管理層發言
Hello, and welcome to the continuation of State Street Corporation's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. Today's call will be hosted by Elizabeth Lynn, Head of Investor Relations at State Street. Today's discussion is being broadcasted live on State Street's website at investors.statestreet.com. This conference call is also being recorded for replay. State Street's conference call is copyrighted, and all rights are reserved. This call may not be recorded for rebroadcast or distribution, in whole or in part, without the expressed written authorization from State Street Corporation. The only authorized broadcast of this call will be housed on the State Street website. Now, I would like to hand the call over to Elizabeth Lynn.
Thank you, operator. Good morning, and thank you all for joining us today. Before we begin the Q&A session of our fourth quarter earnings call, I would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused by the technology issue related to a vendor that we experienced on Friday, which prevented us from completing the Q&A portion of our earnings call last week. We appreciate you taking the time to join us again today. With me on the call are State Street's Chief Executive Officer, Ron O'Hanley; Chief Financial Officer, Eric Aboaf; and EVP and Investment Services CFO and incoming Interim CFO, Mark Keating. Before we get started, I'd like to remind you that today's call will reference results presented on a basis that excludes or adjusts one or more items from GAAP. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP or regulatory measure are available in the appendix to our fourth quarter and full year 2024 earnings presentation from Friday's call, which is available on our website.
In addition, today's call will contain forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those statements due to a variety of important factors, such as those referenced in our discussion today and in our SEC filings, including the Risk Factors section in our Form 10-K. Our forward-looking statements speak only as of today, and we disclaim any obligation to update them even if our view should change. With that, let me turn it back over to the operator to open the call for Q&A.
分析師問答
Our first question comes from Jim Mitchell with Seaport. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Hey, good afternoon. Thanks for hosting the second round. Just maybe digging into the puts and takes on the NII guide, understand the asset sensitivity to non-US. I think a 100 basis point downward shift in your Q is $260 million, but you had a $10 billion maturities in the HTM book and a pickup of 200 to 250 basis points there almost offsets that asset sensitivity. So outside of that, is it real and you had deposit growth that was 15% heading into the year? So is it really just about the growth and mix of deposits and maybe a little bit of loan growth from here that will dictate up or down?
Hey, Jim, it's Mark Keating here. Thanks for the question. I'll start with that. I think it would be good maybe just to take the NII topic from a few different angles. I want to try to give you a bit of a comprehensive overview of how we think about our NII guide. And there's really four items I want to cover pretty quickly. Two are headwinds, which would be things like deposit mix and levels and the rate environment and a couple would be things we would consider a tailwind. You mentioned loan growth, for example, the investment portfolio rollover. So I thought I would just cover those and give you some context for how we're thinking about the outlook. So, first, on the deposit levels and mix. As we've talked about on the call, Friday, deposits did finish strong for the year in 2024 and a strong finish in Q4 specifically. Noninterest-bearing was up in Q4, but that was after three quarters of sequential kind of decrease, and we saw the same pattern in Q4 2023.
So there was a seasonality through the end of the year. So we do expect to see some leveling off as we come out of Q4 into Q1 this year. Overall, we expect deposits to remain elevated in the $230 million to $240 million range with some ups and downs, for example, noninterest-bearing while up in Q4. Year-over-year, it was down about 12% or about $3 billion. And we've talked before about expecting noninterest-bearing to continue to trend a bit lower and somewhere in the range of $20 billion to $25 billion is the range that we think of. Secondly, around the impact of rate cuts, as we've laid out our outlook was based on the rate curve at the end of the year, which was two rate cuts in the US, five at the ECB, three at the Bank of England. And as rate curves have moved around, I would just note that, so far, the reduction in the number of cuts looks mostly to be back-loaded at the end of this year.
So we don't see much of a change there in our assumption. I'd also remind you that as you mentioned, we are asset sensitive, particularly in non-US currencies. We're pretty neutral around US rate changes. We are more sensitive to non-US rates and a cut in either euro or sterling is roughly $5 million to $10 million per cut per quarter for us. So that can be meaningful as well. Turning to kind of more of the tailwinds that we see, we do expect our loan growth to continue. It was about 14% in 2024, and we have a similar expectation. It's something that we're doing really well with our clients on and supporting them, specifically our private markets clients. So we continue to see that to be a growth area. And then lastly, finally, I would say on the portfolio rollovers, we have discussed in other forums that we see roughly $4 billion per quarter, but that can be lumpy depending on maturities.
