Good morning. I'm Daniel Rizzo with Jefferies Equity Research. With us now we have Ingevity Corporation. With us today is CEO David Li, CFO Phillip Platt, and right up front here is VP of IR Mickey Walsh. This is going to be a fireside chat, so it's going to be pretty casual. If anyone has any questions, feel free to raise your hand. For now, it'll just be me, David, and Phillip. We'll probably just talk a little bit. I guess thanks for coming, guys. To start, now that Industrial Specialties and Road Markings, the divestitures are complete, how has the day-to-day strategy focus changed for leadership at the company?
Thanks, Daniel. First, thanks for having us at the conference. Enjoy being here, and I think the team at Jefferies does a great job. Just to go into what's been happening at the company for the past year or so, there's been a lot going on.
Yeah.
If we start with where we came from, the company, about a year ago, had a portfolio of businesses that were high-quality businesses. However, some of them did not fit, introduced a lot of volatility. We went through a portfolio review, and then back last December, we made some declarative thoughts around the portfolio going forward, and that's what we've been really focused on over the past year or so, which is streamlining the company. We announced the divestiture or an intention to divest three businesses that we thought were not core. As you mentioned, we're through two of those divestments, and the third is well underway. We think by the end of this year, we'll be through with that portfolio transformation.
I think really what that's allowed us to do is really become more focused, allow the quality of those underlying core businesses, which are Performance Materials and Pavement Technologies, to really shine through. It's also allowed us to focus on performance. I think our results have been really good over the last several quarters, despite a pretty dynamic macro environment. Also, internally, we've taken that time to double down on a very strong company culture. We call it the IngeviWay. We've also refreshed the leadership team. A lot of things going on with the business. At the same time, I think we spent a lot of time focusing on strengthening the balance sheet. I'll let Phillip go through some of those achievements and what we're thinking about going forward.
Yeah. I will just add on to what David said. The core businesses that we expect to remain within new Ingevity, those being Performance Materials and Pavement Technologies, they are less cyclical businesses than what we have had in the past. It gives us much more forecastability of free cash flow, and that has given us the ability to pay down debt. A year ago from today, we were 3.0 on our net leverage to EBITDA. Sitting here today, as of Q2 of 2026, we are at 2.5, which is right within our target range. These two businesses will enable us to maintain that balance sheet flexibility and that strength going into the future, especially as we think about the next phase of Ingevity and the growth that we expect.
You mentioned changing the leadership and changing the culture, so to speak, at Ingevity. Are you in the steps of having to change lower than leadership, like changing the sales focus or changing maybe metrics on how people are rated? I guess, is there a thing underway where you are changing lower-level people?
Thanks for that piercing question. I feel like for us, really, it is more building onto a very strong culture. The Ingevity culture is very strong to begin with, so just refining different aspects of it. Where we are seeing additional resources are some of the new areas we are focused in. For example, filtration, where we just talked about our first win in PFAS, which is one of the most demanding applications for water treatment. We are adding focus there. Filtration is going to be a big part of Ingevity in the future. I think it is more about adding resources and capabilities than changing folks out. When I came on board, one of the things I was wondering about, frankly, is, okay, how much is this organization up for this amount of change? I have been really encouraged by just the appetite for winning.
There is a lot of momentum at the company today.
You mentioned the PFAS opportunity, which seems pretty unique. How do you see this addressable market today, and how do you see it growing, say, over the next 3-5 years as you focus on it a little bit more?
Yeah. First of all, filtration is not new for Ingevity. We've actually been participating in the business for many years. But in our history, what we've typically done is just basically treat it as an outlet. Any additional activated carbon that we were not selling into automotive, we would outlet into filtration. What we've pivoted to is putting a dedicated team in place. We've also brought in some consultants and some subject matter experts and really looked at where in filtration do we think our solutions, our activated carbon is differentiated and can provide differentiated performance. One of those areas that we're very excited about is PFAS. As everyone probably knows, it's not a new issue, but it's one that's gaining more and more visibility. Next year, for example, it's widely expected for most municipalities in the U.S. to start reporting out PFAS levels in the water.
