Good morning, and welcome to Gerdau's 4th quarter 2025 results presentation. I am Ariana Pereira, Specialist with Investor Relations, and it's a pleasure for me to be joined by CEO Gustavo Werneck and CFO Rafael Japur. Please note that this call is being simultaneously translated into English, and you can choose your preferred language by clicking on the globe icon at the bottom of the screen. During the presentation, all participants will be in listen-only mode, and then we will begin the Q&A session. Analysts and investors can join the queue by clicking on the Raise Hand button. It is worth noting that the forward-looking statements contained herein are based on the company's beliefs and assumptions, based on information currently available. Forward-looking statements are no guarantee of future performance and are subject to risks and uncertainties that may or may not occur. I will now turn the floor over to Gustavo to begin the presentation. Hello, good afternoon, everyone. I hope you're all well. Thank you for joining us again for another earnings release presentation. We will briefly comment on the highlights of the last quarter, also the year 2025, as well as the outlook for our operations. Then we will move on to the Q&A session. The year of 25 was marked by distinct scenarios in the main regions where we operate, North America and Brazil. In light of this, I would like to emphasize that Gerdau has greatly benefited from its business model based on geographic diversification and productivity and production flexibility. Moreover, I would like to highlight the resilience of the North American market, which has seen strong steel consumption and the reduction in import levels, as well as the robust operating performance of our operations in the region. Even in the 4th quarter, when there is a typical year-end seasonality, we achieved solid results. In December 2025, we even posted record shipments in North America. Meanwhile, in Brazil, the market reached a new record for steel imports in 2025, with a 7.5% increase in shipments year-on-year. Despite important advances in trade defense measures, such as the recent inclusion of new NCMs in the list of products covered by the 25% import tariff and the implementation of anti-dumping tariffs on cold rolled steel, this unfair import scenario has impacted the profitability of our operations in the Brazilian market. On the other hand, I would like to highlight the progress of our new sustainable mining platform in Miguel Burnier, in the city of Ouro Preto, in Minas Gerais. The project is about to go into operation and will contribute to a significant reduction in production costs at our Ouro Branco unit. I will now turn the floor to Japur, who will elaborate on the financial highlights and the impacts of this current scenario on our results. Thank you, Gustavo. Hello, good morning, everyone. It's also a great pleasure to be here with you in the presentation of the 4th quarter of 2025. We ended 2025 with EBITDA of 10.1 billion BRL, down 7% when compared to 2024 results, mainly reflecting a still challenging environment in Brazil, marked by increased competition. On the other hand, our operations in North America continued to gain relevance, supported by resilient demand and excellent operating performance, significantly contributing to the group's consolidated results, and the overall results of Gerdau. Having said that, I would like to highlight 4 points related to this quarter's results. First, in the 4th quarter, our net income was impacted by non-recurring items related to impairment losses in Brazil units in the amount of 2 billion BRL. It's also important to note that these write-offs have no cash effect. Excluding these effects, Gerdau's adjusted net income in 2025, you know, in our view, that accurately reflects the operating performance for the period, stood at 3.4 billion BRL, down 21% when compared to the previous year. Secondly, regarding Gerdau's investments, we carried out CapEx in 2025 of 6.1 billion BRL. For 2026, as already disclosed, our guidance is BRL 4.7 billion, representing an important reduction of BRL 1.4 billion. We understand that this will bring more flexibility to our free cash flow generation in 2026. I mean, this is the third topic, by the way, that I would like to highlight. Even if with a very strong pace of investments in Miguel Burnier, with our expansion mining project, even then, in this 4th quarter, we achieved a very strong free cash flow generation of BRL 1.4 billion. As a result, the annual cash flow generation for the last 12 months, which was negative until then, is now positive, and it stood at BRL 394 million in 2025. Part of this cash generation earmarked was earmarked for reducing our debt. As a result, we ended the year with leverage of 0.76 times net debt/EBITDA, a level that we consider to be extremely sound. Our resilient business model continued to be very resilient, combined with caution in capital allocation, and all of that allowed us to grow significantly without sacrificing shareholders' return. As evidence of this, throughout 2025, we paid out BRL 2.4 billion in dividends and share buybacks. Finally, in