All right, to close out the day, we are pleased to welcome Newell Brands to the stage. Today we are joined by Chris Peterson, President and CEO, and Mark Erceg, the company's CFO. Thank you both for being here again this year.
We are excited to be here.
I am going to start with some questions around top line. The second quarter marks the first quarter of core sales growth for the company since the second quarter of 2022. For those in the audience that might be less familiar with recent results, can you maybe give us a walkthrough of what drove this long-awaited inflection?
Sure. In 2023, we launched a turnaround strategy, and a big part of that turnaround strategy was capability improvement on the front-end parts of the business that were required to drive sustainable top-line growth. These are things like consumer insights, brand building, new product innovation, and go-to-market. What was exciting is, since we launched that turnaround in 2023, in 2023, core sales for the company was down 12%, so we clearly needed to do something different. We improved in 2024 and 2025 sequentially, but we were still down. What is exciting about last quarter is all of those things came together, and we delivered 2.3% core sales growth. Importantly, within that 2.3% core sales growth, seven of our top 10 brands grew, five of our six business units grew, and the U.S. led the growth with 5% core sales growth.
We also are forecasting, or provided guidance for Q3, which we're in right now, for that growth to accelerate a little bit with core sales between 2%-3%. As we sit here today, we're very comfortable with that top-line guidance, and the bottom-line guidance that we provided as well.
Okay, great. As you mentioned, U.S. core sales were up 5% in the quarter. U.S. distribution was up mid-single digits, which was driven by aisle reinvention, your tariff-advantaged position in some categories. You had shelf space gains across retailers and channels. I'm curious to talk about how you're working to convert these distribution wins into sustained consumer pull so that you keep or expand that shelf space from here at the next year's line review.
Yeah. Distribution gains are important, but you're right that we need to earn sustaining those distribution gains. What we're excited about is that we're driving POS and consumer offtake that is supporting those distribution gains. If I looked at our POS data last quarter, we grew POS on six of our top 10 brands. Eight of our top 10 brands increased their sequential rate of POS growth. The things I talked about of better consumer understanding, strong new product innovation, better consumer brand building, and stronger retailer execution, all are things that help us sustain better consumer offtake to ensure that the distribution gains are sustaining and, in fact, continue in the future.
Okay. In the past, you've highlighted areas where your share of distribution lags your dollar share, so using this metric to pitch for additional shelf space to retailers. How much runway do you still have left there? Said differently, is distribution a multi-year core sales driver?
It clearly is a multi-year core sales driver. First of all, if you step back and look at when we put the turnaround strategy in place, one of the things we looked at was, where was the company from a capability standpoint? We were not tracking distribution. Talk about starting from zero. We put in place a very sophisticated tracking system. We now track distribution on all of our brands at all of our retailers in the U.S., which is how we know that our distribution this year is up mid-single digits. W e still have a significant number of brands, even with the distribution gains that we have made this year, where our share of distribution is below our market share. That generally means, when we see that we have opportunity to go for more distribution.
We are excited about the start of this journey, but I do think that there is opportunity ahead for the company to continue to grow distribution across the portfolio, given our starting point.
Are there particular categories that stand out where the gap is the biggest?
It is very different by brand, by category. We tend to look at it on the brand basis and say, "Where are the brands the most under-shared?
It's not linear. There isn't a common theme. I would say all of our business units have opportunity for distribution gains to get to fair share. We are closing some of that gap with the mid-single-digit distribution increase this year. As to your question, I do think we've got a multi-year journey here.
Okay. Also, I'm guessing there's also no real pattern in terms of retailers.
There is not.
Sort of.
Yep.
Let's talk about innovation. You've discussed upping the quality of innovation as core to these turnaround plans. You often talk about tier 1 and tier 2. Can you just explain what that means? What is tier 1 innovation? What is tier 2?
Sure.
I'll start there, and then I'll follow up.
Okay. Tier 1 and 2, when we put the new strategy in place, we completely retooled the way the company does new product innovation. We wanted to be consumer-led rather than customer-led. We wanted to make sure that we had a tiering system, so we put the tiering system in place. We actually manage four tiers of innovation, and the things that differentiate something into a tier 1 or 2 versus a tier 3 or 4, we look at how much revenue is it going to generate and what's the net present value of the innovation. The tier 1 and 2 would be our largest innovations, and at that level, we would expect it to be a meaningful driver of market share and revenue growth for the business unit in which it's operating.
