think mid-term, I think Plaque Analysis is going to be a bigger business than FFRCT, and I think that will be a true statement just within the symptomatic market, and I think when you add in asymptomatic, it is even orders of magnitude larger. The rationale for that is the patient applicability. FFRCT is paid for and covered for about 33% of the population. That is if any stenosis is between 40% and 90%, it is covered. Plaque Analysis, on the other hand, is any visible plaque up until a 60% stenosis. It is a larger patient pool. We are nowhere near that utilization yet. But the trends that we have seen so far this year give us reason to believe we can get there over time, and as such, I think it will be an even bigger business.
What does that assume for ASPs? Because right now, FFRCT, the ASP is much higher than Plaque Analysis.
Mm-hmm. Yeah, I can comment on that. Our Plaque Analysis pricing strategy is unfolding the way it was planned. We entered the market with attractive pricing, given reimbursement was principally Medicare. Now with expanding coverage, we are able to command better pricing. In Q2, you did see that step-up in ASPs, which was reflected in our financials. ASPs we expect to stay relatively stable for the rest of the year. Then there is another step up in those contractual agreements we have with our customers in early Q1 2027.
Okay.
We're assuming the same ASP for Plaque Analysis and the high-risk asymptomatic as well.
Got it. John, you've had a lot of early success in Plaque Analysis. You mentioned Anthem is the one holdout.
Yeah.
What's the status?
Short answer is we don't know. It's hard to call. As you can imagine, commercial payers play their cards pretty close to their vest. In addition to Anthem, there's a long kind of tail of smaller regional payers. That being said, I'm very pleased with where we are relative to total covered lives. I think closing Q2, we're at 78%, which was well north of what we had forecasted at this point. Anthem will come, I don't know when. I think when it does, it'll help. I don't think it'll be sort of a hockey stick catalyst by any means, but I think it'll further help adoption.
Then what does that get covered lives from what to what?
I think Anthem is worth about 9 points, 8 points.
That's right.
Yeah.
Gets us to the mid-80s.
Yeah
on a covered lives basis.
Campbell, maybe two-part question on asymptomatic. The studies here, there's no hard outcomes data. What gives you the confidence that these three studies are going to be strong enough, the outcomes for payer coverage?
Sure. Yeah, no, we're going down this pathway of these are diagnostic application. It's not a screening study. It's diagnostic application in people who have coronary artery disease. We have high confidence that we can expand the current coverage determinations from Medicare and from commercial payers that currently cover Plaque Analysis, and they cover CCTA with this evidence. It's the same playbook, Larry, that we've used with FFR and with early Plaque Analysis, where there also weren't outcomes at the time of gathering many of these coverage wins. Yet we had clear evidence for it impacts physician decision-making and it impacts, I would call, secondary markers, really good markers, for example, LDL lowering. We're confident these will be sufficient for these markets.
Second part, you're taking a very different approach from your main competitor that's doing a large outcomes trial. Why is this the right approach?
Yeah, I will tell you from a clinical standpoint, and then obviously John and Vikram can comment from the business standpoint. From my standpoint, these are incredibly high-need, high-risk individuals who are asymptomatic, and it is a very large market. I am going to be real. It is a very large market, and in John's phrase, we are not walking by it. These are populations where we are highly confident we can design trials that we will win. They are extremely capital efficient compared to outcomes trials such as may be needed for other applications. And we have done it before, and this is just the same playbook, high risk, yet asymptomatic, really big markets. So we are confident we can execute these.
I think it is higher probability, it is closer in relative to timing, and it is straight out of our current capabilities. When you go out into the screening world and start talking GPs and what have you, PCPs, that is a whole another world out there. That is a bigger investment, and it is much longer timing.
Vikram?
Yep.
Let us talk about the guidance for 2026. The second half guide implies roughly $1 million incremental per quarter from here, if I am doing the math right. Given the ramp in Plaque Analysis, why would revenue only increase by $1 million a quarter?
Yeah, the underpinning assumptions have not really changed from the August earnings call. The starting point is always the underlying CCTA market. Q2 tends to be seasonally the strongest quarter in the year. The incremental CCTA units into Q3 and Q4 are more modest. That is reflected in the FFRCT guide. It reflects normal yearly seasonal phasing. We have incorporated that into the guide. Plaque Analysis is different. Plaque Analysis is still early in the adoption game. Utilization is continuing to ramp, and as such, we are continuing to project incremental Plaque Analysis revenue to close out the year. And then finally, this is consistent with our guidance philosophy, establishing a high conviction baseline that leaves room for outperformance.
