Hello and welcome. Thank you all for joining us today for the WAM Leaders FY 2026 Interim Results webinar. My name is April Lowis, and I'm joined today by Lead Portfolio Manager Matthew Haupt and Portfolio Manager John Ayoub. Before we begin, a disclaimer is displayed on the screen for you. What we will discuss today is general in nature and is not financial advice. To start, I'll first give you an update on the WAM Leaders, half year results, then pass over to Matt and John who will provide a market update and discuss key investment themes and reporting season insights. We look forward to taking your questions towards the latter part of the webinar. Let's start with the investment portfolio performance. The WAM Leaders investment portfolio increased 8.4% in the six months to 31 December 2025, outperforming the S&P/ASX 200 accumulation index by 4.8%. In the 2025 calendar year, the WAM Leaders investment portfolio increased 11.1%, outperforming the index by 0.8%. Since inception in May 2016, the WAM Leaders portfolio has increased 12.1% per annum. For the six months to 31 December 2025, the total shareholder return was 15% or 16.8% when including the value of franking credits. On the next slide, we have the dividends. The investment portfolio outperformance for the period has enabled the board to declare an increased fully franked interim dividend of AUD 0.048 per share. The annualized fully franked interim dividend of AUD 0.096 per share represents an annualized fully franked interim dividend yield of 7% and a grossed up dividend yield of 10% when including the value of franking credits. I will now hand over to Matt, who will provide a market update. Thanks, April, and thanks for everyone for joining us today. What a start to 2026. I thought we'd walk through some of the developments that we've seen early in this year, and then the bit of the outlook, and then I'll hand over to John who can run through some of the portfolio ideas and the way we're shaping the portfolio. 2026 started off with a bang with I think Trump woke up on the wrong side of the bed, talked about invading Greenland. 2026 is all about geopolitical risk, and we're seeing that time and time again. We've also had AI disruption enter the scene as a potential threat, causing a huge drawdown in a lot of the software companies and also challenging the cyclical uptick we thought we would have this year. Throughout all this, I just thought I'd point out that we've had a lot of disruptions, but the markets fundamentally haven't broken yet. There is a reason why this is happening, and it goes back to the impeccable financial plumbing in the system, the liquidity. We've been through events last year. We had Liberation Day. Very dramatic fall, didn't break the market. The yen carry trade unwind, we saw that happen as well, and again, didn't break the market. The Iran conflict, again, shocked the system, had a little bit of a disruption, but beneath the surface is what we look at, the financial plumbing, and it's been remarkably resilient. It has digested a lot of the risks we're seeing, and that's why we remain fairly constructive on equities because it's very hard to disrupt the financial plumbing at the moment. When I talk about this, it's really we're looking at a lot of markets beneath the surface, particularly the repo market, which is effectively where a lot of hedge funds lever up, and that has been incredibly resilient. Every time there's a shock, the market bounces back, and this is the fundamental reason why we think it happens, is liquidity is huge in the system and hasn't been broken. Any time there's signs of stress, there's always the Fed, the central banks intervene to make sure there's no stress in that market. It's almost a third pillar of the central banks at the moment between inflation, employment, and we'd argue financial plumbing. That has caused a lot of these shock events to peter out. We're starting to see another example of that. We started 2026, the way we thought it would play out was a real pickup in global industrial production. You had the shock of Liberation Day, and we started to see that with the hard data. Things were picking up. We still think there is a cyclical uptick, but obviously the events we've had recently have likely shortened the duration of this pickup, so that means we will change the portfolio. Early in the year, we positioned for industrial pickup, cyclicals, materials, energy was another big call, which has played out okay for us. The way we see it now is we think you need to lean into quality. The reason why we think quality is because we think the cyclical uptick will not be as long as we thought it would be. We think quality is a way to move forward now. Within quality, there can be a lot of stocks that fall in the quality bucket, healthcare stocks, diversified financials, and REITs as well. We're starting to position the portfolio a little bit towards that end. We don't wanna swing too far there yet because it's not quite time, but that is where we're setting the portfolio up over the next period. The three big things at the moment, AI disruption, we don't have an answer for you, unfortunately. It's something we're gonna have to watch develop over the year. What were the early signs are the impact we see is SaaS companies, so the people that sell the technology are gonna have a real hard-time with pricing. We've heard from multiple sources that this is the case, and that's reflected in share prices already. Not saying anything out of the norm there, but it's really gonna be a challenge. I think the key takeout we had over reporting season was we think companies are at their peak FTE, their peak full-time employment numbers. We don't think there will be a huge job loss event over the next 12 months, but hiring is at a freeze, I'd say now, and the risk is to the downside. That's something we're taking into account with how we position as well, working out what companies this will benefit versus what companies it will hurt. The Iran conflict, there's been developments over the last 24 hours. That was the other key event for us. You know, how does this play out? Our view is Iran played it fairly smart. They went wide, they made it into a global issue, and the U.S. have been forced to pull back a bit because of the impacts felt globally. Iran went after, you know, local targets, but also the oil price is a huge impact to the global economy. It may not become a global issue very quickly. We saw a big walk back from Trump overnight. Again, we're watching how this plays out, but it looks like a de-escalation is in place. But, you know, we'd expect flare-ups over the next six, 12 months. It's not over, but it looks like the worst is probably behind us now as well. Then we move to private credit. I mean, that's the other big thing at the moment. Private credit, is it a bubble? Is there a big stress event coming? We don't think there is. Obviously, there's been some pretty poor lending over the last five years, but that's just a function of the environment. What we do think, though, is private credit, the trust around private credit is under question now. What does that mean? It means inflows into these funds have stopped and in fact are on the way out. That can cause some issues. We don't think it's really going to be a private credit blow-up situation, but the inflows have stopped and now they've gone to outflows. There will be a few mark-to-market issues, but we don't think it's systemic at this point in time. Overall, we remain constructive on equities. We think you need to pivot towards quality. We think the global cyclical uptick is still underway, but that duration has been shortened now from a few of the issues we've discussed so far. All in all, we think the key thing for us is to watch the financial plumbing. If you see the basis trade or the repo trades, which are hedge fund trades basically, unwind, that is a key event for us to turn a little bit more pessimistic. Like I said at the start, we're seeing many, many examples, and it hasn't broken yet, so we think that is the final straw to break when you turn negative. We think the only event where it will turn negative is in a credit event when there's actual credit cycle, which we don't think is gonna happen. Remain pretty constructive, but yeah, definitely a tilt towards quality. I'll leave it there and hand to John. Thank you, Matt, and thank you everyone for joining us today. Perhaps another way to explain what Matt was saying is that we're dealing in more extremes today. The volatility that we saw in the reporting season, the volatility that we're seeing day to day is amplified. Why is it being amplified? Because of uncertainty, and we're seeing far more dramatic moves in markets. You know, we've become