Okay. What innovations should we look out for through the balance of 2026 and into 2027, to the degree you can tell us about 2027 already?
Yeah. We are pretty excited. We have a lot of them, and I have mentioned several of them. But this year we are on track to launch 25 tier 1 and tier 2 innovations, which will be the highest number since the company has had the tiering system in place. When we put the tiering system in place in 2023, we only launched one that qualified as a tier 1 or tier 2 initiative. Then in 2024, we got to eight. Last year, we got to 19, and this year, 25. What is important about those 25 is every single one of our six business units has a tier 1 or tier 2 innovation. Most have multiple tier 1 and tier 2 innovations. They span the majority of our brands. Our top brands all have a tier 1 or tier 2 innovation.
We think 25, by the way, is about the right number to sustain the company. We do not think we need to go from 25 to some bigger number as we go into next year. The other thing I would say about it is that when we launch these innovations, we generally support them for several years because they operate on sort of an S-curve in terms of consumer adoption. There is sort of a layer cake type effect where this year we are supporting the 25 from this year, plus the 19 from last year, and the eight from the year before. Next year, we will have another probably 25, and then we will have 25, and 19. The cumulative effect of innovating at scale, we think is going to be a tailwind for the revenue trajectory of the company as we go forward.
To your specific question on what are some of the ones I am the most excited about? Certainly, we have talked about the Graco EasyTurn car seats line of products. Those are very exciting. We have a toddler version. We now are launching an infant version. That is driving significant market share gains. It is driving consumer trade up because they tend to be priced higher, and our gross margin on that product is higher than the fleet average. So it is good from a revenue, from a market share, and from a gross margin standpoint. Similarly, the Coleman Snap 'N Go cooler, which we have talked a lot about, is off to a phenomenal start. I think, relative to the expectation we had when we unveiled it last year as an idea, that innovation this year is tracking about 10x higher from a revenue standpoint than our expectation going into it, so it is dramatically outperformed.
The Rubbermaid Brilliance Glass that we have launched in the market, we are having trouble staying in stock. I think that business is up almost 100% this year from last year. I could keep going, but you get the idea. What we are trying to do is launch innovation that is differentiated, consumer preferred, driving innovation, generally driving trade up, and driving gross margin accretion at the same time.
Okay, great. One little sidebar question is while North America has been strong, we talked about the U.S. core sales growth at 5%, international saw some softness in the second quarter. I know trends were weak a year ago in Brazil and Argentina in September, so easy comp in 3Q, but how do you think about the underlying health of the international business, and can this return to being a growth driver?
Yeah. Good question. We were down 2.7% in international in Q2. We do expect the international business to return to growth in Q3. Some of that is lapping the Argentina-Brazil effect. More importantly, we think the international business is a growth driver for the company. Prior to this disruption period we had, we grew international for six quarters in a row. We have a track record of knowing how to grow that international business. If you look at our market share in international, our market shares internationally are smaller than our market shares in the U.S. Additionally, we still have a significant amount of white space in front of us.
Now that we are for the first time really operating in a One Newell environment where we've consolidated our sales force, our legal entity, our IT system, that's opening up opportunities for us to drive stronger international growth because we can cross-sell across the portfolio in a much more effective manner than we were previously able to do.
Okay. Here's a reminder for everyone here how big international is.
International is about 39% of the business. The U.S. is 61%, so it's a meaningful part of the business.
The biggest market within that?
The top 10 international markets represent, or international countries represent 90% of the business, and those would be the five big Western Europe countries, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Japan, and Australia.
Great. Thank you. Segment perspective. Commercial is the one business that didn't inflect to growth in the second quarter. I guess why? Is this just sort of later in the innovation and distribution gain cycle, or are there structural elements that make the model different there in some way?
Yeah, I think it's a little bit just later in the innovation cycle. We've got three really exciting innovations that are in market actually now on that business. We're restaging the entire BRUTE line of core trash cans with a larger trash can with more features and benefits targeted to the professional community. That is a major innovation that's just launching this quarter. We have also launched a BRUTE line of farm products, think farm feeders, that gets us into a whole new category of products. Then the other business that's in that is a brand called Spontex, which is a European brand. We've launched a very strong trade-up proposition with this Spontex Flex & Wash sponge that's priced about 100% premium to the baseline that's driving significant market share and trade up.