What we've determined is our activated carbon, which is made out of hardwood and is in powdered form, is one of the most cost-effective ways to address the PFAS issue. We are being called in by water treatment facilities, by municipalities that are trying to address this PFAS challenge. We think we're right at the beginning stages, Dan. There's a lot of effort going on beyond, obviously, Ingevity. We think, just to use some industry estimates, we think the market today for activated carbon and PFAS is over $1 billion, growing at double digits, so expected to grow quite rapidly, and we think we definitely have a role to play in that solution.
You mentioned that there are other opportunities besides PFAS for activated carbon and filtration. Will you just talk about some of those? I think you mentioned in the past medical, biopharma, food, and beverage. Just where are the opportunities there, and are there any technical or commercial hurdles you have to overcome to get this to scale over the next few years?
Yeah. The really encouraging thing for us is that, as I mentioned, we've already been participating in different applications in filtration, including food and beverage and biopharma. Our hardwood-activated carbon also, similarly to PFAS, has shown to have a significant differentiation and capability in those other areas. For example, in food and beverage, our activated carbon is really good at taking out odor and color. If you're thinking about a hard seltzer that you might enjoy on the weekend, a lot of that goes through a purification process that needs to take out the color and flavor first before, obviously, the end flavor is added in.
That's typically an activated carbon process and could be using our activated carbon. Biopharma is another area where we found that our activated carbon is particularly good at taking out large molecules. For areas like dialysis and biopharma, we see a lot of really interesting applications. We're still in the discovery phase of understanding where the value chain and where we can best get the value for our solutions are, but we're very encouraged by what we've seen so far.
Okay. Along the same things, just sticking with activated carbon. Performance Materials EBITDA is 53% and sometimes north of 53%. I guess, and this is a question I get a lot, these are leading margins, how sustainable is this? How important is it, or how dependent is it on, say, something like auto production, which I would think not very much, or what would keep that up there, and what would potentially be a headwind?
Yeah. First, Daniel, I wonder if you have any other companies that are reporting a 50% plus EBITDA margin for a significant sized business. It's remarkable. It is a unique business. It's obviously the franchise of our company, and we think about it all the time. What we've seen over the past several years is despite a pretty flat SAAR, or basically an industry metric that reflects the production of autos, we've seen growth in that business and growth in our profitability. For us, and you've followed the company for a while, we were comfortable saying we thought the profitability would be in the mid-40s to low 50s. Now we're confident in saying it'll be in the 50s range for the foreseeable future. I think that's a proxy for a few things.
One is that the industry, despite sort of the sluggish auto production, we continue to play a critical role in supplying our evaporative solutions to our customers. It's also a product line that is not static, so we continue to innovate new solutions. For example, hybrids have become a much bigger part of the auto fleet going forward, whether it's the Middle East and higher oil prices or just consumer preference. There are new solutions required for hybrids, which actually are more profitable than our core evap business. We see a lot of positives in the automotive space, in the backdrop of a pretty flat environment. I think that's a testament to the team's close customer interaction, the work that we do in regulatory, and also our innovation and quality.
Again, staying with activated carbon, can we just talk about the opportunity potentially from China 7 and then the next step up in regulatory standards? Obviously, China's a big focus, but also anywhere else in the world, will this potentially be another step change in volume demand? If it's going to be the same step change that wlipe've seen in the past.
Yeah. We're excited about China. We're also excited about India. I'll let Phil talk a little bit more about timing and what we see there.