addition to completing our buyback program initiated in December 2025, which we already announced, you know, last December, yesterday we announced the launch of a new program for Gerdau S.A. It will be for approximately 2.9% of outstanding shares of the company. If we think about today's numbers of the last, you know, exchange floor, this would be the equivalent to 1.2 billion BRL. I'll end here, and I'll join Gustavo for the Q&A session. Thank you, Japur. Still speaking about Brazil, we expect moderate growth in demand in 2026, even despite the excessive influx of imported steel in the local market. I would like to point out that we are more optimistic about the progress of the trade defense measures recently announced by the federal government to combat unfair competition from imported materials, and as well as a transparent and ongoing dialogue that the steel industry has maintained with pertinent agencies. Meanwhile, in North America, we continue to see stable steel consumption at high levels, with order backlogs above historical averages. The outlook for steel demand from sectors such as solar energy, data centers, and infrastructure remains positive. I'll now hand over to Ariana, and Japur and I will be available to answer your questions. Thank you, Gustavo and Japur. We will now begin the Q&A session. Our first question comes from Daniel Sasson with Itaú BBA. Daniel, go ahead. Good morning. Thank you, Ari, Japur, and Gustavo. It's always good to speak with you. My first question has to do with the outlook of the Brazil business margins. You spoke about some stability expected for Q1 of 2026. I'd like to have your view about the trajectory over the years, starting with a somewhat weaker base, but with Miguel Burnier ramping up in the H2 of the year. Could we expect a different trend? Normally, we have a worse seasonality in the end of the year. Do you think you can end 2026 with an EBITDA margin being double-digit? Although, perhaps double-digit for Brazil would be too optimistic. It depends on more aggressive measures regarding price, et cetera. My second question is about impairment. For more than 5 years, you didn't have a very relevant or substantial write-offs, so could you give us more detail on the more conservative assumptions you used to project the cash flow of some assets? What made difference here? Level of usage, price level, perhaps lower growth for the lower growth expectations for the coming years? In Brazil, some of your competitors may ramp up their own capacity. Will Gerdau consider closing down more capacity in addition to what you have done in the last few years when you adjusted your footprint? Thank you. Good afternoon, Daniel. Excellent to start the call. Addressing the elephant in the room, which is the outlook for the Q1, we realized, and we got some comments in the market, that people were kind of surprised with the expectation we see now of maintaining margins in the H1. There are some points here. First, we have a year with fewer business days compared to other years because there are many holidays, there's the FIFA World Cup, and so on and so forth, and that has an impact on our economic activity. Plus, rainfall, which was stronger in the southeast, particularly in Minas Gerais. Stronger rainfall, heavier rainfall compared to prior years. Also, considering consumption sectors as the automotive industry, we have a 5-year data, for example. In January, they started with a level 12% lower for vehicle manufacturing compared to January 2025, and that matches the high level of inventory that there is in Brazil of imported vehicles. That matches other data published last night of consumption of long steel and flat steel sales in the domestic market that were lower in January 2026 compared to January 2025. A stronger resumption of volume is something that we are not seeing in terms of volume. As regards our costs and margin, although we see prices that on average are better than we had in Q4 2025, there are still some cost pressures that we see in the short term, that may get a chunk of the margin that we would have with the more competitive prices. Here we have coal, the coal theme. We are not so exposed to coal as other companies listed in Brazil. Most of them are integrated, half of our operation in Brazil, rounding up, is the Ouro Branco unit. When we get our modeling, about 20% of our Brazilian costs have a relationship with the cost of coal, and we see that coal costs in from Q4 to Q1 increased substantially. It is true that we have a long lead time, between 90 and 180 days between the price of coal increasing and this being passed through to our results. We see that this will cause some level of pressure on our variable cost. Now, you put it all together, we understand that we will have an environment of better prices, but perhaps costs under a little bit of pressure, and at the same time, volumes that are not increasing significantly to improve the operating leverage. I don't know whether Gustavo would like to add anything about the Brazilian outlook. No, go ahead. If I have anything to add, I'll do it in the end. Well, as regards to impairment, it has something to do