Conagra Brands, Inc.

Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Conagra Brands Third Quarter Fiscal 2026 Earnings Q&A Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Matthew Neisius, Senior Director of Investor Relations for Conagra Brands. Please go ahead. Matthew Neisius: Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Once again, I'm joined this morning by Sean Connolly, our CEO; and Dave Marberger, our CFO. We may be making some forward-looking statements and discussing non-GAAP financial measures during this Q&A session. Please see our earnings release, prepared remarks, presentation materials and filings with the SEC in the Investor Relations section of our website for descriptions of our risk factors, GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliations and information on our comparability items. I'll now ask the operator to introduce the first question. Operator: Our first question comes from Andrew Lazar with Barclays. Andrew Lazar: Maybe, Sean, to start off, I really like your thoughts on if the industry does end up facing another round of broad-based inflation, I guess, whether you think Conagra and the industry at large would be able to count on pricing as but one lever to help offset it as it has in the past or if this time is different, just given consumers are particularly value conscious at this stage? And I ask it because I think some industry players clearly are needing to remain highly focused on debt paydown and protect profitability even if it prolongs sort of the volume recovery dynamic. Sean Connolly: Yes. Great question. Here's how I would tell you to think about that. First, as a reminder, believe it or not, it was all the way back at the beginning of our fiscal '24 when we pivoted to a focus on restoring volume growth in frozen and snacks, even if it meant eating some inflation and enduring some margin compression. Well, that strategy has proven to be quite effective because you've seen our volume trajectory improve every quarter since with the exception of that brief period last year where we had the temporary supply constraints. So we're very pleased and pleased to see our total portfolio growing again this quarter. As for what comes next, our plan at this point is to stay agile. If inflation is benign, you'll see us likely continue to focus on continued volume momentum. If for some reason, inflation was to go the other way, we'll keep our options open. After all, we are a company that is intensely focused on maximizing cash flow. And we've already proven that we can move the volume needle to growth in frozen and snacks when we need to. So net, we'll be agile. But right now, I would say it's too early to speculate on a particular course of action. There's 3.5 months to go before we guide for fiscal '27. And obviously, a lot can unfold by the hour these days, and certainly a lot can unfold in the next 3.5 months. One thing we can be sure of is that we will drive a lot of productivity while we optimize all our other levers to mitigate any inflation that might come our way. And remember, we did take pricing this year on a bunch of products, our canned foods and our cocoa-oriented products and the elasticities have been quite encouraging. So let's see how the dust settles, and then we'll take the smartest course of action to deal with whatever we're seeing at the time. But as I sit here today, I see a lot of positives. The business has strong momentum, especially in frozen and snacks. Shares are excellent. Cash flow is strong. Productivity is robust, and people are highly engaged in delivering some of the most exciting innovations we've had. So a lot to feel good about. Andrew Lazar: Great. And then just, Dave, real quickly, maybe I guess what sort of visibility do we have at this stage on costs going into fiscal '27, just based on where you might already have some hedges in place. I'm not asking, obviously, for your overall inflation estimate or whatever for next year. But just how much visibility do you think you have or based on where you already know what you've got in place? David Marberger: Yes, Andrew, let me give you a little color there. So for our fiscal '27, our material spend coverage is generally consistent with the prior years at this point. So we're roughly 60% covered, and this is total materials, 60% covered for Q1 and roughly 40% covered for the full fiscal year. Areas where we have a bit more coverage than historically would be steel, freight. Remember, we contract line haul. That's a big percentage of our freight. And so that's on contract. And then some of our crop-based ingredients, we have better coverage and then a little bit less coverage on diesel fuel. We're covered through the end of this fiscal year there, but not as covered as we've been in the past. And just as a reminder, proteins probably have the lowest coverage of anything. So for next year, we're only about 15% covered. We're more spot market when it gets to the animal proteins. So hopefully, that gives you a little bit of a feel. Operator: Our next question comes from David Palmer with Evercore ISI. David Palmer: Those were precisely my questions. So let me just follow up on that a little bit. When you look at your portfolio, you've obviously been prioritizing volume over the last fiscal year, and that has helped. And there are some other notable companies in the space that have been aggressive in this prioritizing volume first, just like you. I wonder where we are now in terms of where you think your pricing power is? Do you feel like you're in a better spot now with regard to relative price points