Yeah. Expectation is for China 7 to be implemented in the back end of this decade, call it 2028, 2029 maybe. In India, they're moving from a Tier 1 regulation to a Tier 2 regulation beginning next year and into 2028. We do expect to participate in that. Obviously, China, their BEV adoption, battery electric vehicle adoption, is much more significant than the rest of the world. As that regulation comes in play at the back end of this decade, our content per vehicle will increase. We will participate in that, albeit probably at a much smaller total vehicle portfolio, if you will.
Is there increased competition in places like India and China? I should say, will there be increased competition as they go to higher standards?
Yeah. I'll start, and then I'll hand it back over to David. We've always modeled in some competition coming in with China 7. We've always had competition. When you think about the regulatory regions around the world that require what we call Tier 1 requirements, we have competition at that level. Outside of Tier 1, our competitors can't compete with our product offering. So we do model in some expectation of competitive pressures at the back end when China 7 goes live. David?
Yeah, I would say first, for those that are not participating yet in this market, it may look attractive from the outside, but the reality is the automotive market, I came from the semiconductor area, the automotive market's one of the most demanding industries to serve. There's a significant CapEx burden that a new entrant would need to invest. We're talking hundreds of millions of USD to stand up a new activated carbon facility, and then understanding and going through all the sort of qualifications and regulatory. Also, the one thing that we're very proud of is our products have never had a recall. Phil talked about some of the competitors that are sort of operating at the lower end of the spectrum that have caused recalls in the past.
If you think about what we're supplying into the automotive market, it's probably a $20-$30 solution, which lasts the lifetime of the car. So if that introduces any sort of quality or recall, it's really overwhelmed by that type of quality expectation. So we're very proud of the quality record. I think that's also a testament to the team's focus on the customer.
And again, something I get a lot, can we just kind of focus or just provide color on the technical aspects of creating this product versus not necessarily it being patented, but just having technical know-how and how that keeps customers out. Can you just kind of talk towards that?
Yeah. We are constantly interacting with our customers on new engines, new programs. I mentioned hybrids earlier. What types of engine sizes, and what types of unique solutions might be needed. As you mentioned, also, there's a shifting regulatory landscape towards more stringent evaporative requirements. So all of those require new and innovative carbon solutions. I think we've been a pioneer in this industry from the very beginning, and we continue to innovate new solutions for things like hybrids and advanced ICE engines, which are actually having a bit of a renaissance in terms of, especially here at home in the U.S. So there's new engine designs that we're working closely with customers on. I think those are things that are good for us. We like to have tough technical solutions or problems to address, and I think that plays to our strong suit.
All right. I'll just pause for 2 seconds to see if anybody in the audience has a question as of yet. Okay. All right, so we talked a bit about activated carbon. Now let's talk about a little bit about Pavement Technologies. So new Ingevity has two businesses, two kind of seemingly disparate businesses, Pavement Technologies and Performance Materials, which is the activated carbon business. What are the core competencies that kind of binds these two businesses together? Yeah, that's where I'll start.
Sure. So it's one of the questions we get asked most often. For us, if we look at what we're really good at, and this is the exercise that the team went through last year, and that's how we kind of came out with our portfolio decisions. There are strong core competencies that tie both these businesses together. So highly engineered materials are required for both pavement solutions and performance material solutions. There's a very stringent quality requirement, very demanding customers, high customer touch. So those are all things that we think we're very good at. One of the other underappreciated aspects that both businesses share is there's a regulatory or advocacy aspect that really strengthens our position in the market.
We have a really talented team that works closely with, for example, the emissions regulatory bodies or the Departments of Transportation, to either advise, provide background, or in some cases even help write or draft the requirements for evaporative emissions or, in the case of pavement, the best-known methods for paving. Those are things that tie those two businesses together. It is one team, for example, on the advocacy side that takes care of both businesses. We see a lot of leverage across those core competencies for Pavement Technologies and Performance Materials.
Within pavement, can we just talk a little bit about why you are seemingly outpacing the market and taking share or winning new contracts at a faster clip than elsewhere? Can you just describe a product that is helping lead that, and, maybe some of the headwinds that could develop?