I think you're going to see commercial get back to growth here, possibly even in the third quarter, based on the strength of these innovations that are hitting the market now.
Okay, great. Let's talk about back to school.
Back in August, when I saw you in New York, you talked about the season having a slow start, but that the company was gaining share and that there was evidence that there was a sort of a delayed but still healthy back to school season in total. With another month of data now in reality-
Yep
I think everybody's back to school in the next couple of days.
Yeah.
How have things progressed?
Yeah. I think the last time on our earnings call, we were three weeks in and a little bit more than that when you and I last talked. Today, we're eight weeks into the back to school season, so about 75% of the way through it. And things have improved from a category standpoint. As we sit here today, we would say the category is up about 1%, which is a little better than what we had expected. We are growing market share importantly on brands like Sharpie, Elmer's, Prismacolor, and EXPO. We are very much on track with our plan from a POS standpoint. We have seen the category accelerate just in the last week or two in terms of POS offtake.
This trend of consumers waiting and buying closer to the start time of school, we certainly have seen that be a factor this year, and we think that's probably consumers just trying to delay purchase until the last minute. We've also seen, in the Northeast in particular, the school start date has been pushed back this year because of the Labor Day timing. W e're very encouraged by the category trends, and by the POS offtake, which is in line with our plan. We expect, in writing, to grow this quarter significantly faster than the category as for Newell Brands.
Okay. Great. Historically, when we talk about back to school, there was always the first order, and then there was replenishment.
Yes.
To what degree is that still a dynamic in the category? Was it being pushed later?
It is still a dynamic in the category, and September is a big month. September is the biggest month of the quarter, so although we're eight weeks in, we still have the unknown of the replenishment orders. Typically, I would say two-thirds of back to school is locked up from the pre-orders to stage the stores, and then there's a third that sort of comes through the replenishment. That's why we look at both the shipment trends and the POS trends, because the POS trends are sort of a forward-leading indicator on the replenishment orders. The fact that the POS trends are in line with our forecast so far, and that the category is actually growing this year, albeit by only 1%, and that we're on track to grow faster than the category, I think are all positive indicators relative to the replenishment period.
Yeah. Okay. You'd mentioned when we're talking about the second quarter, you mentioned that you've given 3Q guidance and confirmed the year. T he thing is, when you do the math with your implied 4Q-
Yeah
I know you didn't guide Q4, but we can all do the math. There is actually scope in the range for fourth quarter core sales to be down. It's a wide range, but at the low end of the range, it would be a decline. Can we just talk about why that's on the table? We've talked about a lot of positive dynamics in the business.
Yeah.
What would have to happen, maybe that's a good way to put it, for core sales to be down in the fourth quarter?
Yeah. I would say a couple of things maybe as perspective, and I'll start with what you said, which is that we have not guided for Q4. We've only guided for Q3 and for the full year. Actually, when we guided at the end of Q2, we raised our guidance for the full year to now flat to +1%. At the midpoint, we're forecasting the year to be up on core sales this year. From a category growth standpoint, our guidance assumes a negative one category growth number. We saw negative one in the first quarter. In the second quarter, we were actually flat, and so you could argue maybe we're being a little bit conservative on the category growth number for the back half of the year.
I think we don't want to get ahead of ourselves on category growth, given the external environment, which remains very dynamic. But I will be disappointed if we grow, and when we report Q3, if we're guiding to a negative number for Q4. I don't think that's likely to happen.
Okay. Just from that filling in the blanks here too, curious about visibility on retail orders and holiday plans and maybe any thoughts on retail inventory levels heading into holiday season.
Yeah, retail inventory levels are in pretty good shape. We haven't seen any sort of overstock or things that we need to work down. If anything, a number of our innovations, we're sort of chasing supply because we can't supply demand fast enough. We have a couple of our big innovations actually on allocation right now. That's been more the thing that we're worried about internally. Not big enough to move the whole needle from a company perspective, but we don't see any glut or any big outage on retail inventory levels at the moment.
Okay. Let's talk a little about margins. Your turn. It's in the way. Gross margins this year are going to have a nice benefit from tariff refunds, 140 basis points. I know it's still early, but we've definitely already been getting questions about 2027 gross margins and building blocks, knowing you're just mechanically going to have this difficult lap. A bit forward-looking, but it'd be great to cover off on gross margins for 2027.