I'd keep in mind also that we have had a couple of portfolio repositionings as recently as last third quarter. And currently, the pickup from rollovers is roughly 100 to 150 basis points. So hopefully, laying all that out and giving you a sense of how we balance out the puts and takes and the headwinds and tailwinds gives you a sense of why we think that we have a realistic and appropriately conservative outlook. But those are the variables, and we look forward to updating the group here as we move through the year.
No, that's really helpful and makes a lot of sense. Just on the deposit, I guess, expectation, it's pretty flattish, I guess, with fourth quarter levels. Is that the sort of uncertainty and seasonality, potentially any sense of how deposits have acted in January, I guess, as a help?
I think it's still pretty early. Again, we're a couple of weeks into the year. There's always a trend kind of coming out of the high point at the end of the year. So I think it's still pretty early to say.
Our next question will come from the line of Mike Mayo with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.
Hi. Can you talk about what you view as your core organic revenue growth rate in the fee businesses? And I guess, I know we talked after your call, but you have a 100 basis point headwind from the BlackRock roll off, you have a 100 basis point headwind from the currency. So, what do you see as a core growth rate exiting those factors out for '25 and what do you think the long-term growth rate is? And do you think that growth rate should keep up with the pace of growth in capital markets, which seem to have exceeded what you guys have done? Thanks.
Mike, hey, it's Mark. I can take that as well. Let me start with our fee-based business, and I can talk about servicing fees maybe first. And I think we talked a little bit about this on Friday, but may be helpful to give a sense of kind of how we see organic growth and how we think about the engine and kind of how we continue to drive sustainable growth in the fee business. And I'll take, again, investment services as a good example, but it applies also to our asset management business. And I think the first thing I'd like to take everybody through again is that let's think about where we've come from because this really is a multiyear journey around kind of underpinning our servicing fee business. About 1.5 years ago, we came together and laid out a plan on how we're going to power sustainable growth in our servicing fee business. At the time, we knew that we needed to perform better. Our nearing history then was around servicing fee sales of roughly $150 million in 2019 and 2020.
Then we started stepping that up to $250 million to $260 million, and that was in 2021, 2022. At that point, then we set a target for ourselves of $350 million to $400 million, which is the range now we talk about for 2024 and similar range for 2025. So, in 2023, we did $300 million. And in '24, as we announced last week, we did about $380 million. Again, important to note that about 85% of that was back office, and back office is important as we talk about because it brings a lot of other things along with it. It's a multiplier that brings NII, brings foreign exchange, trading, securities lending, lots of other cross-sell opportunities. So if you stand back and look at what we said we're going to do and what we've delivered around servicing fee growth, sales are up 45% since 2022, about 250% since 2020. We've done that by restructuring our sales team, realigning incentives, focusing on service excellence, as Ron has talked about many times.
Importantly, we've been investing in our products, services, features, and functionality, all driven by a sustained high level of productivity. We expect that range of sales will be the target that we will continue to achieve. The team knows that, that is the level of sales and servicing fees that we need in order to make the business move forward organically when you think about things we’ve talked about around attrition and fee compression. One last thing I’d say is that another way to think about growth is really to talk about the revenue install backlog, which as we disclosed, was about $350 million at the end of last year. Just for comparison, that was $200 million at the end of Q3 2023. So that's up about 75%. Again, there's lots more work to do. Those are the targets, and we've put a plan in place. We've measured that. We've reported on it. We are achieving what we said we're going to deliver, and we just need to be consistent and keep going on it.
Mike, it's Ron. Let me just add to that a little bit, and I know you probably have another question. A couple of things. We've talked for a while about why servicing fees won't necessarily track markets or capital markets. But the way to think about some of the other things is, and this is what we reported for '24. We are anticipating similar kinds of double-digit growth rates in places like software and global advisors. So, the way to think about the guide that we've given you, what we said was a 3% to 5% guide. The real guide, if you will, is 5% to 7%. What you deduct from that is you've got 1% left over from our previously disclosed client, and you've got some FX headwind there that takes it down to the 3% to 5% for 2025. That's the way to think about it.