relatively immune to 1% moves in banks, and for those that have been looking at the markets for as long as we have, a big move in banks was 20 or 30 or 40 basis points. Now, 1% a day is normal. You know, we're seeing BHP move 5% or 6% a day, and we need to kinda understand what's driving that. I think first and foremost, there are a number of factors at play when it's driving the Australian market in particular. Firstly, there are more and more hedge funds looking for intraday, intraweek moves, and we see that in reporting season. The share price leading into a company reporting isn't reflective of the value or the fundamentals of the company. Purely, it's a reflection of where that share price is gonna move that day on earnings adjustments. We need to remain more nimble than we ever have, and we've always been a very nimble fund, but that nimbleness needs to remain front of mind because the other factor that's playing out in the market is more and more of money in the Australian market is moving to the ASX20, the top 20, the biggest names that we know. Why is that? Is that a lot of the large super funds are removing risk. The way that they're judged is judged on an index, and they wanna become more and more index aware, and what that leads to is more and more opportunity for us. As more and more money leads to the, that top 20, you see these valuation extremes or disparity between those that have, and call them the top 5 or 10 stocks in the ASX, versus those that have not, and when I say have and have not, have flow, have money leading towards them. Those extremes that we're seeing are only gonna be exacerbated going further until we see the ASX go from an inflow mode to an outflow mode. When we see many retirees who have their super balances, they start drawing down on that, then we'll start to see that pressure, the pressure valve being released on that indexation that we've seen. What that does present and what we found in the reporting season is that a lot of companies who have been forgotten about get discounted heavily. If they don't fit within certain factors or certain buckets, they represent opportunities, and names that I'll call out in reporting season that fared fairly well for the Leaders Fund was Ramsay Health Care or A2 Milk or Mineral Resources. These are stocks that don't fit into those top 20 buckets. Somewhat been forgotten about. They lead the portfolio when we make good investment decisions as a team. That's one of the extremes that we're starting to notice get more and more and something that we have to continually focus on. Within the portfolio itself, as Matt said, the portfolio enjoyed good performance in the back half of the year because we were overweight resources and underweight financials. You know, that was a position that we'd held for some time. You know, in 2025, we looked like fools, in 2026, we looked like geniuses, nothing had changed for us. It was just the fundamental view that banks were overvalued at that period and resources were cheap. Where we go today is more of the challenge, it's a real live debate. You know, with what's happening in global markets and global geopolitical lens, it's challenging to build a portfolio that we have certainty over the direction of the market for the next six to 12 months. What we are trying to do is identify those companies with really strong balance sheets, with dominant market positions, and that should weather any storms that may emerge. As Matt identified, we don't think the system is broken, but we need to be cautious. I think that's one thing that we can say. Companies like Aristocrat, which have excess capital on their balance sheet, buybacks, growing at, you know, above market metrics and cheaper than they've ever been. These are businesses that we've become attracted to. The Ramsay Health Cares, which we'd spoken about, the CSLs, which have been bashed up and forgotten, and the whole healthcare sector in particular have been, has both. They start to look attractive to us. We fund those from the banks, and we fund those from our overweight positions in resources. That's not to say that we're gonna sell out of resources, it's just we start to neutralize the portfolio somewhat, just so as we can ride out the volatility and come out the other side with a better feel on what the market does. I think from there we'll probably leave time for a lot of questions because I've got a feeling there will be a lot today. I'll pass it back to April. Thanks, Matt. Thanks, John. Before we kick off the questions, I just wanted to mention the national shareholder roadshows that we have coming up. Next month, we're going to commence the shareholder presentations, and we're going to visit seven cities across Australia. There is a QR code on the screen, and you can register that way. Thank you to everyone who sent in questions already. We've got a few coming through. I'll start with Jeffrey. Jeffrey's asked, "Can you please explain the top five active security rates and underweights at the bottom of the monthly reports?" Many of the underweights appear in the top 20. Yeah. Thank you, Jeffrey, it's a question that we do get asked often, and I think it's just a function of the way that we're judged. We're judged against the ASX 200, or the 200 largest stocks in the ASX, and we try to provide a relative perspective on which stocks we own and we don't own relative to that benchmark. If we look at the way that that index is comprised, CBA makes up 10.85% of that index. If we own 5% of CBA within that portfolio, we're actually taking a position which is 5.85% under the index that we're judged against. That is a relatively negative stance against a CBA. Equally with BHP, which is around about that 10% of the index that we get judged against, if we own 8% of the full portfolio, which we do, we're 2% underweight our benchmark. What happens on the other side is that we are overweight Rio Tinto, and Rio Tinto within the benchmark is only 2%, but we've held, you know, a 6%-7%-8% index portfolio weight for the better part of a year there. What we try to do is provide you a guide of our positioning relative to the benchmark that we get judged against, but that's not how we manage money. We manage money based on more sectors, on where we have sector preferences and how we wanna allocate that money to its sectors at any given time. What we're trying to do is help you guys understand how we're positioned relative to the way that we're judged, and then within the reports, we also give you our sector positioning, and that's probably where I would lean you guys to look a little bit more toward. Thank you. Jeffrey's asked another question: "What is the portfolio turnover as the top 20 appear to change every month? Jeffrey, another good question there. The turnover, I don't have the figures at hand, but we've got a reasonable approximation. It'd be around six to seven times per annum. That's where you see, you know, people look at our turnover and think it's really high, but it's really in that top 20 where we do all the heavy lifting on turnover because we use a real dynamic approach to the way we manage money. For example, if John talked about BHP, you know, we're always looking for incremental information. If we get some more positive information on BHP, we'll wind that up. And then if we get negative, obviously the counter will pull it down. But we can move that around 3%-4% of the portfolio. You do that a few times, you know, within a couple of months and you turnover starts to go really high. Yeah, it's... I'd say it's around six to seven times in that top 20. That's where all the dynamic weightings are done. The good news is the turnover costs are very small these days. If there are any brokers on the call, apologies for this, but we can trade stocks at 2 basis points, which is 0.02%. It's quite cheap and liquid for us to do that. Yeah, a benefit of large caps is that liquidity as well. Yeah. You're not constrained by that. Yeah. We've got a question from John: "Why does WAM Leaders have no discount in the dividend reinvestment plan?" I did chat with Jesse beforehand, our CFO. Okay. If you'd like me to- Please, please. Jesse said that decision is made at the time of the dividend announcement, it's based around premiums and discounts at the time. If there's a material premium to the NTA, that's when that decision would be made to have a discount. This question's from Michael: What is the best alternative to bank hybrids given APRA is phasing them out? I guess the first best alternative is insurance companies. They can still do those hybrids, so there is still some hybrids, just not in the banking sector. Then second, there's been a lot of new income products and I don't know whether to do a shameless plug of. General WAM