I guess what I'd say is we feel really good about our ability to drive gross margin expansion in a normalized environment. If you go back three years ago, when we first initiated our new strategy with our very choice for where to play and how to win choices, we've been able to drive gross margin up roughly 500 basis points over that three-year horizon. That was despite the fact that we had a big tariff headwind in 2025. That was roughly $0.23 a share. That's despite the fact that in 2026, we've had about $200 million of inflationary impacts, largely tracing back to macroeconomic factors coming out of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East. We were able to do that despite having over that timeframe, generally speaking, negative sales leverage.
Okay? As we think about projecting out into 2027, what do we know? We know that our FUEL productivity program, which we believe is world-class, will continue to operate at pace. We feel very good about that. We believe that the tariff environment has probably hit peak tariff, at least as it relates to our product sets based on what we currently know about the tariff regime in the current fiscal year. We went from about $115 million of impacts in 2025 to about $127 million this year, excluding all the tariff refund noise. We believe that will likely roll over into 2027. Year over year, there should be actually some tariff favorability as it relates to that, broadly speaking.
We also believe that the inflationary shocks that we've incurred this year we believe are temporal in nature, and that when things sort out in the Middle East, that will roll down, and it won't be the same rate that we've had to offset in the current environment. We also know that the innovation that we've been launching has been doing very well, and we know that the innovation, in order to get through our screening process, has to be gross margin accretive. This year we have 25 tier 1, tier 2s that are gross margin accretive. We also know that the prior year launches in 2024 and 2025, where the innovation is doing well, they'll be leveraged into years 2, 3, and 4. We know that in 2027, there'll be even more gross margin accretive innovation coming to pass.
When you put all those things together, plus, and I think this is maybe the one that some people miss, the benefit we'll start getting out of our domestic production facilities that we've spent $2 billion to automate since 2017 have really good favorable marginal economics. We've been able to get that 500 basis points of gross margin despite all those headwinds, and now we're going to be looking at a situation where we're going to get unit volume leverage through that highly automated set. We feel very, very good about 2027. We don't guide on gross margin, as you know, but when we look at that in totality, we feel really pretty good about where the company's currently sitting.
Okay. A lot of positives, but I'm guessing you don't want people walking away from this conversation, though, modeling gross margins up inclusive of the 140 basis points this year.
Right. What we've done is we've been very clear-
It's been normalized.
We've been very clear that in the current year, there's about $0.17 of favorability related to out-of-period tariff recoveries for monies that we had to pay and incurred in 2025.
Yeah.
When you look at our current year guidance range of $0.73-$0.77, there is that $0.17 that's in there for that specific reason.
Okay, perfect.
That number that Mark's talking about, of about $100 million, did manifest in gross margin. If you take that out-of-period adjustment out of this year's gross margin and use that as the starting place and then say we're going to go forward for all the factors Mark talked about, I think that's probably the right way to think about it.
Okay, great. Let's talk a little bit more about productivity. FUEL has been really successful the last couple of years. I think the run rate's around 200 basis points a year. Is that right?
It's about $200 million this year that it's generating. On a basis point standpoint, we've been taking out roughly 4.5% of COGS each year over the last couple years.
I apologize for undershooting.
We believe world-class is 3%. That team has been hitting it out of the park.
How much of this has been, at this point, capturing low-hanging fruit versus now you get to the harder work? As we think going forward, what is the right run rate for productivity going forward and what keeps driving that incremental gain?
We are increasingly excited about the FUEL productivity program, what that team has been able to accomplish. When we finished last year, we had 39 plants that had initiated the PEAK program. As we sit here today, that number is 47. We have talked about the fact that there is really six stages to the program, and this is kind of our Lean Six Sigma cost takeout program. You start in foundations, you go to base camp, and there is climb one, two, and three, and then you hit the summit. There are six stages to the overall program. As we sit here today with 47 sites that are enrolled in the program, which is 90% of the total targeted sites, we only have 25. We have 25 of those 47 that are basically at either foundations or base camp. Think about that.