to private label in some of your categories versus main competitors and others in terms of your just volume momentum overall? And I really am asking because in the past, you've said things like we'll be okay if inflation is not over 3% in terms of getting to our algo. And I just wonder if today, if we do go over 3%, if you'll be able to drive profitable growth going forward? Sean Connolly: David, it's Sean. First of all, private label, just since you brought that up, we underindexed in terms of private label development in our categories, particularly in our -- almost nonexistent in our biggest business, which is Frozen Meals. But our strategy has been what I've called the horses for courses strategy where our growth businesses have been focused on getting back to volume growth, that's frozen and snacks, and that is happening. Our Staples business is focused on cash maximization. That's a lot of things like our canned food business. And we have taken inflation-justified price on those categories, and we've seen good elasticity. So it's a surgical approach that we've taken historically. And -- but make no mistake about it because we've dealt with the most protracted inflation super cycle that I've certainly seen in my 35 years of doing this. And after a few years of every company taking justified pricing, investors said, "Look, you can't shrink your way to prosperity, show us that you can get the volumes moving again." And we have done that. And our portfolio responsiveness, I think, has outpaced our peers, which shows you we are delivering good value, and we are delivering exciting innovation. But as I mentioned to Andrew, as to what's to come, we'll see what the field gives us when we've got to snap the chalk line here. And if things settle down with the war and things like that and things look more benign, I think it makes sense to stay focused on keeping the momentum that we've got in volume. But if, for some reason, things broke the other way, and we're looking at a whole slog of new costs, we can pivot as well because to the degree you do take price and you sacrifice a little volume, it's more of a volume sabbatical than it is a permanent volume rebase, and you tend to see the volumes come back when inflation moves again and you see those prices get rolled back. So as I said, we've got to stay agile, but feel really good to see that we have a portfolio that is responsive to proper pricing and wise investments and strong innovation when we need it to be. But look, investors always want to see top line and bottom line growth. Sometimes the macro environment can make it challenging to do both at the same time. We'll stay agile, and we'll post you as we get to next quarter in terms of what we're seeing and what the exact plan is. Operator: Up next, we have Megan Clapp with Morgan Stanley. Megan Christine Alexander: I just wanted to start with maybe a question on the fourth quarter. As you look at the third quarter, you obviously had some nice momentum, a return to org sales. There were a lot of moving parts just with the retailer timing and some of the year-over-year dynamics. So as we think about the fourth quarter, maybe you can just help us with some of the building blocks as we think about top line and should shipments generally match consumption. And then on the op margin line, can you just help us kind of understand the building blocks to the sequential improvement that's embedded as well? Sean Connolly: Megan, it's Sean. Let me start by tackling the shipment versus consumption question because I saw a couple of early reports this morning that I think might have that wrong. I would not spend a lot of time overthinking shipments versus consumption because with our company, because of the supply interruption last year and then some merchandising timing shifts in frozen this year out of Q2 into Q3, our shipment patterns have moved around a bit compared to what they normally do. But over fiscal '25 and fiscal '26 combined, we are basically shipping almost exactly to consumption, which is what we always do as a company. It's just been a bit lumpier quarter-to-quarter because of those dynamics. And so with respect to this quarter, I wouldn't get overly exercised around there's an implication in Q4. It's actually more the reversal of Q2 which was where we had a bunch of holiday shipments last year, those -- and merchandising shipments this year moved to Q3. So not a lot of drama there, and that's the shipment versus consumption piece of the year to go. Dave, do you want to tackle anything else? David Marberger: Yes. And just to add to that, Megan, we do expect positive organic net sales growth in Q4. That's obviously implied with our full year guide to the kind of the midpoint of the range for organic. Consumption and shipments should be more in line in Q4, talking to what Sean just explained. And we have -- we're excited about our innovation slate and you start shipping some of that innovation, so you start to see some of that in Q4. So they're really the building blocks for the top line. As it relates to operating margin, yes, we expect an inflection from Q3 to Q4. Really, the big drivers of that A&P as a percentage of sales will not be as high in Q4 as it was in Q3. So it will be more in line with that kind of 2.5% average. The 53rd week actually gives some leverage in terms of overall operating margin. And then just some of the seasonality of trade, timing of productivity, timing of inflation, all those kind of things give us additional kind of benefit in op margin relative to Q3. So I would say they're the kind of the key building