Prahlad Singh, President and CEO of Revvity. So, Prahlad, welcome.
Thank you.
Thanks for coming. Listen, I will check my email a couple times throughout. If any of you want to pose any questions, I'll see if I can weave those in. We have a list and, you know, a little over 30 minutes to tackle it. So maybe, I thought just to kick it off, you know, obviously, the long-term guide, you guys just took it down from 10% to 6%-8%. You know, you've got 75-100 basis points of EBIT expansion. You kind of tweaked that down to 75 basis points. Still very attractive, double-digit earnings growth.
Maybe just give us a sense of what drove that, maybe what should—you know, kind of what changed in the end markets, maybe management philosophy, and, you know, how do you think about that new guide in the context of leaving some cushion on both sides?
Well, good morning, Dan. Great question to-
Yeah
... kick this off with, and, thank you for having us and giving us the opportunity to come and share what our story. Now, I think to your question around the, you know, the LRP we came out. You know, as we had mentioned during the 3Q earnings call, you know, we wanted to take time and then sort of reassess where we were, given the market conditions. And I think if you go back and look over the past few years, you know, the market obviously has seen its ups and downs, both. And for us, it was a very good point to calibrate and reflect as to how—what is our guidance philosophy.
Mm-hmm.
And I think there were two or three things that stood out for us. One is, we wanted to sort of tie our growth rate based on market growth. And we knew we know we have a differentiated portfolio, but we did realize that when we first came out with our mid-range plan at that point, you know, it was, the market was in a very different conditions. You know, everything was growing double digits. And in hindsight, that was not normal, but neither was 2023. So, you know, you have to think of it from a perspective of: what is the long-range cycle that is reflective of market, what market growth is? And given the differentiated portfolio, we felt very comfortable that we would be at least 200 basis points above market growth.
And the other aspect also is we didn't want to sort of have a time period, a defined time period, but rather have an earnings, a philosophy around our long-term planning that is over a period of time. So I think those were the two, three factors that, you know, made us go back and reflect what we had come out with earlier. And the experience of the last few years sort of gave us more confidence in giving out a growth rate for the long term, which we felt very comfortable with, given the differentiated portfolio that we have now.
We'll dig into the different businesses as we go through the Q&A, but maybe just one more follow-up there. When you think about really high level, and you have a lot of, you know, subsegments, you give a lot of color and transparency on your business, when you you know if you zoom out, were there two or three areas that when you first set the guide to where it is today, when you think about the end markets, that kind of changed the most? Was it, you know, was it a geography? Was it a customer? Just any color on that front?
I don't think, I don't think the end markets per se changed-
Mm-hmm.
But I think, again, if I were to go back and look at where we were in 2022 when we first came out with the guidance, right, or 2021, the market was in a very different stage.
Mm-hmm.
You know, pharma, biotech was spending very differently, and I think there was a lot of COVID and, you know, COVID dollar influx, which was coming into the marketplace.
Right.
I think that has been calibrated-
Mm-hmm
and especially after what we saw in 2023. So I think if there was one swing factor, it was the behavior of pharma, biotech-
Mm-hmm
versus what it was during the COVID years.
Got it. So when you think about 2024, obviously, you just printed and gave your guidance, but how would you characterize key priorities for this year for Revvity?
Yeah, I think there were two or three that, you know, comes, jumps off to mind. One, obviously, is control the controllables.
Mm-hmm.
Right? You know, I know we are in a tough market situation, but I think, you know, from an expense management perspective, in terms of what we have said, what our guidance philosophy is, and what cost-cutting measures we are taking to ensure that we execute appropriately on that. You know, the second aspect for us really is we continue to integrate the companies that we've acquired. You know, we acquired nearly a dozen companies over the past 30 months now. So continue to integrate those. You know, while we were plucking the low-hanging fruit-
Mm-hmm
Now we are getting deeper into, you know, what is our selling, marketing, operational synergies that come out of the acquisitions. That's also a priority for us. And third is capital deployment. I think we've talked about, you know, from an external perspective, what we are doing around our debt, et cetera, but also internally, investments around e-commerce, GMP capabilities, that takes priority for us this year. So I would say those are the three things that we are putting our attention on.
