Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the conference call on the quarter one 2026 results of VERBUND AG. I'm Lorenzo, the Chorus Call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be listen-only mode, and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session. You can register for question at any time by pressing star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it is my pleasure to hand over to Peter Kollmann. Please go ahead, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to VERBUND's presentation of our results for the first quarter 2026, and thank you for joining today's conference call. I'm here with Andreas Wollein. Before we turn to details of our financial performance, let me start with a few overarching remarks. As in 2025, the first quarter of 2026 continued to be marked by geopolitical tensions and trade policy challenges, reinforcing the perception that elevated global uncertainty is likely to persist. This environment intensified further with the escalation around Iran. Most notably, the attacks by the U.S. and Israel on Iran had far-reaching repercussions, triggering significant volatility in oil and gas markets, spilling over into our market, into electricity prices, and adding renewed strain to already fragile supply chains. We were also affected by this environment. In Austria, discussions about potential further regulatory interventions continued to weigh on visibility. At the European level, uncertainty was amplified, in particular by debates around possible changes to the merit order system and by ongoing discussions regarding a reform of the emissions trading system. Both of which, as you know, could have material implications for market functioning and investment frameworks. Against this backdrop, two operational and commercial factors also shaped our first quarter. A very low hydro coefficient, reflecting a hydrological situation that remained subdued and significantly lower average achieved contract prices, mirroring the overall lower price levels across the market. I will address these topics in more detail as we walk through our Q1 results and our outlook. Now on the first page, on the influencing factors, let me now highlight the key drivers. I will have particular emphasis on the hydro coefficient and the average achieved contract price. The hydro coefficient, which determines the generation from a run-of-river hydropower plant, was exceptionally low during the first quarter. At 0.78, it's still 22 percentage points below the long-term average and 5 percentage points below the level recorded in the first quarter of 2025. That combined with limited precipitation in the three months of 2026. All that resulted in reduced hydro availability for our hydropower plants. Average achieved contract prices declined by EUR 34.2 year-on-year to EUR 92.6 in the first quarter 2026. This decrease is caused by an exceptionally high base in the first quarter of 2025. That high base benefited from early limit sales, which we executed in 2023 at very elevated wholesale market prices. At the same time, the development also reflects the overall lower price environment across European power markets. Let me turn to the results for the first quarter in greater detail. As always, let me briefly comment on our hedging positions and average achieved contract prices. For 2026, we have so far hedged approximately 75% of our expected generation volumes at an average achieved contract price of EUR 86.6, compared with EUR 116.3 achieved for the full year 2025. Looking ahead, our hedge position is as follows. By the end of the first quarter of 2026, we had secured around 21% of our expected generation volumes for 2027 at an average price of EUR 92, as well as approximately only 1% of the expected 2028 volumes at EUR 85.8 /MWh. Based on forward market prices as of the 30th of April, 2026, the mark-to-market average contract price currently stands at EUR 92.1 for 2026, EUR 98.4 for 2027, and EUR 84.3 for 2028. On the next page, I want to talk about the profit skimming mechanism. You're already familiar with the key elements from our previous conference calls, so I will refrain from repeating all the details which are summarized on this slide for you. For the first quarter of 2026, the levy amounted to EUR 8 million at the EBITDA level in Austria. In addition, VERBUND incurred a further EUR 1.6 million in Spain. In comparison to total levy recorded in the first quarter of 2025 amounted to EUR 4.2 million. Looking ahead, we expect the Austrian government either to adjust the existing price cap mechanism or to replace it with a different framework during the course of 2026. Several alternatives are currently under discussion. However, it is still too early to comment on the potential outcomes or implications in greater detail. On the next page, I would like to share with you the contribution from our flexibility products. In the first quarter of 2026, this contribution amounted to EUR 46 million. That represents a decline of 21% compared with the prior year period, primarily reflecting lower market volatility. For the full year 2026, we continue to expect a contribution of around EUR 270 million. This will be broadly in line with the level achieved in the full year of 2025 and slightly above our previous guidance, which we have given for 2026. Why? We anticipate wider