blocks. Megan Christine Alexander: Okay. That's helpful. And just as a follow-up, the op margin, you're now expecting at the high end of the guide. Could you maybe just talk about what's driving that? And as we look at the exit rate on the fourth quarter, I think it implies something above 12%. Understanding there's a lot of moving parts right now, but if inflation kind of stays in this low single-digit range as you would hope it moderates to and normalizes over time. Like, should we think about that exit rate as being informative of kind of a starting point going forward at this point? David Marberger: Yes. Regarding the last part of your question, I'm not going to comment on fiscal '27. What I can say is -- and if you just look at when we gave guidance at the beginning of the year, 11% to 11.5% operating margin when there were so many things going on at that time. And since then, there have been so many dynamics, I feel really good that we're actually now going to guide to the higher end of that range. And that all starts with our inflation call, which was core inflation and tariffs. We're pretty much on that call. Our productivity programs are really doing well. The investments we've made in our supply chain and technology and in process are really, really delivering. And so they're really the key. As Sean talked about, we have taken price increases, particularly in our canned products and the elasticities have been in line. And so when you kind of look at it, it's how we planned the year. There obviously have been some puts and takes. But generally speaking, we feel really good that we're coming in as we expected to on margin. And we expect that productivity to continue into next year. Obviously, we have more work to do on inflation. There's a lot of dynamics. Things are changing all the time. But I talked about the coverage we have. We are locked in on certain key areas, which is good for us. So we feel good that the building blocks for next year's plan are there, but we have to wait the next 3 months to give specific guidance, obviously. And then it's not operating margin. But on the free cash flow front, we continue to feel really good. We took our conversion up to 105% from 100%, and we took it up at CAGNY. And this is all from focus that we have in this company on free cash flow. It's part of the culture. It's part of the incentive plan for everybody in this company that's compensated, free cash flow is in their incentive. And so we're very focused on it in areas like cash tax efficiency, areas like Ardent Mills, where although our equity profit is off $0.10, our cash is on plan. So they're going to continue the dividend at plan despite the equity earnings being down. And then inventory. We build up inventory levels coming out of COVID, our safety stocks were high, and we've continued to ramp that down. And if you look at our balance sheet, we have $2 billion of inventory. And with Project Catalyst and us being able to leverage AI and other technology, we think we have a long runway to keep taking inventory out and be more competitive. So we're pretty bullish on that front. We'll talk more about that when we give guidance. But obviously, that has a cost impact as well. So I would say they're the building blocks and foundations how to think about margin kind of ending this year going into next year. Operator: Our next question comes from Peter Galbo with Bank of America. Peter Galbo: Dave, maybe if I could just start on Ardent Mills, the change or the revision to that line item, I think it's the second one of the year. And historically, in that business, when there has been a lot of wheat volatility, you've been able to take advantage. And I think in Q4, you're kind of calling that maybe it's the opposite. So I just want to understand kind of what's happening there, particularly in the fourth quarter. And then just any early read on kind of how we might start to think about the run rate of Ardent for '27? Sean Connolly: Sure, Peter. So just taking it from the top, as I've talked about, broadly speaking, Ardent has 2 sources of revenue and profit. They have their core business margin where they mill flour and sell that at a profit. That business is consistent and that business is tracking. And then they have what we call commodity trading revenue. And that's where there's a lot of activity, hedging and different arbitrage where Ardent can be in a position to make a lot of money. And what really drives the upside there are overall wheat prices and the volatility of the markets. And through the -- really through the first 3 quarters of this year, the wheat prices have been low and there's been less volatility in the wheat market. So not as much opportunity for Ardent to take advantage on the commodity trading side. Obviously, with the start of the war, wheat prices have gone up in the futures and volatility has increased. And so you don't see those benefits immediately. And so with our forecast for this year, we've called the number where we are now. But clearly, there is more volatility that the Ardent team is working through now. We will work through it as well to just determine what kind of impact that could have on next year. We don't have line of sight to that at this time. But there is more volatility at this point since the war. Peter Galbo: Okay. That's helpful. And Sean, I think on Dave's initial comments on inflation for next year, he mentioned a bit on contracting on certain crop-based ingredients. There's a lot of, I think, concern in the market just given where fertilizer costs have gone and you all are a pretty