Got it. And then, you know, when we think about the guide this year, both you and your peers, you know, are largely calling for kind of a muted recovery, just given, I presume, the state of end markets here, but your guide is actually above many peers. You know, I think you're calling for growing 200 basis points above market or, you know, 1%-3% organic. So it'd be great just to understand some of the puts and takes that went in. You know, then, when you think about the guide, you know, what are some of the factors that could take you to the high end or, you know, to the low end of the range?
Sure. I think the assumption, and then what we've seen since September, is stability in the market.
Mm-hmm.
So I think that sort of gives us a cautiously optimistic sense that that stability has continued in the marketplace. But I think, you know, our assumption going in has been that the market will go down low single digits, and we'll be at least a couple of hundred basis points above market growth. Plus also for us, uniquely, we have two things that don't repeat in 2024 that we've talked about: the Omics side of the business and the software renewals.
Mm-hmm.
So that is unique to us to some extent. Plus, we also have our growth drivers around Immunodiagnostics. As we've seen, that continues to go well. So that's what gives us sort of the confidence, and those are the puts and takes that we see in the market. The biggest swing factor again is pharma biotech and what the behavior of the buying pattern of the customers out there.
Mm-hmm. And then you're, you know, for 1Q, and then we'll dig into some of the businesses. So for 1Q, your guide is down mid-single. I think you guys cited comps. You know, I know you don't historically give, like, sub-segment numbers quarter by quarter, but can you unpack it a little bit in the down mid-single? Like, what's the biggest driver of that down mid-single, and any commentary on, as we sit here, March, you know, second or—excuse me, March fourth—sorry about that—
Yeah
... kinda how things are going?
Obviously, I can't talk about-
Mm
... intra-quarter guidance, but I think, you know, if you were to look at it, and we've talked about this, you know, earlier, is the pressures around life sciences instruments and Applied Genomics, you know, is one that, that will continue, and we've seen that over the last quarter. I think, our Immunodiagnostics business will continue to do better than market. And, so those are sort of some of the puts and takes, I would say, and life sciences reagents will be neutral to down a bit.
Mm-hmm. Then maybe before we jump in the diagnostics segment, just kind of zooming out on China, you know, we did a breakfast this morning and, one of our Washington Research Group execs, they've been really focused on this Biosecure bill and kind of what it could mean, and they think the government means business. So I'm just wondering, from a super high level for China, which is a really big, important geography for you, even more so than some of your competitors, I don't know, how do you think what the government, you know, is doing with this first Biosecure bill and focusing on some of the key genomic technologies where they want to prevent certain customers in the U.S. from buying those?
Our team thinks it could lead to tariffs and restricting access to some of the key technologies that maybe you sell. So how do you think, like, the business in China is not necessarily doing today, but do you think this is a worry for investors about something could, you know, kind of get worse over the next 3-5 years and really be disruptive?
Yeah, I mean, and again, China, as you said, is an important market for us, but it is also where we have a very differentiated portfolio versus our peer groups. As you recall, and we've said this, everybody grew, declined double digits, if not, you know, higher last year, and we grew mid-single digits in China. But that has been years of work as to ensuring that we have the appropriate-
Mm
... portfolio in the marketplace for us. 17% of our revenue comes from China, 10% is in diagnostics, 7% is in life sciences, and in 10% in diagnostics, you've got Newborn Screening, and you've got an Immunodiagnostics business. So I mean, that if you just look at the Biosecure bill, these are, you know, this is like bread and butter that, that is there. So it's not sort of something that impacts it. On the life sciences side, 7% of our revenue comes from China. More than 60% now that is reagent, which is a regular run rate business.
Mm-hmm.