General advice only. WAM Income Maximiser, but that looks like a good alternative to a hybrid. Yeah, like your insurance companies are your number one port of call there. They still can do the hybrids. I'd be looking there if you want a direct replacement. We have a question from Paul: With so much global uncertainty, should investors wait and see what unfolds or take some action? If so, what should they do? I know you did touch on it a little bit earlier. Yeah, I mean, for us, like we have severely stress tested markets, you know, four instances over the last two years and it hasn't broken. You know, we watch while these stresses are happening to the primary dealer repo market in the U.S., the leverage in the system, and it doesn't change. Until that breaks, and I think it's a credit event that breaks it because that is the thing where it just, it turns all the collateral into I, "I don't know what you've got, I don't trust you," and the whole system freezes. Until you get that, we're gonna be okay. Invest through this noise. Mm. Be, like as John pointed out, be cautious, and look for signs of stress to come in. At this point in time, we are maintaining our stance. We're gonna invest through it, and we're cognizant of the risks out there. They're huge. They're huge, the risk, but while you've got this underpinning of the financial system, which I think it leaves a lot of people confused. They're like, "Why are markets where they are?" It's 'cause it's beneath the surface it's impeccable, and there's so much liquidity and leverage in the system still, and that's holding it all together. If that breaks, then that's when you get the real oh no moment. Until that happens, you just got to invest through it and really be nimble around, you know, where is the best place to put part capital and, you know, we touched around quality. I think quality is a good place. You want the I mean, it's very obvious in times where there's gonna be a little bit more stress, you know, high quality businesses, cash flow, all the boring stuff. Boring will be good again. We went through a period where boring was not good. It was like a race for who could have the highest multiple, and that was cheered like, "Oh, it's on 300x PE. Like, yay, let's keep buying that." Those days are over, thankfully, and it's back to quality, and I think quality will get rewarded. A little bit of discipline to come back in the market, which we think is a great thing because it was ill-discipline for a couple of years. It was crazy. The momentum in this market is changing rapidly and I think if we look back a year ago, momentum was driving tech stocks to euphoric valuations. They drove tech proxies, and call them our banks, to euphoric valuations, and as Matt was saying, boring is good, but boring has come at a very cheap price, and people haven't wanted that. If we maybe it's worth touching a little bit more on the global perspective. Matt's talked about the plumbing, but if we talk about the individuals, and in sports sometimes you've gotta play the man rather than the ball, and you look who's leading the global economy and it's Donald Trump. His appetite for failure is very short and he has shown that he's willing to wear periods of pain, but his ultimate objective is to get the S&P up. We saw glimpses of it this morning. Very quickly he'll put some pain points in, but he'll ensure, as he did in COVID and all sorts of stuff, rhetoric will come out to ensure that the markets start heading up. That's not to distract us though from the realities of what is happening in the actual world and the realities of inflation because of oil, the realities of AI, and the realities of private credit are there and they're real, and it's changed the way that we need to invest. You know, all of a sudden companies like Xero or WiseTech, you start to realize they're not bulletproof companies. You start to then turn your attention to things like REA, Realestate.com I should say, or Carsales or SEEK. You look at those valuations now and if. You know, we don't have the answer today on how disrupted they will be from AI, but those valuations are now cheaper than banks and their headline numbers and as far as we can see, they're growing a lot more strongly than a bank is in Australia. The questions that we have to answer as an investment team and to help you guys on where to put your money is, for us is the question, do we back that next level down of companies over that cohort which is seen as quality, defensive? Quality is a term that we'll use, but money has gone to things like BHP, sorry, to CBA and the like because of certainty. Certainty doesn't necessarily mean quality. For us, we're looking at those quality companies that should withstand some of those topical points that we've mentioned and come out the other side better. Thank you. "Bapcor has been extremely disappointing and now there's been a capital raising. What is your view on the turnaround plan and where they'll be in the next couple of years?" That's from Kay. Yeah, Kay, it's not one that is close to our heart, shall we say. It's not one that we've owned. We did spend a little bit of time looking at it. I think the small cap teams who Oscar and co are doing a call on Friday, it's probably a question better for them 'cause I think they did participate in the most recent capital raising. Yeah, it's, it won't feature in the Leaders' portfolio for some time, if at all, in the future I'd say. We'll make sure that that question is added- Yeah. Mm-hmm. to the webinar on Friday. So Kay has also asked, "I spoke to Matt at last year's seminar about Spark New Zealand. Matt thought it was looking cheap after the share price plunged. In the last 12 months it's gone nowhere. What is your outlook on Spark today? Yeah, I mean, it has gone nowhere. We've sold out of Spark. Again, I think it's a real function. They actually did what we thought they'd do, they sold down their data centers, stake. The New Zealand economy was just too big a tailwind, headwind, sorry, for the company. It's just very tough environment. We saw the writing on the wall and we exited that position. Disappointing that we thought the New Zealand economy might pick up, but it really languished and we keep hearing green shoots out of New Zealand, but we've heard that for a while now. Mm. Yeah, for us, exited and not looking to go back in there. The one other thing, they did pay a large special dividend on the way through, so yeah, the headline share price versus where otherwise would be notwithstanding the dividend makes it look worse than what it was. They paid, I think it was AUD 0.40 from memory, which is fairly substantial. Yeah. Ashok has asked, "Why is the fund not taking advantage of the recent SaaS sell-off?" Software as a service, and I'll preface this by saying WAM Leaders invest in Australia. Yeah. WAM Global, another one of our listed investment companies, invests offshore and there's some opportunities there. Yeah. They've got some of those higher quality SaaS names. Mm in their portfolio. Mm. Ashok, it's a fair and good question to ask, 'cause if you look at what we have, if you look at the opportunity set that we have to invest in Australia. The SaaS companies or the quasi SaaS companies that we have are WiseTech, Xero, Technology One. Then there's a bunch of other stocks which are SaaS proxies, and we'll call them Pro Medicus, realestate.com.au, SEEK, Carsales. Then there's those that benefit from AI, and they're the data center players, which is NEXTDC, Goodman Group, and something that sits in between is Megaport. We go across that spectrum and, you know, if we look at WiseTech first and foremost, you know, they're losing market share. A lot of their competitors and their clients are bringing it in-house and they're losing share too. For us, notwithstanding, the CEO's trials and tribulations and, you know, we're not sure what eventuates there, but we look at the dynamics of that company and they're going a little bit backward. If you then move on to Xero is one that we are looking at and we have looked at, but to Matt's comment earlier, if you take the extreme positions on SaaS, the extreme positions are that AI is gonna disrupt everyone and we'll be able to write our own code, and we'll be able to write our own accounting software for us at home, versus the other extreme, it's a bit of a Y2K. It's not gonna be either of those two, it's gonna be somewhere in the middle. We don't know what happens with pricing and if pricing power dissipates for someone like a Xero and they're not able to get 10% price per annum in a fairly mature markets that they operate, so they're fairly heavy in Australia, they're fairly heavy in New Zealand, the U.S. strategy's failed and U.K. strategy's going well. If you look at