Okay. And what do you think about a long-term growth rate for core fee growth? And where do you stand within that? And what do you think for the next four or five years?
Well, it's hard to look out, Mike, for four to five years. But if you think about some of the changes that are driving our revenue growth, there are a couple of them. One was all the work that we put into the value proposition, particularly around Alpha, right? That's just getting better and better. We're installing more from that. We continue to find very broad acceptance in the marketplace for it, and we can be discriminating in terms of who we're going after in that. So that would be a tailwind. Secondly, we've talked a lot about service quality, which really does set the stage for both business retention and your ability to grow business, particularly from your existing clients. We've worked very hard at that through technology and real service quality improvements, and that’s showing up in all of our customer satisfaction. So that would be the second. The third is what Mark talked about, and we've talked to you about it now since almost continuously since late '22 into early '23.
We've overhauled the sales force. It's not that we had bad people, but think about the pivot that we've made from just selling back office services to pivoting towards being an enterprise outsourcer with Alpha and what that means for how to sell and how to service, and we're largely through that, which is why you've seen the kind of dramatic sales growth that we've had and new business revenue growth. So it's a long-winded way of saying that all things being equal in terms of the market environment, we think this kind of growth rate that we're describing, gross at 5% to 7%, and net at 3% to 5% is actually something that we can sustain.
Our next question will come from the line of Glenn Schorr with Evercore. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Hi, thank you. Maybe a quick one first. In Prime Services, you talked about a $2 billion increase in RWA to support clients. I'm curious about the size and scope of what you do or don't do in prime services that might be redemption facilities or capital commitment lines for the private markets, but just curious if you could expand on that.
Yeah, Glenn, it's Eric. Let me take that. Prime services or prime brokerage is an integral part of what we've built over the last say, seven, eight, nine, ten years. Over the last few years, we've worked with clients to find the right way to deploy capital and do it in a Basel III friendly manner, but also in a client-friendly manner. It's an important part of what we do. You can see our securities finance revenues, which for the year are close to $450 million, a solid third, almost half of that is prime services. It's really a way that we help support our clients: hedge funds clients, it's the multi-manager client who also have hedge funds within their umbrella. For us, it's a way as we support those clients and offer them capital, which they cherish and value. They often bring to us more servicing fees, more FX trading, more thick repo, more depository business. So it's really become an integral part of what we're doing, one that has a real substantial amount of growth to it, given the demands out there at clients and the needs they have, and our ability in a capital-light business to put an extra couple of billion and draw up what turns out to be very strong double-digit growth this past year.
Okay. Cool. I appreciate that. Maybe one more in SSGA, I think quote was we continue to innovate and broaden our product suite and distribution capabilities. I mean your organic growth has definitely inflected the last handful of quarters. I wonder if you can talk about what's driving the rejuvenation at SSGA and how sustainable this better level of organic growth is? Thank you.
Yeah, Glenn, it's Ron. There are a few things that are driving that. Some of them have been long-term changes that are gaining traction for us. As you know, we were for many years, primarily an institutional player and even our ETF business was oriented towards institutions. We launched the low-cost line and made some fee adjustments in that. We've got a set of low-cost funds priced very well for the retail intermediary market, and we continue to gain share there. Secondly, on product development, we've just picked up the pace of product development. Last year, SSGA launched about 60 different products, most of them ETFs. We're swarming the field, if you will, with that, both US and non-US, and that's paying off. We continue to gain share in places like EMEA, where the ETF market is growing quite rapidly. Finally, we've changed out a lot of people or added people. We've got this deep expertise in institutional and we've added a lot of really good people in the retail intermediary.
That's been one of the primary drivers of what we do. We continue to pick our sub-advisory partners very well. We don't run a funds network. We work with really talented firms that do things that we don't. We've got some long history of that, for example, with the Bank loan bond and Blackstone and more recent history with some of the things we've announced that are still in SEC approval. All those things coming together, certainly, we'd point to that as the performance source and more importantly, positioning us for continued growth in the future.
Thank you, Glenn. Our next question will come from the line of Brian Bedell with Deutsche Bank. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Great. Thanks. Good afternoon, folks. I wanted to revisit NII. What is the interest in pursuing more aggressive deposit raising? How do you view that? This could be through pricing or other initiatives with servicing clients to increase the deposit base. What are the chances we could see upside from the mid-30s number?