So again, it's not something where we are giving out high technology on the life sciences side either, where you would sort of have an impact from the bigger picture.
Got it. Okay. So maybe kind of moving into, you know, the, you know, the businesses, just, you know, you mentioned Immunodiagnostics. It's been, you know, really a workhorse in diagnostics, growing above the, you know, kind of corporate average. You know, I think, you know, you've talked about low double-digit, maybe profile. Just give us some color on the confidence and visibility of to kind of grow at that maybe 9%-11% rate. I know this year, like we're, we're modeling kind of high single-digit growth, a little below that this year, just given the comp from 2023. But just maybe unpack that business a little bit and how we think about it, you know, as we look into 2024.
Yeah. I mean, I think the assumptions are correct around how to model it this year, just given how big, you know, 2023 was for you. But again, Dan, if you just take a step back and look at the Immunodiagnostics business, and I have said this many times, even in the developed world, this is still in its, I would say, infancy, maybe not in its nascency. You know, the call point tends to be you go to first your PCP, then you might go to a specialist, and then you might go to an endocrinologist, and eventually, you end up at an autoimmune specialist.
Mm-hmm.
So even in the developed markets, the call points are still there, and the autoimmune business continues to grow very well. Then in China, in India, in Brazil, and some of the emerging markets, it's still far away. So that's why sort of it gives us the confidence. Plus, the portfolio that we have in Immunodiagnostics, especially, is much more differentiated. And in China, one of our opportunities is that, how do you stay ahead of the game? Whether it's with VBP or any one of these aspects, you know, we are always gonna have pricing pressure, but how do you stay ahead of the game by having technology which is going to be something which is much more differentiated than what the local competition can bring in?
Mm-hmm.
That has been our success story in Immunodiagnostics for the past seven years, and we hope to continue that for the next decade.
That was my next question, Immunodiagnostics in China, competitive landscape. So you've kind of touched upon it, but I guess, you know, on the tendering process, maybe just comment there. It doesn't sound like it's gonna be a big deal, but just speak on the competitive landscape in China and the work that we've done in the past, and haven't done it recently, was that it's really your menu and the ability to bring new tests out and get pricing, which is very differentiated view. So just what can you speak to for investors who China is a long way away, and it's hard to diligence? You know, what, what's the kind of durability strength of that business in China?
... I think you have the answer to the question in your question.
Mm-hmm.
You know, I think having a menu which is differentiated enough, which is something that is a need and an ask, and it's an unmet need in the marketplace. You know, you're always going to have pricing pressure, as I said. You're always going to have, you know, mid-single to high single-digit pricing pressure, but that is going to be a piece of the portfolio where competition is able to come in. The question is: How do you stay a step ahead in the game? How do you have a portfolio that is something that is a need of the market rather than something that you want to push through?
Mm-hmm.
That's been our differentiating factor.
Okay. Maybe just on Reproductive Health, it was down, you know, kind of slightly in 2023, and we've got flatter growth this year. But just, you know, when we think about the ability to get back to something better, whether it be low single, low single plus, like, what are the drivers to get you back up? Is that possible this year, or just... You know, just kind of unpack that business a little bit for us.
It's a great question there. I think if you look at it and if you actually, you know, peel a layer of the onion, on the Reproductive Health business, actually, our newborn screening business has done really well. You know, it's grown mid-single digits last year, and that is primarily, in the face of declining birth rates. Especially if you look at China, where you've had double-digit declines in birthrate. And we've continued to be able to do that because of the new tests that we have brought in. I've talked about SMA, DMD, in some markets where you have a, you know, need, and now with the RUSP having MPS II, which is on approval, and hopefully DMD gets through it. So we've tried to, again, have a very healthy NPI pipeline on newborn screening.
You know, the pressure for the overall Reproductive Health business is because of the omics side of the business, where we had some pharma partnerships which didn't renew last year, and which is one of the corrective factors that we will see this year, as I've talked about.