that, it's very much a GDP plus growth business of just underlying uptake, and then they've relied heavily on price. If that price lever is no longer there, and if price goes the other way, you know, you start... It gets challenging to actually work out what the right valuation is. Xero's still not cheap on, and it's still not cheap on a global perspective. We take that next bucket, which is the peer set, the hybrids we'll call them. Their valuations have pulled back a lot and we have to ask ourselves, REA, Carsales and SEEK, are their business models robust enough to withstand AI disruption? Now we think realestate.com probably does have a robust business model to withstand it, yet to be proven, but we think it's okay. SEEK on the other end probably doesn't, and CAR we don't know. For full transparency. We played it through the data center guys, in particular Goodman Group. We think that's come back from a valuation perspective to levels where it's attractive enough for us to own it. People have been waiting for catalysts and catalysts and catalysts for this thing, those catalysts are contract announcements. They've played a steady hand with the cards that they've been dealt. They've been more patient than others, they've been waiting for full pricing when it comes to signing up data center clients. For us, we wanna play the certainty. When I said not certainty, we wanna play the quality, that quality is Goodman Group, until we can form a better view on the others, we're not ready to go big. We have bought some Technology One, we have bought some REA, we have bought some Pro Medicus. They're the ones that we have bought. On this topic, we also have a question from George. You've covered it a bit already, but in case you have anything else to add. He says, "The good has been thrown out the, with the bad in the great AI disruption, feared tech sell-off, but companies like Cochlear, ResMed and Pro Medicus have patented hardware, and requiring regulatory and medical approvals," Pro Medicus, "are surely not as threatened by the pure, as the pure SaaS companies with narrower modes. Yeah. What's your take on this, especially on Cochlear, ResMed... Yeah and Pro Medicus? You're right there, George, I think we're just trying to highlight it is about stock picking within those sectors 'cause it is. AI isn't a catch-all phrase, it's a catch-some phrase. If you look at ResMed and their last three results from memory. They've been outstanding, and they've got some proper momentum behind them. That's one we're pretty comfortable with. Now, Pro Medicus is an interesting one because it's still a regulated, it's still a regulated asset in effect, where every single time one of their tests come out, it needs to be approved by regulators. AI, you know, it provides them a barrier from AI where, you can't just provide software that challenges it. You're right in calling out Pro Medicus. Pro Medicus and Cochlear had weak results at the result. In the past reporting season. You know, I think Pro Medicus has gone from AUD 300 back to AUD 100-AUD 140. I think it's AUD 150, wherever it is today. We did buy some of that one on the pullback 'cause we do think the technology they have, the regulatory backdrop that protects it provides some sound momentum and tailwinds. Cochlear we're not so sure about. You know, Anna literally just organized a meeting for us to go see 'em on April 14th, so we'll be better educated on April 15th to tell you what we think of Cochlear. The last two or three results there have been weak, and I do take your point around the hardware being somewhat of a moat. Their results have been weak, and we need to get a better grasp on what's driving that weakness. You know, right here, right now, we're not ready to go into that one. Yeah. Just adding to that, we literally went through this exercise internally around moats and where to position. Yeah, you're right on the money there, especially around financial moats as well, you know, capital or regulatory moats, incredibly powerful. Obviously with PME as well. Again, starting valuations do matter, and like PME was trading in the stratosphere. You know, when you actually get some questions around these stocks, that's what you see, the share prices can fall dramatically. We have a question from Michael on currency: Are we seeing the start of the decline of the U.S. dollar? If so, which currency will replace it? What is in store for the Australian currency? Yeah, I think the U.S. dollar's been on its deathbed probably 10 times in the last 20 years, but it won't be replaced. We're seeing very good examples of late that it is backed by the largest military. You know, throughout history, if you go through the history books, the largest military, their currency does win, and they protect it at all costs. Another perfect example we're seeing at the moment. No, it will not be replaced. You know, post-Liberation Day, everyone was saying the end of U.S. exceptionalism. The proof was, is actually the opposite. Money flowed back, and we're seeing that again now. The U.S. dollar was overvalued, that's why when it paired back, everyone was saying it was the end, but it's not the end. Until the military breaks or, you know, we get a larger military, from China, who knows, in 10, 15 years, the U.S. dollar will be defended. We don't even factor that into our base case. We do think it's overvalued though. You know, we are expecting a slightly softer U.S. dollar, but it's not the end of the U.S. dollar. Just on Aussie dollar. Sorry? Aussie dollar. Oh, yeah. I mean, the Aussie dollar, I mean, it's really still a proxy of China and how China are doing. We saw from their NPC meeting last week actually, China looks okay. It's gonna be fairly solid, 4.5%-5% GDP growth. You know, everything's, you know, that's gonna be a remarkably resilient economy. On that, Aussie dollar should be okay. What the RBA do is obviously the other swing factor and we've talked about, you know, last year we're of the view that there was too many cuts in the curve that came out, and they flipped back the other way now to hiking. We've probably only got one hike left. Obviously we've had the oil price move, which will push through a little bit of inflation. If they pull back, they'll just look through it. You know, we'll probably got one more hike, you know, potentially two, and then they're done. Yeah, the Aussie dollar looks okay. It's very much a risk-on proxy too. If global growth is okay and China is okay, the Aussie dollar will do well. We've got a question again from Ashok: What is the outlook for commodities this financial year? Yeah. Good question there. We just. Yeah, China. Mm-hmm. Yeah, China. Mm-hmm. Touched on it. Like, it was really around China. What was the outcome of the NPC meeting? You know, it wasn't, "Wow, this is amazing," but it was solid. We just think another solid year for commodities. Where we think commodities, what commodities will do well, I mean, iron ore will be thereabouts where it is now, be fairly stable. Aluminum still looks good in our view, and coal still looks good. They are the areas. Copper is an interesting one that's. You got a little bit of movement around the world with, you know, the difference between the different exchanges and, you know, tariffs, so there's a little bit of an anomaly there. Copper, if you believe in AI, I mean, over the next decade, there's a massive shortage. Copper will be up and down with how the global economy goes, but ultimately we should be in a decade-long copper bull market. The other commodities You know, lithium is, you know, a boom-bust sort of industry because of the supply and demand movement, so that one's tough. We're pretty constructive lithium in the very short- term. Other than that, it falls away pretty quickly then. Rare Earths. Rare Earths, I mean, yeah, obviously, the conflict in the Middle East was positive for Rare Earths. It was already positive anyway leading into this, but, yeah, there's definitely gonna be some deals done. The way we're playing it is through Iluka and Lynas. We think that's gonna be of strategic importance. They've already flagged it. Expect some deals to happen in the next few months, I would've thought. The other commodity that's very linked to the AI phenomena is uranium. As more and more comments come about energy security and small nuclear cells, uranium goes up with it, and, you know, we wouldn't be surprised to see if the U.S. government do a similar sort of deal to what they did in rare earths to secure a domestic supply of uranium. From that perspective, we own, you know, NextGen as our proxy for uranium. You were just touching on Iran as well. We've got a question on that. If the conflict proves to be a multi-month rather than multi-week event and elevated