Hey, Brian, it's Mark. I can take that. Thanks for the question. I think over the recent history, we've shown a very strong capability in engaging with our clients around deposits. It's across the balance sheet, not just deposits, but speaking of deposits. It is something that we are always looking at with our clients. I think we have some of that built into our outlook today. I mean, again, I mentioned that there are some ups and downs. So you can assume that there is some expansion of some of those initiatives that we have with our clients. I think it’s something we've built that muscle over the last few years, and it’s something that we're always working with our clients on in terms of what their cash needs are.
Okay. Great. And then my follow-up question is on asset management. It's a two-parter. One is just the fourth quarter beat our expectations, and I think the fee rate was higher, just not sure if there was any one-off in that? And is that a good jumping-off point for I think what you said is double-digit expectation of fee growth in SSGA? And then a longer-term question attached to that. Ron, you've had a really long history of experience in the asset management industry. What's your view of 401(k) plans potentially adopting alternative products? Would you be positioned to offer those? Obviously, it’s very compelling, but there are a lot of sort of roadblocks in terms of litigation and things. What's your perspective on that changing?
Let me start with the first, and Mark, if I missed something, certainly add it in. But on the first, SSGA had a very good year. Obviously, they're much more market sensitive than the servicing business. There is a direct element to that. But you saw the net asset growth in there and all the organic growth. For a lot of the reasons that I described earlier, we do think that the fourth quarter is a good jumping point from there. Mark, I don't know if there's anything you want to add on that.
I think you got it.
On the broader point, Brian, it's interesting that you're saying this because the DC business, which I did mention in my prior answer, is also very important to us. We're one of the largest DC investment-only players. It's been driven by innovation plus very good selling into plans. We were the first to put, for example, annuities into target date funds. We’ve got clients in that. We launched a broader product that’s attractive and really solves a problem for 401(k) investors, giving them some longevity protection. There's been a lot of talk for years on why shouldn't DC investors be able to earn an illiquidity premium because they've proven to be the most durable of long-term investors. You alluded to it. The plaintiff’s bar has made that almost impossible on trustees. They are basically making their choices less on performance and much more around compliance. We’ll see with the new administration on that. It’s hard to see what you describe happening. But to the extent to which the Department of Labor provided a safe harbor rule, it would make the standard on what is after-fee performance, and if that were to become the standard, I think that would open the doors. But unless there’s some kind of safe harbor, I don’t see a lot of trustees stepping up to that.
Yeah. That’s great perspective. Thank you.
Our next question will come from the line of Brennan Hawken with UBS. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Thanks. Thanks for taking the question. I'd like to drill down to the loan growth that you said embedded in your outlook, 14% last year, similar rate here in 2025. It's a rather punchy level of loan growth. So could you speak to the types of loans that you are adding, the efforts involved? You said it was about expanding the client relationship. So maybe pulling back and thinking about how these loans are connected to expanding relationships and how you go through the risk parameters around adding new loans at this pace? Thanks.
Sure, Brennan, it's Eric. Let me just describe the loan growth. 2024 is a good example year. It continues the strength we had out of the year before and foreshadows the kind of lending we do. Roughly two-thirds or more of our loans are really clear towards alternative and private market clients. There are also a series of loans that we provide to insurance companies, asset managers, as backup clients, and so forth. The growth is driven around private markets. That is, first, an area that we think we can serve particularly well. We know the clients and their end users. A good part of the loans are capital call financing. So the recourse is strong to their underlying institutional investors. We also do BDC lending. We know the underlying assets in those funds. We help seed or support the expansion of CLOs. Again, we’ll often do the servicing for those BDCs and those CLOs or the funds for the capital bolt on.
It's an ecosystem that we're quite comfortable with, and we’re always vigilant, saying benign because we understand it so well and we seek out a high standard of credit and assurance. It’s an area of lending that is incredibly valuable to those private markets firms as a way to support our growth in that business. In my prepared remarks, I said we had about 15% private market servicing fee growth, and a good way for us to help drive that and encourage that is to be there for our clients. Our clients really value it, not only the individuals across those firms, but all the way up to the C-suite. The more private markets as part of the array of just about every asset manager, not just the alternative providers, it just becomes an important part of, I'll describe it as the balance of trade and the relationship that we see as particularly strong and particularly remunerative for both us and for them.