I will take that, and then I would let David comment as well. Pavement Technologies is about a $300 million top-line business. Two-thirds of that is what we call pavement preservation. There are emulsifiers that go into all aspects and all levels of the roadway. We are a market leader in that position, in that market. The other $100 million is what we refer to as hot mix and warm mix. We have a technology, it is branded under the brand name of Evotherm, and it provides pavers the ability to pave roadways at significantly less temperatures so they can save money on natural gas costs for heating the asphalt. It is also safer for their employees. It also enables them to pave earlier in the season and later in the season, to utilize their assets. It is a real value proposition for our customers.
David talked about the advocacy component to that. Our advocacy team goes out, engages with the DOTs around the world, primarily in the U.S., federal, state, and municipal levels, to get warm mix requirements incorporated into the requirements in those jurisdictions. Then once in, we obviously have an opportunity to participate in that market. The conversion opportunity here is converting hot mix to warm mix. So working with the pavers, convincing them that the warm mix is a better alternative, a higher value proposition for their business, utilizing our technology to start paving in warm mix.
That opportunity is about a $400 million opportunity right now. Warm mix in North America comprises about 20%-25% of total paving in the U.S. It is a compelling opportunity for us to participate and start to convert hot mix into warm mix and grow the business at a much higher rate than the typical market, which is a GDP plus growth rate.
Even though you are obviously selling to the actual pavers and the contractors, by going around them and having this kind of incorporated into the thing, you kind of have to force them to use your product, effectively. Or not force them, but it heavily incentivizes them to use your product, I would think, though. Correct?
I think we approach both aspects. Working directly with pavers. Phil kind of outlined the value proposition. For the pavers, it could be potentially energy savings, environmentally more friendly, could extend the paving season. Then for the DOTs, the value proposition is longer road life. Again, maybe the environmental aspect. The selling and advocacy aspect work hand in hand, but the way we approach might be a little bit different.
Is it more popular in maybe northern regions just because it extends the season, so to speak, versus the South? Or is that not really a factor at play right now?
That's not really a factor in play right now. We're pretty well diversified across the U.S.
Okay. Are there any headwinds or any risks from, I don't know, just something like skyrocketing asphalt costs, maybe slowing down the amount of repaving the municipalities do? Is that something that's a concern given the inflationary environment we're in?
Yeah, I think we actually mentioned a little bit in our last earnings release that although Pavement Technologies grew, it would have grown even more. We did see some kind of pullback, especially outside the U.S. For example, China was down significantly. So oil is obviously one of the key raw materials in asphalt, so as oil prices have gone up, those sort of discretionary projects have been paused in some cases. We're still growing through that. However, I think elevated oil prices for an extended period of time would impact the pace of which some of those discretionary projects get done. There's always going to need to be infrastructure improvements, whether it's pavement resurfacing or new roads being paved. So I think that will continue to go on. I think the rate of growth could be affected if we're in a prolonged elevated oil environment for a while.
Did we see any surge in demand for Pavement Technologies after the U.S. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act from a couple of years ago? Was it noticeable or were things already kind of moving along in that direction?
I would say probably the latter. For the most part, I do not know about roadways here in N.Y., but roadways in South Carolina constantly need to be fixed.
Yeah.
Seems like everywhere around the U.S. So the demand for paving is always there.
Yeah.
Having the funding that is available to the municipalities and state Departments of Transportation is a tailwind for sure, but no, I do not think we saw any meaningful step change.
Okay. As you are simplifying the company, how are you restructuring things like corporate costs and SGA to ensure that it kind of aligns with what you have become versus what you were?
Yeah, I think we're always going to go after becoming a more efficient company. As we mentioned on the onset, our company EBITDA is 36%, I think, last quarter.
Yeah.
Pretty high level of profitability in the company. That being said, we're looking at all things like technology, AI, automation, to go after those potential opportunities. Phil, you want to say anything more about that?