spreads for pumped storage operations over the remainder of the year. On the next page, hydro segment, I would like to comment on developments, and I will start with the hydro segment and then go through our individual businesses. At 0.78, the hydro coefficient, which you know is an index measuring generation from run-of-river hydropower plants, was 22 percentage points below the long-term average and 5 percentage points below the level recorded in the first quarter of 2025. In addition, generation from annual storage power plants declined by 2.3%, mainly due to lower pumping and turbining operations. As a result, total own hydropower generation decreased by 370 GWh or close to 7% year-on-year to 5,000 GWh. At the same time, average achieved contract prices were significantly lower, as I mentioned before, compared with the prior year period. Against this backdrop, EBITDA in the hydro segment declined by 37.7% year-on-year to EUR 299 million, so almost EUR 300 million. As an operational update, let me briefly comment on Limberg III. The repair works are being processed and are progressing according to plan. The recommissioning schedule remains unchanged. Unit 2 is expected to return to operation by summer 2026, followed by Unit 1 in the winter of 2026. Now let me continue with an analysis of the generation from our new renewables segment. The new renewables coefficient, here it is an index measuring the generation from wind and solar, was below the planned level, but above the level recorded in 2025. In the first quarter of 2026, the coefficient amounted to 0.89, compared to 0.76 in the prior year period. Electricity generation from our wind power plants totaled 609 GWh in the first quarter. That represents an increase of 120 GWh year-over-year. Although the wind generation coefficient remained below the long-term average, it was quite higher than in the first quarter of 2025. In addition, the commissioning of new wind farms in Germany and Spain contributed positively to generation volumes. The electricity generation from VERBUND's solar plants increased slightly by 0.3 GWh compared with the prior year period. Now turning to earnings development, EBITDA, the new renewable segment decreased by EUR 23.3 million year-on-year to EUR 35.8 million. This decline was primarily driven by lower realized contract prices, reduced income from the sale of green certificates, and valuation effects related to energy derivatives. VERBUND currently operates approximately 1.3 GW of new renewable capacity. This renewable capacity is across Spain, Austria, Germany, Romania, and Italy. As a recent update, I would like to highlight the signing of a framework agreement with Nordex Group for the supply of wind turbines with a total capacity of 700 MW. In Spain, construction activities remained a key focus during the first quarter of 2026, particularly across four PV portfolios with a combined installed capacity of approximately 1.1 GW. On the next page, on the sales segment, when we look at the earnings development here, EBITDA in the sales segment increased to EUR 49.4 million. That was mainly driven by the stabilization of earnings in the end customer business. The retail business EBITDA improved significantly, rising from EUR 7.2 million in the first quarter 2025 to EUR 18 million in the first quarter 2026, while the EBITDA in the trading business increased from EUR 29.4 million - EUR 31.3 million. At the same time, contributions from flexibility products declined by EUR 2.9 million compared with the prior year period. Overall, the improvement in EBITDA was primarily attributable to lower electricity procurement costs as well as positive valuation effects from future energy derivatives. On the next page, we'll talk about the grid segment. In the electricity grid business, EBITDA, according to IFRS, amounted to approximately EUR 100 million in the first quarter. That represents a decrease of around EUR 27 million compared with the prior year period. This decline was primarily caused by lower contributions from auction revenues. Against this backdrop, we have slightly adjusted our full year guidance for 2026 to approximately EUR 290 million. Our previous guidance was EUR 300 million. The regulatory account balance is expected to amount to approximately EUR 589 million by the end of 2026. Turning to Gas Connect Austria. EBITDA here amounted to approximately EUR 30 million in the first quarter of 2026. The increase compared with the prior year period was mainly driven by a higher contribution margin from the transmission network. We achieved roughly half of the EBITDA implied by our full year guidance already in the first quarter. This development is primarily explained by the seasonal structure of our cost base. Only around 10% of total expected energy costs for 2026 were incurred in the first quarter, while we also benefited from additional short-term revenues. From the second quarter onwards, however, we expect energy costs to increase significantly. With that, I would like to hand over to Andreas, who will talk about the other segments and the key financial figures before I come back with the outlook. Yeah. Thank you, Peter. Continuing with all other segments, I would like to focus on two elements. First, the generation from thermal power plants decreased by around 90 GWh on a year-over-year basis to 828 GWh. Despite the