big procurer of vegetables. So just how you all are thinking through that, what the conversations are like with your growing partners and whether that's really an issue for this growth season or whether it's more of a '27 growth cycle event? Sean Connolly: Well, fertilizer, it would be more of an F '28 event than F '27. But I would say conversations are very productive. I think everybody is in the same boat, Pete. I mean, it's kind of like the news of the hour around here that we're responding to. And so it's just super dynamic. We got to stay on top of it. It changes day-to-day, and you got to be agile. That's why I started my comments today to Andrew in saying we will be responsive to the hand we are dealt, and we will choose the smartest course of action. And that's just kind of the nature of operating in incredibly dynamic times. Operator: Our next question comes from Tom Palmer with JPMorgan. Thomas Palmer: Maybe I could just start off with a clarification on some of the inflation and freight commentary. You noted that you're covered in terms of contracts. I think in the past, when we've seen rates run up, not totally dissimilar to now, we have seen spot running well above contracted rates and maybe contracted rates not holding in the way that you might think of a contract holding. I guess, to what extent you're seeing that now, especially when I look at some of that margin pressure in the refrigerated business this quarter? David Marberger: Yes. So spot was actually running low for a lot of our fiscal year. Spot has now spiked up and is above sort of contracted rates. A high percentage of our freight, as we kind of look into next year, is contracted line haul, so a high percentage. So a smaller percentage is spot. That market has spiked up like you just alluded to. But we've incorporated all that for our fiscal '26 guide. And then as I mentioned, next year, we're covered through a good part of next fiscal year with our freight contracts, and that's a high percentage. We do have some spot, but a high percentage is contracted. Thomas Palmer: Okay. And then following up on Ardent, you mentioned earlier on the strong free cash flow conversion, some of that was aided by not lowering the distributions from Ardent even as earnings have maybe not come in quite the way you expected. If we think about a potential rebound next year in Ardent's earnings, to what extent should we think about that flowing through to free cash flow generation, so essentially increasing the distributions versus more just fully covering the distributions in terms of the earnings? David Marberger: Yes. So Tom, we look at this on a kind of a year-by-year basis. We have a lot of discussion with our joint venture partners on capital allocation priorities. As a kind of a general rule, Ardent Mills does an outstanding job managing their balance sheet. They keep their leverage low, and they're really efficient with their cash flow. So this year, they were in a position to be able to hold to plan despite some of the volatility I described earlier on the commodity trading revenue. So as a general rule, we set -- we have a sort of a payout ratio level that we set going into the year. And then we look at how the year plays out and then we modify from there. But generally speaking, we feel very good about the cash generation of Ardent Mills and getting timely distributions. Operator: Our next question comes from Robert Moskow with TD Cowen. Robert Moskow: A couple of questions. One, Dave, can you remind us what the tariff component of your cost inflation is this year? I think it's like 2% or so. And how should we think about it for fiscal '27? Does it lap? Will it turn to a 0? And is that -- does that automatically get you some relief in your inflation for next year? David Marberger: Yes, Rob. So generally, kind of, going into the year, our overall inflation was 7%, 4% was core and 3% were gross tariffs before mitigation. And we track mitigation as part of productivity, and we estimated 1% in mitigation. And so as we look -- and that's pretty much played out. There's been some volatility, obviously, with the IEPA tariffs, but then we have the new tariffs that have come in. And so not a material change, I would say, to the original estimate, a little bit favorable, but then our core inflation has been a little unfavorable. So we're still at that kind of total 7%, call it. As we look to next year, because we had mitigation that we're going to wrap, there is going to be some headwind from a kind of wrap perspective in tariffs. And so we originally said 1% mitigation, which would imply $80 million of headwind. We don't think it's going to be that much. It might be more like half of that, but we are going to have some headwind with tariff just because we're wrapping on the mitigation that we had this year that now flows -- won't flow into next year. Thomas Palmer: Okay. I'll follow up on that. And then more broadly, I mean, the retail consumption data, Sean, looks really strong on a 2-year volume CAGR basis for frozen. But then when I just look at your shipments and I try to do that same 2-year CAGR just for Refrigerated & Frozen division, it's down on a 2-year basis, and that's trying to normalize for the supply chain disruption. Is that just because this division has, like, refrigerated brands that have been down over that 2-year period that are -- that you're not including in that Nielsen data? Sean Connolly: I'm not sure exactly what you're looking at, Rob, but that could be a piece of it. I mean, there are some of the refrigerated businesses that are nowhere near the strategic