Mm-hmm. And, and you know, like, even maybe just as an adjunct to that, like, when you think about that business, yeah, I think a lot of investors think of it as like, you guys are a leader in newborn, and then you have this pharma thing tucked in there. Is that the right spot for that business? I mean, would it help to break that out separately so it doesn't get clouded under, like, what the Reproductive Health, you know, what the core newborn screening business is, or just maybe any color on that pharma piece?
No, I think it's a good question.
Mm-hmm.
The reason it is, is because a lot of the pharma partnerships are around rare diseases.
Mm-hmm.
It's a very good conduit to have them together because the Omics side of the business is essentially a sandbox.
Mm-hmm.
You know, which is, you know, DMD is a classic example. You know, the test was developed, the assay was developed there, and then once you have the assay, you kitize it, and then it moves to the IVD side of the business.
Right.
Also from a customer's perspective, our pharma partners are looking for, you know, how... You know, especially around the rare diseases, how do you be a partner of them all the way from discovery to clinical?
Mm-hmm.
Eventually post-clinical, providing them the support and identifying patients through the services side of the business, following them up for efficacy. It is a good fit. I mean, in the longer term, we might have to assess, are there some pieces of it which we parse out?
Mm-hmm.
So it makes. But, you know, it's gonna go from here to there somewhere. But overall, at the liberty perspective, it doesn't really make that much of a difference.
Right. And maybe one more just... So, is the pharma weakness more just given what's going on in the pharma end markets? Was it a comp issue or just anything, you know, related to IRA? Just maybe a little bit more color on kind of what drove the weakness and kind of what have you baked in for 2024.
This is specific to Omics-
Yeah, yeah
or is it overall?
No, Omics. Omics.
I think it was primarily just CapEx spending.
Just CapEx spending.
You know, where they were just refraining from signing more multi-year contracts-
Got it.
till they see what was happening.
Got it. Okay. So maybe, maybe last piece in diagnostics, Applied Genomics, you know, that was down high single in 2023. You know, it was kind of well below initial plans, you know, and we've modelled that down kind of low double digit this year. Here as well, I think you've talked about pharma spending, you've talked about, you know, elective procedure volumes. Just, there's a lot of different workflows and applications in this segment. Maybe just kind of, kind of point to what are the key things that drive this business, a little color on your competitive positioning.
Yeah, I think if you look at Applied Genomics, despite what you've said, what you've said for this year, over a 3- to 5-year cycle, it'll still be growing mid-single digits.
Mm-hmm.
You know, during the COVID years, that business grew 40%-50%, you know-
Mm.
and some ridiculous numbers
Right
... for 2-3 years. You know, obviously, you are seeing a calibration of that, and I think it'll at least take 2024 for it get back to a more, you know, what is a normal cycle of mid-single-digit growth for that market.
Mm.
Because essentially what you're looking at, a liquid handling platform, extraction of DNA, RNA.
Mm
... you know, primers and reagents and assays that go from sample to detection-
Mm-hmm
whatever the detection modality is.
Mm-hmm.
So.
Your competitive positioning, obviously the robotic side, probably a leader. How do you compete in the other parts of the Applied Genomics business, and kind of what are you seeing there?
I think we, that's where we just need to be much more innovative, honestly. It's not just from us. You know, if you look at some of the global competitors, you know, if you were at SLAS-
Mm-hmm
... you saw some of the competition coming out from other markets. It's not just about how low can your cost go, but what are the unique features and specs that you can bring into your portfolio. Because the more robotics that there is now, and more remote robotics, you know, I mean, it's those days are gone where you have an automated platform, but means you still stand there and watch it.
Mm-hmm.
Versus when you can truly be remotely in a position where you can run an experiment. How do you set up a protocol which doesn't take a week or two to get validated? You know, these are sort of innovative features that you bring into it. You know, now the whole automation, machine learning, AI, how do you make it ubiquitous? That's sort of the strategy that one needs to look at for that portfolio.