lower generation volumes, EBITDA increased, mainly driven by lower fuel expenses as well as higher realized margins, particularly at the beginning of the year. Second, the contribution from Kelag, the provincial utility of Carinthia, where we have a 36% shareholding. The contribution was slightly above the prior year level. This development was primarily attributable to positive contributions from the heat business, which more than compensated for the negative effects of below average water availability and lower sales prices. Moving on to the next slide, I would like to comment on the development of the relevant key financial figures. First starting with EBITDA. I think we discussed basically the influencing factors. EBITDA declined by 26.1% year-on-year to EUR 534.6 million. The financial result remained broadly stable, changing from a plus of EUR 1.3 million in Q1 last year to a minus of EUR 1.6 million in the first quarter 2026. As previously mentioned, the contribution from Kelag improved slightly compared with the prior year period. This positive effect was largely offset by lower interest income, mainly due to reduced returns from money market transactions. Taxes on income amounted to EUR 80 million. The group result declined by 32% year-on-year to EUR 269.8 million. Let me highlight the significant increase in additions to tangible assets, which rose from EUR 152 millio- EUR 262 million in Q1 2026. Major investment projects primarily related to the Limberg III hydropower plant, battery storage projects, and various investments in the electricity grid infrastructure. On the next page, let me briefly comment on our cash flow and financial position. The operating cash flow decreased to EUR 453.5 million in the first quarter of 2026, primarily reflecting the lower contribution margins from the hydro segment, resulting from lower achieved contract prices and weak hydro availability, as mentioned before by Peter, as well as higher income tax payments. This development was partially offset by changes in margin payments related to hedging transactions in the electricity business, which were deposited as a collateral for open position with the exchange clearing house. Free cash flow after dividends declined from EUR 289 million to EUR 150 million. This reduction was mainly attributable to the lower operating cash flow and the significantly higher level of investment activity during the quarter. Net debt decreased slightly from EUR 2.818 billion at year end 2025 to EUR 2.637 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2026, supported by the positive free cash flow generation. Accordingly, the gearing ratio improved to 23% compared with 25% at the end of 2025. Let me hand over again to Peter for presenting the last chart related to the outlook for 2026. Great. Thank you, Andreas. Let me first highlight key sensitivities for the 2026 financial year as of 31st of March, 2026. A deviation of ±1% in our generation would have an impact of approximately EUR ±14 million on the group result for 2026. A deviation of ±1% in wind and PV generation would affect the group results by approximately EUR ±1.8 million. A deviation of EUR ±1 in the wholesale price would have an impact of approximately EUR ±4.2 million on the group result for 2026. Our updated guidance for 2026 is as follows. We expect reported and adjusted EBITDA in the range of approximately EUR 2.1 billion-EUR 2.5 billion, and a reported group result in the range of approximately EUR 1 billion-EUR 1.2 billion. As always, this guidance is based on the assumptions of average hydrological wind and PV conditions for the quarters two to four, 2026, as well as the current opportunities and risk profile of the group. For the 2026 financial year, we intend to make a distribution between 45%-55% of our group results, which adjusted for non-recurring effects, is expected to amount to approximately EUR 1 billion-EUR 1.2 billion. Now, with that, I would like to open the call for your Q&A. The first question comes from the line of Wanda Serwinowska from UBS. Please go ahead. Hi, Wanda Serwinowska, UBS. Before I go into my questions, Peter, congratulations and best of luck in your new role. At the same time, I must say I'm 100% or even 200% sure you'll be missed by the financial market. Thanks a lot for all those years and the calls, and roadshows you did with us. Now back to two and a half questions. The first one is on the Austrian regulation. You mentioned that the discussion is ongoing. What options are being discussed, if you can elaborate a bit more? Which one is the most likely in your view? The second question is about the trading environment in the current energy crisis. What do you see on the trading during the current energy crisis? Is it different from 2022, 2023? Any observations would be much appreciated because some of your peers reported not that good trading results, and I noticed you also didn't mention great trading results in Q1. Lastly, as usual, if you could comment or disclose the latest hydro year to date and the hedging, but without mark-to-market. Thanks a lot. Wanda, thank you very much for your kind words, at the beginning. Really appreciate it. Let me tell you that, the more than 12 years, with all of you, research analysts and investors were an outstanding experience, which I wouldn't have liked to miss. So thank you for all