oil prices become persistent rather than transitory, how do you see that feeding through to equity markets, particularly in terms of inflation expectations, earnings pressures, and sector rotation? Yeah, I mean, oil, we had a saying internally it was oil was driving the bus and everyone was following as a passenger 'cause oil was dictating how equities would move. Like oil would go up, equities would go down. You could see it directly in your screen. If it was prolonged oil up. It used to be an old rule of thumb for every $10 increase in oil was like a 10 basis point hit to GDP. It is, it's effectively a consumption tax. It does have huge impact to the global economy. Higher oil price for the wrong reasons is bad. High oil price for, you know, global growth booming is good. It would've been bad, it would've been quite stagflationary. If it was extended, you know, we do have problems. It looks like, you know, our base case is largely the worst is over. We still think there'll be flare-ups over the next year basically. I think the worst is over. Our base case isn't a prolonged, but if it was prolonged, we would go more cautious on the equity market for sure. It is a big consumption tax and a drag to global growth and then you'd have to work out who does it hit the hardest, the importers. Asia gets hit hard, Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam, those countries. U.S. fairly self-sufficient, so they're probably the best market. You know, when we're looking for companies on the ASX, where do we invest? Europe gets hit hard. You've already seen that with gas prices and, you know, every day you see up 30%. Then we'd look for companies which benefit, and one company that benefits is Macquarie Group. They're long a lot of these, well, the volatility of these commodities. Macquarie would've been cleaning up over the last week and a bit through the U.S. price movements, but really Europe as well. We saw one of the other big things we saw was the crack spreads for jet fuel, like astronomical, like the Singapore margins were huge. We're looking at, you know, how do you play that ALD like Ampol or Viva Group, a couple of positions we've been playing around with as well. Not only like you gotta look at the impact of the economy, like what areas benefit and what get hit the hardest and hit the hardest would be consumer discretionary of course. I remember Gerry Harvey used to have a saying the one of the main drivers was interest rates and petrol prices for retail sales. I think that still holds. It's probably worth touching on oil stocks in Australia as well. If you look at who we have, we've got Woodside, Santos, some other smaller guys below it, and then we have Ampol and Viva, are the main ways to play it. If we look at what's gonna happen in the world following the events in Iran, energy security is certainly gonna be front of mind for governments. We've already seen South Korea, China all respond with, you know, pulling back exports of diesel or whatever it might be. As we go forward and we look at the ways that governments are gonna position their supply of energy, be it LNG, be it oil, they're gonna ensure that they have diversity. One of the things that is very strong within the Australian listed oil companies is there is no oil in the Middle East. If you look at Woodside's assets, it's very much Australia and U.S.-focused and the Gulf of America. I'm sure that's how we say it these days, not the Gulf of Mexico anymore. Their assets are very tied up in those two areas and for us in Leaders, Woodside's the way that we play oil. The spot. Yeah. You talk about the spot. They, they've got more exposure to spot. They've got a lot more leverage than Santos and the like. We think there's been a lot of questions on some of their more recent acquisitions, in particular, Louisiana LNG, also known as LLNG. It's a mouthful for me, but those assets all of a sudden become very important in energy security assessments around the world. You know, you no longer wanna be dependent on Qatar oil. You no longer wanna be dependent on Iraqi or Iranian oil or gas. What we think will eventuate is these assets, be it the North West Shelf of Australia, be it the Santos PNG assets, be it the Gulf of America assets, become far more important in geopolitical, positioning, in the future. Asset sell-downs all of a sudden become a lot more attractive and a lot vastly more valuable. We look at what closer to home, and we've all seen the headlines that we have 39 days of petrol left in storage. Right now, Viva and ALD have been negotiating with the government, and it's been negotiation that's been taking place for the better part of a year around subsidies to ensure that below certain crack spreads that Matt was talking about, that they're incentivized to ensure that supply still comes into the country. I'm pretty sure now that ALD or Ampol, I should say, and Viva have a lot stronger hand in negotiating with Mr. Bowen and the likes around what value they can get from those negotiations and furthermore, how much storage we need from our refinery. We look at that and Notwithstanding the gyrations that we'll see every single day based on volatility in the oil price and the intraday movements, long-term, Woodside, Santos, Viva, and Ampol are far better positioned today to capitalize on the changing geopolitical risks that have surfaced because of this conflict. We have another question from Ashok: Why are you adding weight to REITs, real estate investment trusts, if rates are going up? Yeah, good question, Ashok. A way to look at REITs is the guys which are predominantly exposed to the short end of the curve, and then there's the guys exposed to the long end of the curve. What I mean by that is interest rates going up hurts the resi developers, so think your Mirvac, your Stockland. The long end of the curve is like, we're talking the 10-year part of the curve, is related to more cap rates. What are cap rates? The discount rate you use. We think, as and we've seen it, if you hike too aggressively at the front end, the back end starts falling off, and we've seen that recently. Our thinking is the RBA will over-tighten into a softening market, make a policy mistake, pulling down the long end. I mean, that's our rationale. It could be right, it could be wrong, but that's what we think at this point in time. It's more around the discount rate play versus the front end around the RBA hiking cycle. I mean, we all can see the RBA hiking cycle in the curve. It's not really new news, but, you're right, it does impact people's perception in the short- term. Yeah, we're really around the discount rate play rather than the front end. We've got a question from Ian: please, can shareholders receive weekly NTA updates? Even pre-tax NTA would assist. That's noted, and we'll pass it on. Yes. Yeah. Unfortunately, out sort of our control. Yeah We'll pass your feedback on. Thanks, John. We have a question from Peter: The million-dollar perennial question, do you think we are closer at this moment in time to a savage correction, given the numerous negative happenings? You can just say, "I have no idea. Well, I can give you a definite answer. We're one day closer. Yeah. That's, by definition, we're always. Yes By a day. I mean, we can see the writing on the wall. I'll give you a hint where our heads are around collateralized loan obligations. It sort of rings, rhymes with the collateralized debt obligations, which were part of the GFC issue. Now we've got this, CLOs, they call them, another acronym. Packaging up all this private credit stuff and loans, which are... We don't know if they're good or bad. Unfortunately, the holders of these often don't know if they're good or bad yet. I mean, we can see all the writing on the wall, where we're going, but like I said at the start, it's really around once the economy, when that rolls, that sector is toast. That's when you get the big correction. We don't see that yet. Can we see it happening? 