Great. Thanks for that, Eric. And we touched on this last week, but I don't think it was broadly broadcast. So I wanted to circle back to it. The deposit betas here recently, so the euro and the pound sterling looked a little bit lower than what you guys normally talk about in your expectations. Could you speak to what might have caused that? And then how should we think about the betas by currency going forward?
Sure. Let me take that again, Brennan. We've provided good disclosure here on our deposit betas. You could see it at a very high level on the average balance sheet, where it's done on a general basis. But in particular, we've got additional information in our addendum, where we describe it by currencies. What we've described is that our betas will generally be symmetric on the way down for rates as they were on the way up by deposit segment. We have market index deposits, we have administered rate deposits, and we have deposit types in between. What we found so far is within our expectations that across the deposit base, and I think the US dollar was the easiest one to see, and it's the largest single group, so the law of large numbers helped us see the trend. We had a 60%, 65% of betas over the course of this past quarter, and it’s something that we expect to be representative across the deposit stack.
Euro and sterling have bounced around. Those deposit levels in those areas are anywhere between GBP11 billion and EUR30 billion. If a new client comes in, or a client shifts their currency makeup, it can affect the averaging in the deposit yields and thus the betas or the immediate calculation. But I think the dollar one is representative, and something that we'd expect as we have seen in euros and sterling. It just gets overshadowed in those other currencies by mix and volume changes in any particular quarter.
Got it. Thanks for the color.
Sure.
Our next question will come from the line of Gerard Cassidy with RBC. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Thank you, and good afternoon, folks. Ron, in your comments the other day when you guys went over the results, you mentioned that you have invested in technology to improve your service quality. Can you share with us how has AI played a role in this improvement? Overall, can you share your thoughts about how important it is for you guys to embrace AI? When will we, as outsiders, really be able to measure the companies that are having real success with AI?
Technology has always been a crucial aspect of our offering and has set State Street apart from the beginning. When considering past generations of AI and machine learning, we employ these technologies extensively throughout the organization. A prime example is fund accounting; previously, we assessed this by the number of accountants per fund, which evolved to measuring the number of funds per fund accountant. Now, with the integration of machine learning, significant improvements have occurred. In developed market equities, we no longer rely on fund accountants. Instead, machine learning processes every transaction daily, allowing a human to quickly review flagged exceptions. What used to take an hour and a half now takes under 15 minutes. This level of machine learning is being implemented across our operations. We believe we are still in the early stages regarding AI, especially in terms of collaborating with large language models while ensuring private client data remains secure.
We are conducting numerous tests, but have not yet rolled out a broad implementation. However, this will change rapidly, particularly in routine client service tasks, likely starting each day with an AI-powered chatbot. This technology can also be extended to areas like HR inquiries. We anticipate this development, and the technology is consistently improving, allowing for AI to provide more accurate answers linked to original documents, increasing trust in these systems. We have been discussing transformation, and we expect that most of it in the coming years will be driven by AI.
Very good and very thoughtful. Thank you for the response. As a follow-up, possibly to Eric, on the loan portfolio, and though it’s not very large relative to total assets. How large are you willing to allow the portfolio to grow, relative to either capital or assets? At what point do you think giving investors better detail in the portfolio in your public disclosures would be helpful?
We've been comfortable with this strong double-digit growth in the lending portfolio for several years, hovering around high single-digits or low to mid double-digits. This has become a key part of our business model, and we don't see any immediate limitations. Other banks may have larger lending portfolios as a percentage of their assets. From a peer perspective, our capital-light model allows us to continue expanding our lending book while also returning significant capital, as we did this year. The lending portfolio has shifted more towards relationship-based lending, which is essential for our private markets and support for asset managers, insurers, and corporates. We are open to disclosure and encourage any thoughts you may have to be shared with our investor relations team. We would be happy to consider those and provide more insights over time.