that. Fortunately, we have another results presentation, the half-year result in about three months time, where I will certainly repeat what I've just said, maybe in a little bit more detail. Now coming back to your questions. I'm more than happy to give you sort of like a hedging update per sort of like the end of April, which is a number that is highly relevant as not too much has changed between the end of April and today. We are 80% hedged at a mark-to-market level of EUR 92 for 2026. We are 26% hedged for 2027 at a mark-to-market price of EUR 98. For 2028, we're only 1% hedged at a price of EUR 84. Those are the most current mark-to-market levels. Obviously, you can see here that two factors. Very high prices for 2026, then leading into a back correlation in 2027 and 2028, which is a high correlation to the forward TTF prices. A lot will depend on gas price developments for 2027 and 2028. I'm sure this is something we will discuss today as well. The trading environment. The trading environment is not easy. If you follow oil prices, gas prices, and then of course, electricity prices, we're very much influenced by, you know, by daily news, and the market follows the news despite the fact that very often they assume that the information they get is not correct or will be changed the next day. However, there will be momentum, and it's almost like a psychological trading environment where people assume that when Mr. Trump says A, a lot of people will react to that. On the basis of this, we see oil prices moving, we also see gas prices moving. The next day there is another comment, then again, you have a similar movement. I mean, there are some, you know, there are some traders in the market that basically say, you know, the best would be to basically ignore because everything can change within 24 hours. Again, you know, you lose some of the short-term momentum trades, which are happening a lot at the moment. Overall, as far as I'm concerned, a very difficult trading environment, which very much depends not on key data like supply and demand data, but more on assumptions in terms of the Strait of Hormuz and peace negotiations between U.S. and Iran. Certainly happy to talk more about price developments the way I see it. On the political environment in Austria and the kind of measures that we'll be taking in terms of profit skimming, I would have liked to be at a better position today as it was in the last conference call. If you remember, I said in the last conference call, I would like to share more information with you. Unfortunately, I don't have it. I'm still in the same position. We don't have a very clear way forward in terms of the regulatory framework and the new rules as far as the profit skimming is concerned. Methodology, there are a lot of different discussions. We don't exactly know what it's going to be. The one thing which I can share with you, and this is our internal assumption, we think that the finance minister will stick to the around EUR 400 million, which he wants to get from the energy sector. We assume that we will be around 40% of that contribution, which basically means that purely on the profit skimming scheme, we could end up with around EUR 160 million. Of course, there are other considerations. There's the industrial price, there's the social tariffs, and a few others. As a result of that, it's going to be interesting what the exact numbers are going to be for the sub-segments. Those are smaller numbers, but they all add up. Then what the actual methodology is going to be for the energy crisis contribution, as it is called. Thank you. Just a few follow-ups. Any words on hydro? I read this is the driest spring in 170 years. Any comments on hydro year to date? Do you have hedging without mark-to-market? It's easier for us to make our own assumptions if we know what is the clean hedging. Sure. The clean, the clean hedging is what we have hedged to date, for 2026 is the 80% at EUR 86. For 2027, 26% at EUR 95. For 2028, you know, the very small amount of around 1% at EUR 87. Of course, the biggest delta, you said you can obviously calculate the mark-to-market yourself. What we have used for the 2026 figures was EUR 114, for the 2027, EUR 100. You see that there is a big delta obviously between what we have already in the books as the hedged levels and what is open, everything that is open is an upside. That upside, we will take full advantage, obviously, of that upside up to the point where we are capped by the old system that is now still in place. It is more sensible to be in place because of the Iran war and because of the higher power prices. If the power prices had normalized, as we had anticipated before the Iran war, then, of course, the contribution to the Ministry of Finance would have been very, very low. As a result of that, the methodology, the new methodology, would have been introduced much earlier. Hydro, unless I missed it, sorry for the second or third follow-up. Oh, yeah. The, the hydro coefficient, year to date? Yes. Yeah, 0.71. Thank you very much, Peter. You're welcome. The next question comes from the line of Thibault Dujardin from Bernstein. Please go ahead. Hello. Good morning. Thank you very much for taking my question. My first one will be regarding buyback. Did you have a buyback so far this year? Do you anticipate additional over the end of the