25 of the 47 are literally in the first or second stage of a six-stage program. We have no sites, none, that are at climb 3 or the summit, zero. This program just continues to build itself out. The tools and the capability sets that the team is learning compounds on itself. Presently, we track thousands of individual projects, literally thousands of individual projects, which contribute to us being able to take out $200 and roughly $15 million this year of hard savings. We don't play games. It's real math. It's real savings. That's been equating to 4%, 4.5% of COGS take out each and every year. We think there's still tremendous runway available. I have to tell you, the AI enablement tools that we're bringing to bear, they unlock a lot of supply chain value as well.
Once we start putting that on top, Chris and I believe that we can continue to post world-class cost takeout for years going forward.
I won't ask the question on future margins, don't worry. One shorter-term question I did want to ask, though, was we've heard at least once today about higher freight costs than maybe companies expected six or eight weeks ago. Just curious what you're seeing, the degree that's impacting you or not. I know over the long term you've got it covered, but just shorter term.
Yeah, there's no question that the cost of diesel is having an impact on the business. I think we're at $92, $93 a barrel as we sit here today on the WTI. Obviously diesel, over the last couple days, kind of hit an all-time high, in excess of $5 a gallon. That does impact us. When we started this year, we thought we'd have about $100 million of inflationary impacts. At the end of the first quarter, you heard us up that by an additional $50 million. At the end of the second quarter, we added another 50 on top of that. Most of that's coming to us in two sources. It's either resin, which is obviously dependent on the price of oil, or it is direct transportation costs, i.e. diesel.
Now, I think the team's done a remarkably good job of being able to offset those challenges, which is what has basically allowed us to manage the year, I think, very efficiently and effectively. That is why you saw us in the last quarterly release, we were basically able to add that $0.17 above the low and high end of our range, which was the out-of-period refund monies that we received. A lot of companies had to use those out-of-period refund monies to offset inter-year challenges. We were able to push that through on both the bottom and the top end because we made additional choices on the FUEL productivity program, on the overhead spend. We obviously are benefiting now from being able to take our revenue forecast up, and we did that in the last quarterly release.
That then manifests itself through the factory systems and gives us unit volume leverage. We feel pretty good about our ability to be agile and handle those, but certainly it will be some impact and we have to see how long it now durates at this higher price. I mean, it could roll back over tomorrow for all we know.
For sure. Okay, great. I want to spend a moment on capital allocation. You are set to end the year below 4.5x on leverage, which is great. You have spoken to a longer-term target of 2.5x. Why is 2.5 the right level?
A couple of reasons. First, when we started our journey, I think we were around 6.5x levered. We did say in our last quarterly call that we will be comfortably below 4.5x when the dust settles on this current fiscal year. We feel really good. Again, we have been able to take two turns off despite the tariff challenges, despite the inflationary challenges. We feel good about that. We believe it is important to be an investment-grade issuer because obviously it lowers our cost of capital. If you did the math right now and you basically imputed through and you said, "If you are already at an investment-grade status, what would that do to your average cost of debt?" Ours would come down roughly 135, 140 basis points if you actually did that math.
That's over $70 million a year of interest expense. That's a lot of money, right? We want to be able to have a lower cost of capital. We want to have a balance sheet that allows us to be opportunistic as it relates to maybe small and strategic tuck-ins when the time comes. It just gives everyone a little more confidence when the balance sheet is in better regard.
Yeah. Okay. Chris, on your first day as CEO, you cut the dividend. We definitely hear from some investors who'd like to see you guys do that again in order to pay down debt faster. What would be your response to that?
Yeah, I think, first of all, it's never fun or easy to cut the dividend. I've only done it once in my life, and it was on the first day I became CEO, so I didn't shy away from it, and it needed to happen at that point in time. I feel very differently today. We do get some questions from investors on this. Equally, we get a number of investors who come and say, "Don't touch the dividend." Depending on who you talk to, you get very different messaging. What we look at is the operating cash flow that we're expecting to generate this year, which we've guided to about $400 million. We've said that our CapEx is going to be about $200 million.
If you look at our free cash flow, our free cash flow is sufficient to not only pay the dividend, but also to pay debt down and end the year with less debt. We are expecting to pay down north of $100 million of debt this year, and I expect that number will go higher next year. We think that we can drive this de-levering on the balance sheet, both through debt paydown and EBITDA growth. We think we are generating sufficient cash, free cash flow in the business to do both: fund the dividend and fund the. We are very comfortable where we are, and we think that there are enough investors that value the dividend that we do not think that is the right move to touch the dividend right now.