priority as our frozen business, as an example. So we -- those could be categories where as we follow our horses for courses approach that it's more of a value over volume. But I would say, in general, on the core frozen business, you've seen strength on a 1-year and you see strength on a 2-year, and staggering market share data around 88% of that business holding or gaining share, which I know was a central focus for investors last year when we had the supply interruption. It's like, will this bounce back? Will it bounce back strong? And it has bounced back. So our refrigerated businesses, some of those businesses are more about cash contribution. There are some particularly high-margin businesses in there. And so much -- some of those refrigerated businesses, we treat more like some of our center store businesses like cans, where we manage them for cash and not as much for volume growth. That's probably what you're seeing there. Dave, do you want to add to that? David Marberger: Yes. Just -- Rob, just -- and I'll let you kind of follow up checking numbers. But if I just look at my -- the Q3, obviously, this quarter for shipments for R&F volume was plus 3.9%. Q3 a year ago was minus 3%. So on a 2-year basis, volume is actually up in shipments. Robert Moskow: Yes. I was referring to overall dollars are down. So -- but yes, I agree with you, Dave. David Marberger: Thanks. Operator: Our next question comes from Chris Carey with Wells Fargo. Christopher Carey: I wanted to see if you maybe could just take sort of a 2-, 3-year view on the margin trajectory for your key U.S. businesses. The Grocery & Snacks business has seen pressure, but there's clearly been more pressure on the refrigerated and frozen side. When you kind of digest that past few years, what are the key challenges that have impacted the business? Obviously, there's been inflation, but I wonder if there are other things under the hood. And as you look out over the next several years, how tangible -- how is your ability to kind of claw back some of those margins? And maybe you can comment on your medium-term productivity initiatives as well. So I'd love any thoughts there. Sean Connolly: Yes. Chris, let me give you my thoughts on that. We are the biggest frozen food manufacturer in North America, if not the world. And we have, as a company, seen in this now 5-, 6-year deep inflation super cycle, we've seen a massive increase in the cost of goods that we've had to deal with. And after about 4 years of taking inflation-justified pricing in order to kind of protect margins, that's where we said on our growth business is you can't shrink your way to prosperity. And that's led by frozen. So we did pivot the strategy to stop taking at some point, all this inflation justified pricing in frozen to get volumes moving again. But that means we had to eat some of that higher cost. And as a result, that business, in particular, because it's so strategic to us, we got volumes moving. They're moving extremely well again this quarter, but we've had to eat some cost. And a lot of that cost has been in animal protein because, as you know, animal proteins have been up. So that is exactly what has driven the margin compression in the frozen business, and it was a choice we made to protect our leading market shares and protect our sales. And if you looked at even the velocities across our portfolio that came out yesterday, I think we've got the best velocities by a good chunk in the group. So now the question comes, what's next? Obviously, we've got the war curveball that we're dealing with. But as I said last quarter, we absolutely -- assuming we can get some element of normalcy, we absolutely expect margin expansion going forward, particularly in frozen. And the building blocks haven't changed. It starts with productivity. In fiscal '26 between core productivity and tariff mitigation, that number is just over 5%, which is very strong. Second, at some point, we're going to get inflation relief, hopefully back to our -- closer to our typical 2%. Certainly, getting the war behind us would help with that. Third, we've got the advancement of our supply chain resiliency investments, including the chicken plants, and that's going to enable us at some point to repatriate outsourced volume, which will be a good guy for margin. And then fourth, we are taking price, and we have taken price surgically, and we've seen encouraging elasticities. And then the fifth thing is, as you've heard me talk in the last couple of quarters, we've kicked off this Project Catalyst, which is an ambitious initiative to reengineer our core work processes, leveraging technology. And that's going to be a benefit to both the P&L and the balance sheet. In the P&L, it will be a benefit to sales. It will be a benefit to profit. In the balance sheet, we see opportunity there in terms of reducing working capital, increasing cash. And that's a real tangible and exciting opportunity. So yes, it's margin and it's more than margin in that particular project. So put those things together, and we feel very good about the margin outlook from here. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt if the world settled down a bit. But we'll deal with that because that's not something we control. We got to respond to that. Christopher Carey: Okay. All right. Great. And just, Dave, the free cash flow conversion has been a really good story. You upped that at CAGNY and a small increase again today. Are we run rating at a new level for free cash flow conversion? Do you see a level of sustainability up here over 100%? And then just it's kind of a confirmation of a prior question. The dividends are staying on Ardent or I think the cash component of Ardent has maintained despite the income statement component coming down. Does that get reset next year? Or can you maintain a level of dividends? And by the way, I know you're not guiding to Ardent and nor am I suggesting, but is there some sort of like mark-to-market that needs to happen there? So that's kind of just a quick follow-up, and same things on cash. David Marberger: Yes. Okay. Well, let me start with the free cash flow conversion. So we're not going to guide to that now. What I would say is we always target a 90% or better free cash flow conversion as the base. Given our earnings and our ability to convert that to cash just in the normal course, we feel 90% is the appropriate target. So to get above that, we need to find additional cash-generating ideas. We've done that with cash tax efficiency this year with different planning that we've done that's really helped us there. And the big thing has been working capital specific to inventory, and I talked about it earlier. We have a significant amount of inventory, and we believe we have great opportunity to really reduce that inventory in future years. We -- our inventory increased coming out of COVID because we had a lot of demand and we increased our safety stocks. And now we're methodically reducing it with our supply planning systems and our process. But when we leverage some of these new tools with AI now, we think that we can continue that acceleration of inventory reduction, and that's the kind of thing that's going to take you above 90%. So again, I'm not going to specifically guide on that today, but we're laser-focused on inventory. And a big part of that, too, I've done this a long time, to be able to take inventory down, you have to have alignment between supply chain, sales and finance. And it may sound simple, but sometimes that doesn't always happen. And we have great alignment here, and it starts at the top in terms of a commitment to taking inventory out. So we're investing and we feel pretty bullish on our ability to take that out. As it relates to Ardent Mills, I would just -- when we set equity earnings for Ardent, we always have a payout ratio on those earnings, and that's how we start the year. And that payout ratio is pretty high. It's not 100%, but it's pretty close. And then we go from there. And so this year, the earnings fell, but we kept the dividend to plan. So our payout ratio is above 100%. But you always reset it every year so that the dividend payment and the equity earnings to start the year are pretty much in sync, and then we evaluate their balance sheet as we go each quarter. Operator: Our next question comes from Scott Marks with Jefferies. Scott Marks: First thing I just wanted to get clarity on, in terms of the volume growth in the business, wondering if you can help us understand how much of that was driven by some of the retailer inventory adjustments? And how much of it would you attribute to just recovery from the supply chain disruptions a year ago? Sean Connolly: Well, we certainly undershipped last quarter, Scott, and we caught that back up because the merchandising events moved into Q3. And so the shipments associated with those moved into Q3. So we're -- on a 2-year basis, as I mentioned before, we basically shipped consumption, and there's not a material gap there at all. In terms of the takeaway portion of it, it's strong on a 1- and a 2-year basis. And if you look at the mix of TPDs versus velocities, the hero there has really been the velocity piece, and that's driven in large part by just the strength of the innovation we've seen. So very pleased with the consumer takeaway that we've seen, particularly in frozen and snacks, which is obviously you could see in -- some of the data has been quite strong. Scott Marks: Understood. Appreciate that. And then a follow-up just quickly. I know last quarter, you've been talking about the new big chicken facility, talking about bringing in-house some production and that had been on track. Just wondering if you can share an update on that, how that's progressing versus expectations. Sean Connolly: Yes. We sell a lot of chicken, and we use a lot of chicken in our products, and it's a combination of baked or roasted, whatever you want to call it, and fried. Both have been strong. Both projects are tracking right where we need them to be. We still do have production on the outside. That will continue for a little bit. But then at some point, when we're -- all our work is complete, we'll have an opportunity to bring that back in as a good guide to our margins. David Marberger: Yes. And just on the baked side, we did complete that project, and we're starting to bring that volume back this year. And so as we go into next year, that should be a tailwind in terms of having full year on that. And then the fried, we've made investments, and that's going to go out longer. Operator: Out next question comes from Carla Casella with JPMorgan. Carla, is it possible your line is muted? It's open on our end, but I'm still unable to hear you. Matthew Neisius: I think that might be the last question. So why don't we go ahead and wrap today? Operator: All right. This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the call back over to Matthew Neisius for closing remarks. Matthew Neisius: Thank you, Bailey, and thank you all so much for joining us today. Please reach out to Investor Relations if you have any follow-up questions. Operator: The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.