Okay. So maybe just toggling over to life sciences. So here, you know, reagents have tended to grow above the corporate average. BioLegend kind of is a, you know, a core part of that business. You know, it does seem that maybe reagents felt a little bit of pressure here in a tough macro the past few quarters. Just any color on the kind of underlying trends, whether you want to start with BioLegend or just go to the broader non-BioLegend reagents and kind of, you know, what you're seeing from the end market dynamics there?
Well, I think we did see some pressure, but I think our reagent business still did pretty well last year.
Mm.
You know, if you look at it compared to our peers, it still did pretty well. I think, you know, you see some consolidation, you know, because of what happened in the third quarter last year, that saw some pressure and, you know, and some budgetary constraints that you see. But I think it's a very healthy portfolio. You know, if you, if you look at BioLegend as an example, right?
Mm.
You know, half of it is antibodies, but the other half of it is getting more and more into proteogenomics, single cell, you know, areas of growth that you are seeing in the marketplace. You know, and as we've talked about BioLegend as an example, it's got unique features in terms of next-day delivery, service, cost. These features really help them differentiate from the marketplace, and that's the sustaining ability of that acquisition, which we could not be happier with.
So we model kind of mid-single-digit growth for BioLegend. It's. I think it's 15% of revenue, so it's a key business growth driver. You just mentioned a few of the differentiating features. Can you step back a little bit and zoom out? I mean, are those the key aspects, obviously from a performance basis? I'm sure that has to be on par, if not better than peers. Just kinda how do you think about, you know, why BioLegend wins and, you know, kind of, is kind of mid-single-digit growth the right area for that business?
Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, if you look at it from a whole life sciences reagent business, BioLegend is close to 50% of that.
Mm-hmm.
But I think, you know, the three unique features that I talked about from there is speed, service, and quality. But more importantly, I think their uniqueness is that their commercial teams tend to be very highly qualified, and they work side by side. I mean, if you go down here in Harvard, you know, you can't differentiate which one is the BioLegend representative and who's the Harvard technologist on the lab bench. So the work starts very early in the process, and then it is all based on an e-commerce platform. Once you have set up what is needed, you know, you just go, and from a buying perspective, the buying process is much faster and much more efficient than what you have in the traditional side of the business, and hence, our investment on the e-commerce capabilities.
Now, imagine if you could do that for our whole life sciences-
Mm-hmm
... reagents business, where you could have the same fast throughput that BioLegend is able to do. So, you know, it's not just the innovativeness that they have been able to bring in the portfolio, but it's also, you know, how did they do business? Their commercial effectiveness is really unique, given how close they are to the customer.
What is that addressable market growth for BioLegend, and are you gaining share? Are you growing with the market?
I think we probably... I would say in the last year it was tough to tell, just given the market conditions. You know, How do you put a pulse on that? But I would say that, you know, if you go back, and I think it was, I don't know, I'm gonna get the year wrong, but 10, 15 years ago, BioLegend was, what, 5% of the market? And now it's, you know, number one position. At, I would say, a tie for a number one position in the marketplace. So that's the uniqueness, and you see that market growth continuing.
Mm-hmm. So, so moving on to instruments, obviously, they've been feeling the brunt of the pressure, and we're here today from a lot of players, kind of how they're thinking about it. I think, you know, we model down in the mid-20s in Q1 with some improvement as we go through the year due to comps, but I think we've got down high single digits for this year. First, is that a reasonable way to think about it? Do you think that's a reasonable way to think about it? And then, B, can you kinda unpack between your different subsegments there? Are they, are they all being, you know, kind of painted with this brush, or are there certain segments that are doing a lot better or worse?
Yeah, I think, I think that's pretty close in terms of the assumption that we would use. I think, you know, again, I would go back to how I started the conversation, Dan. You know, what we are looking for is stability in the marketplace, and, and I think I would say since September, we've started to see stability.