Yeah. Part of my job is making sure that we support the businesses at the adequate level, not only from corporate, but also the back office functions. I know that because Dave told me it was my job. I would say, we announced to the street this strategic portfolio review in Q4 of 2024, and at that time, we knew that if we were going to embark upon essentially making a smaller company, we were going to have to rethink how we approach corporate costs as well as back office costs, and we've taken out a significant amount of costs. If I pull forward to 2026, we closed the Industrial Specialties deal on January 1st of this year, Road Markings on April 15th of this year. The combined leftover stranded/dyssynergy costs associated with those two businesses was about $20 million.
Through Q2 of this year, we've already eliminated 10, and we have clear line of sight to eliminate another 5. So, we're moving as fast as we can to take out costs. As Dave said, I always point people back to the numbers that we presented in December on the strategic portfolio update. We expect new Ingevity to be a 36%-39% EBITDA margin business. So even with some remnant costs that might remain post-APT sale, it's still a very highly profitable business.
And just to touch on APT just for a second, I know you've mentioned you're in an advanced stage of potentially divesting this business. I guess I'm just trying to think about what criteria you're prioritizing to make sure you're maximizing shareholder return.
Yeah, I think you said it well, Daniel. We're going to focus on shareholder value. We did mention in our last update that the process had reached an advanced stage. I think as you've seen from our last two divestments, we're trying to move them at pace just to get that clarity both externally and internally, and we'd expect to have something to announce this year.
And then, as kind of a small part of the business now, but just Nexeon and CHASM, how do they fit into the portfolio now, and how do you see them fitting in further? Maybe they're a little more volatile, or how should we think about those investments?
Yeah. So Nexeon and CHASM are two of the investments we've made in the energy storage space. We also have our own internal efforts in areas like hard carbon. I think it's important as a company to have multiple growth pathways for us to participate. Obviously, energy storage is one of the most dynamic and fast-growing areas. So although we think of them as more future-looking, for example, Phil referenced the investor update we did last December.
Those financials do not include any contribution from energy storage. We continue investing in the space because we think it's important that we're there, and we actually think some of those areas like CHASM, which provides carbon nanotubes, or Nexeon, which is silicon anode technology, play into our core competencies, or we could be a supplier into those technologies. They're just our way of putting some investments out there in a dynamic and growing space.
You mentioned, I think, on the last call that you're ahead of pace for the $300 million share repurchase plan. Given your EBITDA and EPS guidance, which is currently increasing and a relatively rosy outlook, is there a possibility that we could even go further than that?
Yeah. What we committed to in December of last year was over the course of 2026 and 2027, on a ratable basis, we'll purchase back at least $300 million of shares. Through Q2, we've repurchased $87 million. So we're trending slightly ahead of that 150 each year. You're right. We're opportunistic when we buy back shares, and we're going to continue to do that. We're going to fulfill our commitment.
What you saw in Q1 when we had a dislocation in the stock price because of the Middle East conflict kickoff, we actually stepped in a little bit more bullishly and bought back a lot more shares. So we'll be opportunistic to the extent that we can, but we're going to fulfill that commitment. If and when we strike a deal to sell APT and we receive those proceeds, those proceeds would obviously give us an opportunity to potentially accelerate that share buyback as well.
With those proceeds, also with the cash you guys generate, you have the repurchase plan. You are a leaner, meaner Ingevity now, but is there opportunity for maybe bolt-ons, or is that something you are going to shy away from? Where would those opportunities be? I do not know if it would be more of technology based or how we should think about it.
Yeah. I think we have been pretty declarative that acquisitions in the near term are not going to be a high priority in our capital allocation plan. However, I do think, for example, you mentioned bolt-ons to accelerate our internal growth in areas like filtration could be something that is an attractive use of capital in the future. We are going to be very disciplined about it. It will be right down the middle of the fairway, so to speak, in terms of if and when we do an acquisition like that, I think it would be to accelerate our own internal growth initiatives, but nothing in the near term.