year? My second point will be regarding the new renewables coefficient below the planned value, it has been the case for several quarter. May I ask, what are the underlying assumption? If by default, it could imply a lower long-term average. Second point regarding new renewables, do you have any update regarding the hedging and PPA in Spain? Okay. Two and three, I think are related. Andreas Wollein is going to do two and three, and I will do the first one. I just wanna paraphrase, so if I understood you correctly. You asked me on the first one, how much, because of the dryness, because of the very low hydro coefficient, how much did we buy back, and what was the quantum in euros. Yes. correct? Yeah. Yes, yes. Around 60. Yes, around EUR 60 million. Thank you very much. You're welcome, and I will hand over to Andreas. Yeah. With regard to new renewables coefficient. Can you repeat the question once again? Yes, of course. My main question is, I noticed that the achieved coefficient is below planned value and has been the case for several months, quarters. Yes. Is it an average? Is the coefficient an average or is it a P50 assumption? No. Yeah, yeah. No, no. And- It's based on average, on long-term average as well. Yeah. We compare that, of course, the actual generation to this to this average. It's a little bit comparable to the to the to the hydro coefficient. We measure it against the of course, against the actual generation. Yeah. What was the second? What was the second one? Yeah, regarding, update regarding, hedging our PPAs in Spain. In Spain. You know that currently in Spain, we are operating around a little close to 800 MW of existing capacity primarily wind. It's about 60%-65% is wind, the rest is PV. The majority of the currently existing assets in Spain are either secured through a PPA or contracted or they are basically run under a tariff system. In total, it's around I would say around 70% of the existing generation assets have basically secured prices. Going forward, when we talk, you know that we're currently developing a couple of new projects in Spain. We have currently about 1.1 GW of projects under development and construction. The majority is linked to PV. We, of course, we have the target for these assets under construction to also enter into longer term contracts. Currently, PPA prices in Spain are very low. Of course, we always measure these prices against our internal price curves and price expectations. When we see that the PPA prices are way below our price forecast and the expectations or price curves, we are currently not hedging. We sell it instead in other channels through the electricity exchanges on the spot market or on the forward market. This is the current way how we handle it. Of course, long-term target is to hedge around 80% of our production based on tariffs or PPAs. Thank you very much. As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star and one on your telephone. The next question comes from the line of Olly Jeffery from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Morning. Two questions from me, please. The first one is just a little bit more on the hydro coefficient that you've seen in Q2 so far. The hydro coefficient year to date is 0.71. If I assume that's done through the end of April, obviously it could be a bit later than that, but if it was done to the end of April, I think that implies a coefficient of 0.55 in April. My numbers, that would imply under budget by about 1 TWh in April. Given where your hedge is probably a EUR 90 million EBITDA impact. I also account for further buybacks in April if the coefficient is 0.55. I can imagine buybacks could be another EUR 40 million or EUR 50 million April, meaning that taking the April hydro, you potentially you're looking at EBITDA as being EUR 130 million, EUR 140 million worse off. Thoughts on that would be welcome. The second question is on the full year guidance which you've adjusted. You mentioned that flexibility products have slightly increased. Price of grid has been slightly lowered, so those two are a bit of a wash. You've had an improvement in the hedge price, the hydro. Anything else in the other segments in sales or in the other segment that's going better than you initially anticipated at the start of the year to factor in? With that guidance, are you very comfortable with the midpoint as a guide at EUR 1.1, given what's happened in Q1? Thoughts on that would be welcome too. Thank you. Okay, Olly. On the hydro coefficient, yes, you're right. I mean, obviously, the year has continued to be very dry, and I can give you the rationale for that. It is really a combination of two things which I mentioned before. The snowpack in the mountains has been very low. There has been sort of like late snow, but it wasn't enough to really make a big change to the snowpack. As a result of that, when we usually get a lot of additional water into the rivers, into our hydropower plants, by the snowpack melting and the water coming from the mountains, that has been lower, obviously, than in previous years. That is a result of April and so far May, which has continued to be dry. All that has been combined with very little precipitation. We had very little rainfall. The rainfall could have compensated for the snowpack, but it hasn't because it has been very dry. Wanda mentioned, I saw it in your