Mm-hmm.
You know, you know, we are not sort of not jumping for joy-
Right
... but at least we are not seeing continued decline, which is an important aspect to keep in mind.
Mm-hmm.
You know, and if that stability continues, that's what we have assumed in, in our guidance for the year. Now, if the market turns around in the second half of the year, you know, significantly more than that, then obviously that's all upside that you would assume. I am optimistic, given what we have seen in the trend over the past, I would say, since September.
Mm-hmm. So when you think about in China, if we were to unpack the instrument business in China and ex-China, just how much of the decline. Like, I guess could you speak to instruments in China, maybe is the right way to ask it in life sciences? Like, are they a lot worse than what the overall instrument business is doing?
Yeah, I would say that, you know, it's. When I say stability for our instruments portfolio, it's across, I would say, the same thing. You know, keep in mind, China grew for us mid-single digits last year.
Mm.
Obviously, our instruments did better. It did much better in the first half of the year, given that there was still some of the stimulus funding there, rather than the second half of the year. But again, I would say the stability remark would be the same for them, too.
Have you guys assumed any of the stimulus in China comes back in 2020?
No.
No.
No. If any of... If it does, then that would be upside to what we have in our guidance.
Yeah, Agilent just talked about on their fiscal first quarter call that China improved. I think it was still down 9%, but they said it was, like, better than they expected, and they kinda... There wasn't one thing they pointed to. But anyway, I guess just maybe walk us back through a little bit, like, has China, whether on life sci-- I mean, maybe saying in life science, like, I forget, in your fourth quarter... Was there any, like, intra-quarter improvement or just maybe, you know, how did China trend for you guys?
I would again say for the year-
Yeah
... if you look at it, China-
Yeah, better
... grew for us mid-single digits.
Mm-hmm.
I'll go back to the comment that I made around, you know, we continue to see the stability in the marketplace, and hopefully that continues.
Mm-hmm. So you recently rolled out the Signals Clinical to support analytics through clinical trials, excuse me. Just talk about the TAM in your software business, like, what does this mean? And can you frame kind of how you expect it to contribute to Revvity, you know, maybe not this year, but as we look out?
Yeah, and I'm glad you asked that question because software is really one of our hidden treasures-
Mm
... which doesn't get the attention that it deserves.
Mm.
Simply because, you know, if you just look at the business as such, it's close to $200 million business.
Mm
... which continues to grow very well. Obviously, last year they had the renewal aspects, which we pointed out at the beginning of the year, which we won't have this year. But it's no different than on the software side versus what we've talked about on the life sciences reagent side, where we primarily focused on pre-clinical research and discovery. And now the opportunity with the GMP investments that we have made is to move more and more towards, you know, the, down the value chain into the clinical side of the business. And Signals Clinical's the software suite that was launched was, again, a prime example of how we are moving down from pre-clinical research and discovery, where they have a very strong market position, to into the clinical arena, where it's a very dispersed workflow right now.
And literally, some of the CROs send Excel spreadsheets back, which have to be collated. And, you know, and I think, the clinical suite is one step, that we are now going forward in the direction of how do we help our customers collate, collaborate, and analyze the information that comes from the trials?
I mean, clinical market's a lot bigger than the economic market.
Yeah. Absolutely, absolutely.
So actually, maybe related to that, and this question was on the list, so what, what, what percent of your pharma business is like the emerging biotech? Since I think the feedback we've already gotten at this conference from a lot of investors is people are gravitating towards funding, biotech funding getting better. I think there's a lot of excitement on what that could mean. Just, I mean, have you guys quantified, like, your pre-commercial biotech versus your kind of commercial biotech?
Yeah, I think we did that, and if that 5% of our numbers, of our total revenue is, I always have to-
Yeah, yeah
... look at them before I give out a number. But, it has to a 5% is to be pharma biotech.