100% we can see it happening, but it's really around if the economy rolls, and we go into a loan loss cycle, that's when stress happens. You know, we are getting closer, 100%, but we can't see it quite yet. The other thing is that if you speak to certain participants in the market, we've actually gone through a fairly extensive correction. If you look at the valuations in, say, the tech sector in Australia or, you know, in some of the small industrials, a lot of these are 40%-50% off their highs, some are even more. What we'll say is that the Australian market and the global market's a lot more resilient than they have been in the past and, you know, they always just find a new home. That goes back to Matt's earlier comments about the plumbing. The plumbing's still there. There's still a lot of capital in the system, and until capital changes, then, look out. You know, we've spoken about a lot of these stocks that have fallen 40%, 50%, 60%, and they were some of the market darlings, yet we're still hitting all-time highs up until a couple of weeks ago in the ASX. You know, it's just an interesting lens to look at it from. We have a question from Wei: Can I ask your insight on MPL Medibank, please? MPL we like, but no one else does. The share price won't move. You know, you gotta take that into account when you look at your holdings. We did reduce it at higher levels thankfully, but fundamentally it looks okay. Just it's not attracting flow. Like, everyone's chasing other areas in the market to put money to work. Until that changes, it will not move. You know, part of our job is to identify an event where it will change the perception of the stock, maybe it's June, July now when earnings come back around. Until then, it just looks pretty tough. Like, we thought the price rise for health insurance was fantastic, like a way better outcome than we thought. The market's gone through so much turmoil. You get all these, stocks which are used for funding, and that's unfortunately one, that's been used for funding. Until that changes, we're just gonna hold our position at a much reduced weight. We have a question from Chris: How does the current WAM Leaders' relation to NTA, i.e. premium or discount, compare with LICs in general at present? It is trading around its NTA at a small premium. Mm. I think LICs generally are, on average, trading at a small discount. Mm So it is trading better than that, I think, for that sector. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Yep, that's fair. How important is the timing of dividends to your portfolio trading? That's from Kerry. Zero importance, I'd say. Like, occasionally we'd look at it, but, like, it really doesn't dictate what we do with stocks. It's probably the only exception where the cum period and ex-dividend periods, you get some anomalies as people try to harvest the dividends. Apart from that, I mean, resources as well sometimes... Mm It's really not a big consideration, but except for those ones I mentioned. Occasionally, if something gets sold off because people are harvesting, you know, it's a small opportunity, but nothing material for us. Mm. We have a question from Ian again, "Is the equity portfolio portion of WAM Income Maximiser totally the WAM Leaders portfolio? No, it's not. It's largely similar, but all the weights are different, and it has different stocks in there as well. Mm. It's not, no, not the same at all. No. We've got a question from Rod, "Why should I buy WAM Leaders when it's trading at a premium to its NTA? That's a good point. Like, we're not allowed to say whether you should buy or sell, but we've always said, like, you always wanna buy a discount if it's possible. I mean. Mm I think Rod's answered his own question there. It is only a small premium. It, yeah. Like it has been trading around its NTA. Well, the flip side is we obviously think the shares within the portfolio are not worth what they currently are. Mm If we could do a implied NTA. Mm On what we think the shares are worth, it's obviously gonna be higher than the actual NTA. Yeah. Otherwise, we wouldn't own the stock. You could take that into account, but no. We've got good dividend coverage, good franking credits. Mm. We do have some other LICs within the WAM stable that are trading at bigger discounts. Yes. Yeah. A question from Greg, "Can you please provide your thoughts on the future direction of LLC's share price? Do I take this? You want it. I'll take it. I'll take it. Yeah, Lendlease has been, it's been a one-way journey down, unfortunately, from AUD 12 all the way down. I still recall, it was about a year ago when we owned it last, a shareholder, and I won't mention his name, rang and almost warned me about ever owning it again. I actually listened, and I went away and did a bit of work on Lendlease, and it turns out he was right. The anonymous shareholder, thank you for that. The reality is this company has a bit of an identity crisis. It's. If you go back in time, Lendlease used to be a developer, and it made all its money from buying land. When it came to sell that land, you know, all the value was in what they had in the ground. They added a little bit of value to it, and harvested it, and then would rebank it whenever the cycles would take place. Over time, it moved away from that premise and became a little bit of a jack of all trades and a master of none. That's led to where it is now. Tony Lombardo's leaving. He tried to turn it around. The CFO's left. Yeah, it's a challenge to get that business back into order. They've been selling a lot of assets, trying to recycle the capital, but they still have liabilities that outweigh the asset recycling program that they have. The challenge for them is they just haven't got lucky with the cycle. They haven't been able to replenish their stockpiles of land, to reinvent it to back to what it was. You know, do we look at it at sub $4? Yeah, we have. Have we bought it? No. Will we buy it? Unlikely. Mm. Thank you. We've got a question from Dilip on Ramsay. You talked earlier about Ramsay. Do you think there is value investing in it? Well, it's about 1.75% of our fund as it stands today. It's a great question because that business has changed, and it actually goes hand-in-hand with the Medibank question, because a lot of what drives Medibank also drives Ramsay. The price renewal that the health insurance got was circa 7%, was about as big as we've seen for a long time. What we found most recently, and Anna and I caught up with them, I think it was last week, management are in a way better position than they have been in some time. We've got Natalie, who's the new CEO, has certainly found her feet and is leading this business and forward. The new CFO, Anthony, we have some history there from Santos days, and he's very much a cost-focused CEO. The way that we look at this business is it's matured from a care business, and that's not to say they're gonna step away from the care nature of the business, but they're also focused on the financial outcomes. We look at that now, we look at the dire position of their competitors in Australia, and Healthscope is really, really struggling. The big other catalyst for this company is you've got on one hand, you've got momentum in health insurance renewal pricing, which flows through to them. With Healthscope being so challenged, their ability to recruit doctors and nurses is far improved, and ultimately that's what's gonna drive the foot traffic, and I hate to trivialize it to that, back into the hospitals. If you've got the best hospitals, and the best nurses, and the best care, but with a financial lens over the top, the position's in a lot different position than it was two or three years ago. Healthscope weakness has been certainly taken advantage by Ramsay, and we think over the next, you know, three, four years, we should see this thing head further north than where it is. The assets in the portfolio are probably worth AUD 35, AUD 36 from memory. Mm. With a bit of earnings momentum, a little bit more operational focus, you know, it's a good position for it to be in today. We have a question, another question from Ashok, "What is the franking credits balance available in the portfolio?" The answer is - April at the end of December, including tax payable, we had over a year's dividend coverage, sorry, franking coverage, in the franking account, so before the payment of the upcoming interim dividend. Yep. Maybe the profit reserve, yeah, but... Yes. Well, not at the moment. Yeah There is a question, yeah, the profits reserve for WAM Leaders appears to rarely increase as of late. Does the WAM Leaders unlisted fund share its dividends to the unlisted WAM Leaders fund, has it ever done so previously? No, they're totally separate. I mean, the profit reserve should've been going up the last few months in quite a meaningful manner. Mm-hmm. Yeah. In theory, we deplete a fair bit every year too, so we need to replenish that every year. Yeah. For it to hold at, is it four years at the moment? Yeah, around that. Yeah. Absolutely, yeah. That's fairly healthy, and if we can keep at those levels. Yeah I t says that we're achieving the outcomes that we desire. Yeah. It is exactly AUD 0.317. Mm F or the end of February, which has just come out. We've got a question on gold from Ashok. "Gold has rallied hard the last two years. What is your outlook this year? I'm gonna file this under the impossible question. Because there's so many dynamics at play. We don't take a view and go, "Gold's gonna be great for 12 months." We take a view in what's