Okay. Mark, you mentioned tuck-in M&A when the time is right. You guys have done such a great job focusing the company on priority brands and geographies. You have sold licenses and shut down a good number of brands. You have got visibility to leverage getting to 3x or lower. How do you think about the opportunity to acquire new brands? Are there certain areas that you would look to broaden? Is leverage the only hurdle to making the decision that it is okay to go now? I would like to get in a little bit more of the thought process of going the other way, starting to add.
Yeah, I guess what I would say, and then Chris, I am sure will add some additional color, is look, we are not at that point yet, right? We have a long way to go still. We are committed to getting ourselves back to investment-grade status. Along that journey, and over the course of the last many years, we have been building a flywheel that is highly integrated and is scaled on the supply chain side of the house and across all the corporate capability sets as well. At some point in time, I think we would be a very good acquirer of businesses, because we can bolt those in and drive a very high level of synergy effects throughout that process. T hey would have to be things that are very much in line with our core capabilities, our core businesses, that go through the same distribution channels.
Like I said, we are not there yet. Chris may have some additional color to add. But it would have to be something that is, on the merits, clearly very logical, tight, and clean.
Yeah, the only thing I would add is we see tremendous opportunity in our existing brand portfolio. We do not think we need to do any acquisition to drive significant value creation from top-line growth, margin expansion, and de-leveraging. We have got a very strong base plan. As a result, I think our bar for doing something from an acquisition standpoint is pretty high. It would have to be a very strong strategic fit. It would have to be accretive. It would have to accelerate our de-leveraging impact as opposed to take us backwards. I am not a believer in large-scale acquisitions for this company, just to be clear.
Okay, great. One thing we were talking, I am sneaking in two questions.
If we have got time. A year ago is a little bit different direction, but a year ago, we were talking a lot about tariff advantage categories, right? The world was shifting, right?
Yeah.
When we were sitting here last year, there was a lot of anticipation of how that would all shake out. Where do you think you are right now on sort of capturing that opportunity of having such a big percentage of the portfolio manufactured domestically?
Yeah, it's certainly been a big advantage. We have 15 U.S. manufacturing plants. In many cases, we are tariff advantaged in that manufacturing footprint. As Mark said, we've automated those manufacturing plants, so they are highly cost competitive, and in many cases, have the best cost in the category. If you look at the distribution gains that we've had this year in the U.S., of call it mid-single digits, that's a function of a whole number of things. Part of it is innovation, part of it's better brand building, part of it's better retail execution, but part of it is the tariff advantage selling, too. We've seen that in the writing category, where we've got the world's largest writing factory in Tennessee. We've seen that on things like I mentioned Rubbermaid coming out of Ohio.
We've seen that on a number of our businesses that are made in the U.S. that retailers are increasingly looking to lean into to avoid the tariff dynamic, and the uncertainty of that tariff environment. We think it's a big deal. Last thing I would say on this is we've moved our manufacturing index. We used to manufacture about 45% of our business in the U.S., and we're now up to about 55%. We've meaningfully improved the amount of our business that's manufactured in the country by insourcing things into our U.S. manufacturing footprint, and part of what's enabled that is this automation effort that we've driven across the manufacturing base.
Okay. My final question is just assuming we're here together again, so consider this an invitation. We're sitting here again a year from now. What are the maybe three operating or financial measures that you would want investors to be looking at to say, "Something's changed, they're on the right path, the turnaround has continued.
Yeah, it's very simple. The three things that we're focused on that we talk every day are core sales growth first. We've had one quarter of core sales growth in Q2 at 2.3%. We're on our way to a second quarter this quarter. We need to sustain that. I think as we sustain that and demonstrate that through the capability set that I went through, that has a potential for the company to completely rerate in terms of how investors look at this company. Second thing is operating margin. We think we've got significant opportunity on the gross margin line and on the overhead line. We think we have funded the necessary A&P increase at this point. We think operating margin would be the second. Then third for us is the cash flow and de-levering.
We believe we're on track to continue the de-levering path. We're excited that we've gone from 6.5x to below 4.5. We'd like to continue the journey to get to 2.5. We think those three things are the things that we talk about. Those are the three things we think investors care about.
Okay, great. All right, we're going to move to breakout, but thank you so much for being with me this year. Please join me in thanking Newell Brands for coming.
Thank you.