report, Wanda, sort of like the driest spring for 170 years. I didn't know that. You can see that you have very little rain, that you have had very little rain since the beginning of the year, I'm not surprised. The one thing, and I totally understand where you're coming from, the one thing we always do, because as far as weather is concerned, nobody has a crystal ball, neither do we. As a result of that, we always take the long-term average for the rest of the year. That is a downside and that is an upside, which we cannot really assess. Some people argue, well, you know, when you have such a dry beginning of the year, it might continue relatively dry. Then again, you know, I could give you many examples of years in the past, over the last 100 years, where we had a very, very dry start, and then it started raining during the summer and fall, and part of it was compensated. There we have, we have upside and downside. Purely mathematically, if we take the 0.71 and we take, you know, for the rest of the year, we take the long-term average, we end up at around, you know, 4.9 approximately. On the, on the buybacks, we don't give in-between numbers on the buyback. We will give you a buyback number at the next conference call, when we have, when we have more data points, not just for four weeks, but, you know, for the period, for the quarter. Obviously, you can assume that when a month is very dry and is below sort of like, you know, our security levels in terms of dryness, then of course, you know, we are forced to buy back. On the guidance, I mean, the guidance is really sometimes it is relatively scientific, sometimes it's a little bit of art. This year we found relatively difficult because we have so many imponderables, which are external factors we have absolutely no influence on, which have quite an impact. Given the Iran war, you know, what we discussed before, very difficult. We don't exactly know what's going to happen there. We obviously think that power prices are going to be higher probably for longer as a result of my assumption on the gas price, which by the way, there are two schools of thought in the market. I mean, there are some, there are some people, some traders, some investors, who think that gas prices are going to normalize quicker than most people assume. Of course, there are some, and I belong to that camp, who think that it will take much longer for things to normalize in the gas market. You know, given the geopolitical situation, given the very strong demand from Asia, that is now pulling LNG from the U.S. because Qatar is not able to deliver, will have an impact that is going to take longer. We shall see. Now given all that, we don't just have price, we don't just have the hydro coefficients. We have certain amount of uncertainty around flexibility products. You know, we have changed the guidance slightly. On the flexibility products, there's always uncertainty. Where we see an improvement is on thermal power, there we are up by, you know, at least EUR 15 million. Of course, in our sales business, where we are up both on the retail side and on the trading side by approximately EUR 30 million. You see there are sort of like the positive factors, there are the negative factors. Of course, we have the entire political discussion around the caps, around the new methodology. On the European level, we still have an unresolved discussion around CO2 pricing, and we seem to have a lot of disagreements among various countries. You have some countries that are very, very forceful vis-à-vis changing the ETS system because they think that is the quickest remedy to power prices, particularly in the context of deindustrialization. You have others that basically say, "I think we should leave the scheme as it seems to be working, and don't want to change it." As long as we don't have an agreement there, it will take longer to pursue that. We think that Merit Order discussions, again, you know, they flare up, everybody talks about it, and then, you know, the engineers and the technical advisors have more influence, and then they basically say, "Well, the system works so well and it needs to be a European system. As a result of that, we should probably not touch it." What the EU has done, and that is something we need to observe, all over Europe, the EU is basically giving more power to the countries. The hot potato is thrown back to national states, and the EU is basically saying, "Well, you know, if you're concerned about ABC, there are certain measures which you can implement." The industrial power price is one of those. That is something where we might see some changes, but as far as I'm concerned, it all takes longer than many people would wish for. That is the framework, in terms of, you know, your first question on hydro coefficient, and a little bit of background in terms of our guidance. Now my final remark, do we feel comfortable with the midpoint? The answer is yes, we do. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Peter Kollmann for any closing remarks. Yes. Well, Andreas and I would like to thank you for your participation and again for very relevant and interesting questions. Always a pleasure discussing those with you, and I look forward to hearing you for our half-year results. Have a great day. Bye-bye. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your line. Goodbye.