That's helpful. I know investors were impressed with the gross margin in Q2. The guidance doesn't assume much of an improvement in the second half. Why is that, and what's the outlook for the gross margin?
Yeah. We're very pleased with our Q2 performance. Came in about 3 points ahead of expectations. 75% of that beat was driven by better revenue performance. For the rest of the year, we've anchored on that 82% number given there's puts and takes, higher Plaque Analysis revenues, continued automation of the algorithm. The offsets are we are continuing to hire in production ahead of demand in 2027, as well as beefing up the customer success team that John talked about. They're integral to ensuring seamless integration with our customers. So puts and takes, we feel good about the 82% guide. If we do see higher Plaque Analysis revenue, that should flow through to the gross profit line. But longer term, the more recent trends have reinforced conviction around the 85% midterm target.
No one is going to escape my 2027 question, including you guys. So again, I'll stick with Vikram. Streets modeling 24% year-over-year for revenue. 40%, I think, is about the midpoint for the guidance this year. What are some of the puts and takes to consider?
Sure thing. Obviously, we'll provide a more comprehensive view at a future earnings call, but the setup's highly attractive as we enter 2027 across both FFRCT and Plaque Analysis. John touched on some of the catalysts that we expect in 2027. There's continued new onboard opportunity. There's 3,300 accounts. We're about 45% penetrated the beginning of 2025, so more room to hunt. We expect full year contribution from Heartflow PCI Navigator out in the marketplace. Campbell alluded to the positive reception from the customer base. So that's a good tailwind for us. The very predictable utilization ramp that we expect from the sites we onboard in 2026 will pay dividends in 2027. Finally, on ASPs, we do expect that moderation in ASP shifts on FFRCT in 2027. Moving to Plaque Analysis, the 1,250 sites that we've guided to this year, they'll ramp in utilization heading into next year.
The DECIDE one-year outcomes, which we'll share at a conference in Q4, that'll be a catalyst. More coverage gains as we work through the commercial payer list. That's another catalyst. Finally, we do expect that price uplift that I spoke about on Plaque Analysis in early Q1.
That's helpful. John, when does international become more of a priority for the company?
No time in the near term. Right now, when we sit around and we allocate capital every quarter or so, it's hard to not allocate it in the U.S. It doesn't mean there's not patients that can benefit from our technology. CT adoption is actually quite high in a lot of these markets. But to do that well, you really need to build a local team with local expertise. There's such a need here in the U.S. Probably $0.90 on every dollar is coming back here.
One last one on Coronary CTA. I think penetration is called about 11% in the U.S. on non-invasive coronary artery disease tests.
Yep.
The higher it goes, the better it is for you.
Sure.
Is there anything. Why is it only 11%, and is there anything
Yeah
you can do to move the needle?
It is roughly 11%, and that has been growing pretty consistently around 20% a year, just the number of scans coming through every quarter. We play a role in helping develop that. In some of our best customers that we have been with for six, seven, eight years now, we see their penetration relative to the standard of care closer to 40%, 45%. Which gives us reason to believe when we partner with programs and help them grow, we can really shift that standard of care. But we have not been everywhere for that long. That takes time to get there. The other thing to know is there are lots of constituents involved in driving CCTA penetration. This is a diagnostic pathway.
It's not like you're just putting a new innovation on the inventory on the shelf and swapping it out for the old one, and you're going to see quick adoption overnight. There's a lots of pieces that need to fall into place. We feel like a lot of the macro factors are still in our favor and will be for the long term, most notably guidelines. Guidelines is level Ia ahead of all other choices, okay? Over time, guidelines win. It just takes time.
Okay.
I wouldn't. We've talked about some of this in our one-on-ones. There's nothing in the future, despite all the positive wind at CCTA sales, that would lead me to guide towards a hockey stick on CCTA growth. I think it's very consistently going to grow, but I don't think there'll be an exponential growth.
You're a new enough public company that I can ask you this question. What's most underappreciated about HeartFlow?
Well, I think the TAM expansion, which is one of the reasons we wanted to highlight it these last couple of days. To think about all the success we've had in this $5 billion TAM, and we're still only less than 5% penetrated. Now we've got a $6 billion TAM sitting on our doorstep that we believe we can execute and monetize before 2030, I'm not sure has been appreciated yet. I think as we continue to talk about it and get the trials rolling, hopefully that can be better understood and appreciated.
All right. Well, thank you for being here