Do you have enough capacity within activated carbon and Pavement Technologies to meet the current growth you see for the next 3-5 years? Is there potentially a need in a couple of years to do some sort of debottlenecking or brownfield expansion or whatever?
Yeah. All of the above. I think if we are as successful as we expect to be, I think we will be having those discussions about adding capacity or debottlenecking. I think debottlenecking is just something we do on a normal basis. That also plays into should we think about acquisitions to increase capacity as well. Right now, I think we are in a very good position. We have talked about 20%-plus of our volume of activated carbon going into filtration already. That is at a very low margin, basically at zero. So the opportunity really there is to upgrade that volume into higher value applications like PFAS, like biopharma, like food and beverage. If there is additional volume that is needed at attractive volumes, that is when I think those reinvestment discussions come into play.
But you're not going to chase volume just to chase volume. Margin discipline is probably going to be the focus going forward, though, right?
Absolutely. The remarkable thing is even with those 50-plus % EBITDA margins for Performance Materials, because we're currently selling 20-plus % of our volume into filtration at really negligible margins. To the extent we're able to upgrade those 20% volume into higher value applications, that would actually be accretive to our PM margins going forward. We're really encouraged by what we're seeing. Obviously, still pretty early in the discovery process.
Are there any macro headwinds or just uncertainties that keep you up at night, so to speak? I don't know. Would it be government spending? We've been in such a volatile environment. I guess anything that could happen has happened to a certain extent. But is there anything that you really worry about?
Well, we worry about all things all the time. We're paranoid. But I think what we've demonstrated over, as you mentioned, a very volatile macro environment, whether it's tariffs or supply chain or reshoring, is that our business model is extremely durable and resilient. We've been able to perform and execute over a variety of different environments. We expect that to be the case going forward. I think at the end of the day, although we're a global company, we have a very North America-centric business. We produce primarily in North America for North America. We have China facilities that are producing for China. I think we're somewhat insulated from some of the kind of macro volatility that's happened around the world.
Having a North America-centric business that is focused on the U.S. economy, I think, has proven to be a very resilient and durable aspect of our company.
Pavement Technologies is kind of North American-focused for apparent reasons, but I was wondering if there is opportunity elsewhere in the world to really grow that business, if that is maybe some white space, so to speak, that you are taking a hard look at or will take a hard look at once maybe the company is the way you want it.
For sure. We already have efforts. We have teams set up globally. We actually announced very recently that we had received approval from the Federal Ministry for Transport for Evotherm, our disruptive warm mix additive, and I think that was also a nod towards the environmental benefits. We do have efforts, and we do sell outside the U.S. As Phil mentioned, our focus is the U.S. because we think it is obviously close in. There is a lot of room to grow and disrupt more the traditional hot mix way of making asphalt. That is going to be our primary focus. But we do have teams and efforts to sell outside the U.S. already.
Okay. That is all I have. I do not know if there is any questions from the audience. Any follow-ups right there?
You mentioned that warm mix is 25%. Excuse me. Good morning. You mentioned warm mix is 25% of the paving market, if I have that correct?
Yeah, 20%-25%.
20%-25%.
Where does Evotherm stand in terms of share? What are the other products? How would you displace those? If you have an advantage product, it would seem you over time should have a higher share, and I just want to understand that landscape.
Yeah. We're the clear leader in the warm mix space. Within that 20%-25%, we're the primary participant there.
Yeah.
There are other folks that provide warm mix additives. We would say they're not providing the same level of value and quality that we are, so we're the clear leader in the space.
Thank you.
Anyone else? Okay. A couple minutes left, but I think we're pretty good here. Thank you, guys, both for this, and thanks everyone for listening.
Thanks, Daniel.
Thanks, David. That's great.