driving gold in the next one month. You saw unprecedented buying from central banks, China retail, huge buying, and now, I remember Poland, I think Poland were going to 30% of FX reserves into gold. Like it was crazy, and all the central banks were moving that way. Mm. It's an impossible question unfortunately. It's quite funny, when you had this, the latest shock with Iran, everyone thinks the gold's a safe haven. In these times it actually becomes a liquidity event, and it gets sold, showing you how fragile gold can be in actual crisis. Yeah, I can't give you an answer. We look at it as a very much a, it was trading in like a risk-on asset. So much momentum was behind it in... As everyone was talking about the end of the U.S. dollar, and all the central banks were pushing it up. We just watch all those dynamics, and we just make a call based on the latest incremental information we get. No strong house view on we're gold bugs or, we just watch the factors. Unfortunately, that's not an answer that's gonna please you, but, it's very much a trading stock for us, or a trading commodity. We have a question from Ross, "Can you please give an opinion on CSL? I'm worried it will be the next Star Casino. Ooh, that's an interesting- Yeah alignment of a, of a company, but very, very different. Yeah, one stock was effectively regulated out of business, or tried to, and CSL undergoing huge change. The base business is high quality. Very, very different. Not without its challenges though. I mean, huge amount of change happening in that company, moving, changing the model from a, very much an R&D led to a more commercial model. The flu business obviously under pressure through the U.S. system at the moment. They're really anti-vax. Yeah, a lot of headwinds. Fundamentally the business is okay. That's not gonna say it's gonna run away from you, but it's hard to see a huge amount of downside. Famous last words. The business is quite solid. The underlying growth rate of the business, it's not your double digits anymore. Even if it's 5%-7%, I mean, going back to John's point, you know, we've got banks at 28 times earnings growing at 3%. I mean, there are anomalies within the market. If CSL can actually hold its earnings and get some clarity around direction, it doesn't look too bad. It's very early. Yeah, it won't do a Star. Yeah. No, I think, you know, to try to understand your question a little bit more, you know, it has had a fall from grace. It was certainly the poster child of the ASX for a long time, CSL, from its infancies in the CSIRO. What we're seeing at the moment is action from the board. They weren't happy with management, and they acted decisively. You know, I think we've had some dealings with the new CEO, sorry, the interim CEO, I should say. We walked away slightly more confident. It feels like they don't want this to get further away from than it currently is. You know, it's cheap relative to it has been a long time, hence why we're attracted to it. You know, for what it presents, it's, you know, in high teens multiple growing in, at high single digits in theory. We will spend a lot of time, trying to work that one out. You know, we were underweight based on those early conversations for the better part of last year, I think we've taken, you know, it's about 3.5% of the fund- Mm as it is today. Which is about market weight, slightly over market weight, I should say. This certainly isn't systemic fraud or regulatory issues that face CSL like Star did. You mentioned coal looking good as a commodity. Have you bought some coal stocks? Yeah, I mean, thankfully we positioned coal. It was around November last year, we, I was up in China actually, doing some research on the commodity space, and came back away incredibly bullish on coal. Whitehaven is the name we've been invested in. Had a great run. We did trim it. It was a really big position for a while. It was about 2.5% of the portfolio. We reduced it a lot, and we increased it a little bit as well going into this, The conflict with Iran as well, because obviously with the oil price where it was, the substitute is coal. We saw huge increases in coal price, even overnight there was. Again, it looks quite good in the short- term. Again, like everything we look at every day is do we need to own this going forward? I mean, that stock is the same, but we'll just assess, but at the moment it looks quite attractive. We have a question on the franking reserve relative to the current annual dividend level, i.e. how many years? Just as John said before, it is just over that three-year mark. Mm. We've got a question from Jamie: With the midterms coming up and a likely change of House, do you avoid the sectors that Trump has supported, i.e. coal or fintech? Yeah, I mean, that's our base case. The midterms will be a swing. Like as we have been talking about all day today, you have to be short-term focused at the moment. Positioning for an event, let's call it 12, 18 months away, there'll be about 10 events in the interim. Unfortunately, we'd love a very stable market where you can make long-term calls, but Which we'd sleep again. But we have to. There's all these events and as we've seen with Trump presidency, so I think we had PSTD from the first one. It's coming back again because you position and then you wake up and there's a new announcement and you have to pack all that stuff and run that way. It's terrible for investing, but, yeah, there'll be so many events before the midterms. We can't position for the midterms yet. I suppose it's the benefit of active management. Well, yeah. That's why shareholders pay you guys to do it. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. so they can sleep at night. Felix has asked: How long would it take a higher oil price to percolate into a perceptible rise in inflation? I mean, that's a, it's a great question. I'm gonna frame it first by if it's three months, it will permeate through, but the central bank reaction function is what we care about, and they'll just look through it. It will have an impact on consumption and input costs. Like companies we own, like Amcor, we have to think, "Oh, you know, with resin prices, Ansell," I mean, petroleum is throughout the whole economy everywhere. Most of these companies have three, six-month lag before they move price, so they have to wear some of the margin. My best guess would be it'd have to be larger than three months. Then the transfer of it, whether they can put it on, would be another three months. There'd be like, I'd call it a six- to nine-month lag before it showed up in the data. Initially they have to wear it, and that's why we've adjusted some of our holdings already. Yeah, the central banks will largely look through it. They see an end in sight and call it transitory, that famous word, transitory, and they won't react. That's what we would care about the most. George has asked another question on the U.S. dollar. He said: A weakening U.S. dollar means stronger Aussie dollar, so stocks with substantial U.S. sales will have their revenues negatively affected when converted back to Australian dollars. How is this factored into your investment decisions, and is this part of the reason why ResMed's share price has gone backwards over the past six months? Yeah, I'll just go, just before John jumps in there, is we actually did adjust probably it was about one month ago. Yes. We were like, 'cause we could see the setup of the Aussie dollar going up, and then we actually looked at our U.S. Dollar earners that are translating back. If they're U.S. dollar reporting companies, we don't care. If they're translating back, and Treasury Wines was one. Not that we own, have much of that Macquarie Group. A few of the translators that we worry about that. It was, I think we started looking at it when the Aussie hit, you know, high 60s, early 70s, and things like Don't Own a Bill was a 10% headwind. Aristocrat's about a 7% headwind. Treasury, ResMed, James Hardie, but they're a U.S. dollar reporter, and a U.S. dollar share price. It's certainly something that we need to consider. On the other side of the ledger, it's, you know, who are the beneficiaries? They're like the Wesfarmers of the world or the JVs or the importers. You know, then you need to take into context what's happening with rates and policy. Yeah, Australia typically, and you look at the move in some of the money flowing into Australia, the biggest benefits are the major miners and banks. 