Got it. Okay, so we have a few minutes left here. What have we got? No, actually, we're almost out of time. Yeah, we still have five minutes left. Maybe just moving over to, you know, margins, and pricing. You know, pricing, I think, was, I think you guys talked about 150 basis-
Mm
... points of pricing in 2023. You talked about at least 100 basis points going forward. Just, you know, just what's the pricing strategy? I think we've heard from some companies, like, they're able to kind of sustain even better pricing coming out of COVID. It's sticking. Just how do we think about pricing benefits for Revvity?
Yeah, I think we've said, you know, what our assumption is going forward, but, you know, if you look at the businesses and the diagnostic side of the business, you know, while it might have some pricing uplift in some markets, you know, the China piece sort of balances that out in terms of the pricing pressure that we see there.
Mm.
You know, most of the pricing uplift that we see is on the life sciences reagent side of the business.
Mm
... and that's where you would naturally expect it to come through, given the differentiation in the portfolio and given, you know, the capabilities that we-- I talked about earlier during our conversation.
Okay. So you're expecting to hold margins flat this year, despite, you know, low single-digit growth. So that's, you know, that's pretty good, I think. Just maybe how are you kind of managing the investment in the business versus delivering to the bottom line? And, you know, as we think going forward, you've talked about 75 basis points, you know, is that, like, would that be possible in 2025, given maybe the restraints you're putting on the business this year? Just any color on kind of margins.
Yeah, I mean, you know, think of it this way, Dan. You know, just coming out off the blocks post the divestment, you know, we were at 28% margin, which I think is really good, and then puts us right off the bat in the top quartile of our peer sector. But I think the opportunities that we've got, you know, as we've talked about, whether it's around standard costs, around you know, the e-commerce ability, capabilities that we are bringing in, footprint rationalization that we have now that we have divested, gross margin opportunities. So there are just many baskets that we have to go in and plug.
Mm.
I think that gives us a great deal of confidence that this, why this should not be a business operating in the thirties in a few years.
Mm.
I would say because these are all things that are within our control-
Mm
... and it's a matter of execution.
So that's pretty good. So maybe, cap allocation, you discussed at the beginning, the integration side. What about on the external side? Kind of how are you thinking about acquisitions versus buybacks and kind of debt paydown and, you know, what kind of size deals, you know, could Revvity undertake? Just, you know, any color on your strategy there.
Yeah, I think we'll continue to be acquisitive, and we are, you know, we continue to have conversations in the marketplace, and, you know, we haven't yet found something that has both the financial and the strategic aspects aligned, you know, and all the stars aligned. And when it is, you know, you'll hear about that from us. It's. We've never been shy of being acquisitive. But I think, you know, we've got a debt paydown that comes due in February, which in September, which we've allocated in U.S. Treasuries. And, you know, we'll continue to be opportunistic around share buyback. I think, you know, that's one of our most attractive investments that we would make is on share buyback. So that continues to be front and center, along with the other two aspects which I talked about.
Maybe last question here, since we're out of time. So what, what's the message you want to leave investors with? What's one message on Revvity?
I think learning about the company and seeing how differentiated our portfolio is today versus what it was post-divestiture. You know, Revvity is a company that has got a very compelling and differentiated portfolio, both on the life sciences and the diagnostic side. But I think the bigger nuance is that now how we are able to connect the life sciences and diagnostic side of the business, where we are part of the journey of pharma biotech, from licensing technologies to them, providing them the tools and capabilities to use that technology, developing companion diagnostics as they go through the disease development process, and then using our service capabilities globally to identify patient, follow them up for efficacy, and follow-ups.
So for us, the opportunity is now how we are a part of the whole journey, from discovery to commercialization, for our pharma, commercial and biotech, pharma biotech customers. That is sort of a portfolio which is very differentiated than anything that you will see out there in the industry.
Great. Well, I think with that, we're out of time, so thanks, Prahlad. Thanks for being with us today.
Thank you, all.
Excellent. Thank you, Prahlad. Great to see you for sure.