Gerard, I just want to add one thing on this. Remember, this is highly focused on the growth of our private markets business. We’ve been experiencing double-digit growth there. As that business grows, the lending opportunities available to us grow. We're not leading with lending. But as we grow the servicing and administration, and there’s a lending opportunity that passes through our standards, we're willing to do it. We're not giving you a 10-year forecast, but over the next couple of years, we think we can sustain it based on the growth of our private business.
Our next question will come from Vivek Juneja with JPMorgan. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Thank you for taking my question. I would like to ask about buybacks. Given that your Tier 1 leverage ratio was slightly below the low end of your range, can you discuss the potential impact of that on buybacks? How long are you prepared to maintain the low end of the Tier 1 leverage ratio, especially since it has increased since the end of last year?
Yeah, Vivek, it's Ron. Let me start there, and then I'll ask Eric to step in. Just to be clear, we stand by what we've been saying for a couple of years, that our intention is to return 80% of our earnings to investors. We see the path to continue to do that, and we're committed to that. So that's what you should expect here. You're right, you've identified the binding constraint there. We need to manage that. Even knowing that, we're standing by the 80% target.
Vivek, it’s Eric. I’d just add that CET1 has been our dominant constraint for many years and over a long series of quarters. Occasionally, Tier 1 leverage will move around and line up this quarter as the balance sheet grows. We’ve been careful and diligent about supplementing Tier 1 leverage with some preferred equity when necessary. Our capital ratio, CET1 is the dominant one in risk-based, risk-sensitive. We’ve said we want to operate towards the upper end of our CET1 range. We’ve not said the same with regard to Tier 1 leverage. Tier 1 leverage is just a function of the balance sheet's size. As we get more deposits and more clients trust us, it floats down a bit, but that’s manageable, and we’re comfortable with our leverage ratio and its general zone over the last couple of quarters.
Completely different question, if I may. You talked about in the presentation deck about winning a large business from an APAC lender. Could you talk a little bit about the fee rate on that kind of business? Is it more akin to US type? Is it lower than what you've seen historically in the Asian when we look at your fees on the business wins and the AUCA on the business wins? It seems to imply that. Any color on that?
Hi, Vivek, it's Mark. Thanks for the question. When we talk about the APAC asset owner client deal that we signed in Q4, it's a good question because we framed that as a multiregional type of deal. It's a client that has products, and we’ll be servicing in multiple regions. You shouldn't take the APAC parent as being specific to kind of the APAC business in terms of pricing. Hopefully, that helps in terms of it's a multiregional deal with pricing very consistent in what we see in those different jurisdictions.
Our next question will come from the line of David Smith with Truist. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Hi, good afternoon. Alpha was responsible for about half of the AUCA wins this year. Can you share how much of the overall total business on the platform right now is on Alpha? And if there's any range or target you think will be on Alpha in the medium term? And how would you compare the benefits of getting clients on Alpha?
David, I'll start this and turn it over to Mark. We've always viewed Alpha as a way to not just improve our value proposition, but to offer something distinctive from our competitors, providing a front-to-back open architecture interoperable platform that, in some cases, we service. We have about 35 announced clients and roughly 25 that are installed. Mark, do I have that right?
That's correct. We did seven mandates in 2024, and we're comfortable in the same range for 2025, so six to eight. But beyond the number of mandates, it aligns with our core business pieces in the asset servicing side, focusing on product enhancements and talent management around onboarding. These conversions can be complex, but we’re standardizing and enhancing our integration tools along the way, leveraging what we've learned.
Thank you. And then separately on deposits. You talked about the 60-ish percent in the fourth quarter being representative. Can you help us unpack what's underlying there and why it might be lower than the 75%, 80% beta you saw in the US on the way up?
Sure, David. It's Eric. At the start of the rate cycle, we observed low betas that gradually increased to around 60%, 65%, 70%, and 75%. The changes can vary by individual quarters and specific client activities. We generally align with the beta changes. Our deposit composition fluctuates year to year and quarter to quarter. We are remaining disciplined and strategic in our pricing, aiming to strengthen our deposit business. Despite pricing adjustments, we achieved another quarter of deposit growth, highlighting the strength of our offerings, relationships, and our capability to attract deposits at healthy margins.
All right. Thank you.
There are no further questions. I will turn the call over to management for closing remarks.
Thanks again for joining us today. Please feel free to reach out to IR with any additional questions. Thank you, and have a good day.