'Cause people quite often use Aussie dollar as, you know, you park it in those names, and you get the leverage of the Aussie dollar on the way up, and hopefully you can cash your equities out at the same price. It's certainly a factor that we think about, especially on passive flows as well, 'cause actually a high Aussie dollar eventually makes our stocks look expensive. Eventually it flips the passive flow back the other way as well. One of the greatest consensus long macro trades was the long Australian dollar over the past couple of months. There is a bit of momentum behind that trade. We have a question from Nava: Have you factored in the potential trade or sovereign conflicts between the U.S. and Canada from an oil and mineral to NextGen and Lithium-? Yeah perspective? If so, how have you done this? It's the impossible question, it's, you know. They've got friends now, Carney and Trump this week anyway. For us, if we look at NextGen, the beauty of owning NextGen is that when they start producing, it's beyond the scope of Trump's presidency. We feel a bit of comfort in that one. That kind of alleviates. Our lithium plays, they're all Australian lithium plays. You know, I think in the context of Trump's priorities right now, I think Canada's slipped down on that list. I think he's got bigger fish to fry right here and right now. Carney, you know, he's probably the only person that really stood up to Trump, and it's starting to look like it paid some dividends by standing up to... I won't say what I was gonna say 'cause I wanna go back to America one day. They had a good call last night actually, Carney and Trump. Around their conflict, they're back to talking anyway. I mean Rio Tinto is the other big one. Yeah with aluminum- Yes for us as well. 100%, we're always looking at the ebbs and flows and where that relationship is going. It deteriorated pretty badly, but I'd say it's lukewarm now. Yeah Which is probably a good place. Good place to be. Yeah. Nava has also asked, "What is your risk mitigation strategy of Australia's strategic reserves held in the U.S. with Australia first view of U.S. on WAM Leaders portfolio?" Strategic reserves may be thinking currency or- Maybe oil. No, it'll be currency. Gold. Fuel? Right. Yeah. Most of our fuel, there are some. The U.S. SPR is predominantly for U.S., most of our oil reserves are sitting in Geelong. Maybe we can take that question. Yeah offline. Yeah to get a little bit more context. Maybe some context around the strategic reserve as well. It's, everyone thought, you know, with this announcement they're just gonna pull it out of the ground. They're in these salt caves. They have to inject water, get the oil up, and apparently it's full of sulfur and, the flow out of these strategic reserves is very slow. It's probably not the cure for a high oil price. Mm. Anyway, maybe if that was the question around strategic reserves, it's, it won't have a huge impact on the physical market. We have a question from Howard, "Other Wilson funds have invested in higher risk unlisted companies such as Firmus Technologies. How do you think about risk of capital loss in the Leaders fund? Would you also consider private assets in the future? We Look, we'll never say never, but our mandate has been to invest in Australia's highest quality leaders. That's ASX 200 or stocks that have a pathway into the 200. As it stands today, we haven't. Do we think we will in the future? Highly unlikely. No. Yeah, it'd be. I can't even think of a case where we'd do it. Yeah. There may be a pre-IPO of a company potentially for a six-month period or something that we are certain, that would go into the ASX 100, it's not what. It's not the way that we invest. No. Felix has asked, "Do you have an opinion on Magellan's merger with Barrenjoey? For all our friends at Barrenjoey, well done. Yeah. Look, I think it's depending on which side of the fence you're sitting on here, you know, if you owned Magellan beforehand, you were owning a funds management business, that was cheap, that was a value play even though they were agnostic, slightly growth investor. What you've ended up with is you've paid a premium to get a fast-growing broker or investment bank. You know, if you look at Barrenjoey as a standalone business, it's doing great. It's taking market share. You need to look at it's a different investment than what you were in. It's done particularly well, but you've got to understand you now own an investment bank as opposed to a fund manager, and there's different risks and different valuation parameters around it. Kay has asked another question, "Sonic Healthcare has been implementing AI for a couple of years. Loss of longtime CEO had a big negative impact and price is down even further. Do you think Sonic will take care of AI, and what is your outlook? Yeah. Regulated industries like Pro Medicus and Sonic, they have a moat, and Sonic's got Harrison AI as their fix-all when it comes to diagnosis. It's yet to be proven, hasn't got a lot of contracts, but there is a certain regulatory process to get approvals before Harrison can start and be implemented through their testing regimes. You know, if you think of that, yes, they've got. They're further down the curve or further down the road, shall I say, than a lot of other participants. You rightly pointed out that Colin Goldschmidt leaving was a big loss to the market, and we took a fairly negative lens 'cause we thought a lot of the skeletons will come out of the closet post that. In saying that, the last result was a lot better than we had feared and the market had feared. We don't have a position in it today. It is something that we are looking at 'cause broadly speaking, healthcare sector has been very weak in totality, and we're seeing a bit of opportunity in that space and we're just trying to work out which ones to prioritize. Yeah, look, it is potentially an opportunity, and you're right in pointing out that their response to AI is better than most. Yeah. I think there was a few issues around in Germany as well with some of the pricing and a few issues around. Yeah, we are looking at it, but yeah, a bit early yet. Howard has asked, "How do you think about managing investor expectations of capital versus income returns, and how does your relatively high dividend impact your portfolio management decisions? Interesting question. It doesn't really impact our decisions on how we manage the portfolio. Well, ultimately, we're just trying to make money. Yeah. Um- Not lose money. Not lose money, yeah. We don't really segregate it into different buckets, you know, how, should we get income or capital? I'd say income is a lot less of a priority from the underlying stocks. Occasionally we will have a go of a more of a income stock when it becomes a bit silly and that cash flow is backing that dividend. It's on the very rare occasion. I'd say if I understand the question right, we lean towards more capital, trying to grow capital and the on the portfolio decisions, it's really the dividend is an outcome of how well we manage the capital. Peter has asked, "I'm not sure if this question has been asked, but do you expect the RBA to raise rates this month?" You said, one to two cuts this year. Now we need to- Oh a specific timeline. Oh, geez. It changes. It's a day-by-day thing. I mean, I was sort of laughing to myself 'cause yesterday, not the short-term rates, but the three-year rate in Australia moved up 14 basis points off the back of oil price going up. I think this morning it was down 10 basis points. I mean, yeah, you're getting cuts in and out of the curve 'cause everyone is a bit uncertain. Knowing the RBA, this uncertainty will make them sit on their hands. Again, I'm gonna steal Michelle's line, I can't rule anything in or out. Great. That is actually all we have time for today. Thank you very much for sending through your questions. To stay informed with our latest investment insights, please join the community of 100,000 subscribers. You can also follow us on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook, and visit our website for more information. As I mentioned before, we've got the Shareholder Roadshow presentations coming up, which we'd love to see you there. A recording of this call will be made available on our website shortly. I'll pass back to Matt for any closing remarks. Well, thanks for everyone for joining us and, you know, we're really happy as a team to get back to outperforming. That's, that's what we live and die by. You know, we've gotta outperform, and we're back there and very excited to be outperforming at a decent margin at the moment. Just like to thank everyone for their support. Look forward to catching up with everyone on the roadshows if they can make it. As always, you know, we are totally open. Feel free to come through the info mailbox or, you know, directly if you wish. We're always available to talk through, 'cause, you know, we are managing your money, so any questions you have, feel free to come through. We'll always get back to you. Thank you very much for your support.