with the Brazil conditions. When we run our annual tests in our accounting policy and recovery of PP&E, et cetera, we run a number of tests considering the future cash flow for our business operations, taking into account foreign exchange assumptions, profitability of the businesses, and utilization of our capacity. When we compare the set of the assets in the Brazilian business, it justifies some of the assets that we have in our balance sheet. Some plants were hibernating. They were depreciating slowly because we didn't have a definition of not returning these units. Some other units that were not operating at full capacity, they were far. You can see that our utilization capacity is below 60%. In terms of the melt shop, operating lower than 75%, so clearly we see a high level of idle capacity. Except if we have a significant increase in demand and the level of profitability, we don't see any reason why we would maintain part of these assets. It's a small amount of the total PP&E that Gerdau has. In terms of premium prices, well, we had something around 350 million BRL, 400 million BRL, we understand that with a more challenging foreign exchange, with a more challenging market, with a more challenging macro scenario, it's a moment for us to reflect these results in our accounting. That's why we had the impairments. Rafa, perfect. Still on the margins, on the first question, is it reasonable to imagine that everything constant in the H2, we should see an improvement in the margins, at least in the part of costs with Miguel Burnier? Absolutely. Absolutely. To answer the second part of your question, again, we're talking about stability of margins. Have a margin of around 7%. We don't think it's unreasonable to have a H2, perhaps a year today, a full year with a 2-digit margin. It's not unthinkable. It depends on our ability to deliver the Miguel Burnier project, and if we have the trade defense mechanisms and market dynamics not deteriorating, things can happen. I'd like to remind you that this is a presidential election. It's election year. There might be some volatility in some of our target markets, but it's something that we're going to be monitoring over the year. Daniel, you also mentioned a possible closing down of further capacity. When Japur was talking about a lower usage, it was possible to think about closing down more operations, but the thing is, we have such a variety of products manufactured at these mills, that if we remove capacity now, we will not be supplying the market in some of those segments. Our 2026 plan does not include closing down any more capacity. What we had to do, we did last year. Of course, over the next few years, depending on how things progress in Brazil, there's always space, and technically it is possible to change these assets, so we can make investments, particularly in the rolling mills, to make them more flexible. Looking at the short term, in 2026, we are not thinking and we're not considering closing down any more capacity, so our expectation of cost reduction-... Optimizing our Brazilian operations, that will not come by closing down mills, okay? Thank you very much, Gustavo. Next question from Rafael Barcellos with Bradesco. Thank you, Ari. Thank you, Rene and Japur for the opportunity. My first question, we have seen the United States boasting very strong results, kind of contrasting with Brazil, but this has been discussed here. In this quarter, South America was a negative surprise. You talked a lot about Brazil. You gave us a guidance, I would like to know more about South America and how you're seeing the expectation for the year, for the quarter. What can you tell us to help us understand the future results? My second question is about the United States, which is indeed what is impressing more the investors, boasting very strong results. We are following metal spreads, it seems that we are going to see even greater margins in Q1. In talking with some local players, they tend to be less optimistic, which is only natural, because margins and prices increased. Also there's parity of some products, which is kind of stretched in the region. If you could speak about the United States, what you're seeing about the sustainability of the US profitability, and comment on the main drivers. Since this is a segment that is really standing out, some investors consider a possible listing of the operation. If you can comment on that, we would appreciate it. Hello, Rafael. Starting with South America, in this specific quarter, we had a specific team in Argentina to maintain the level of utilization of our unit. We had a greater volume of exports, which ended up increasing our cost, because we have a greater logistics cost that goes into our cost line item, and that impacted profitability. We don't expect that we will maintain the same level of exports from Argentina this year, so we're expecting a normal condition, a recovery of our margins in our South America operations already in the H1 of this year and continuing in the H2 of the year. Something in the mid-teens would make more sense to the South America operation, as was the case of what happened in the year of 2024, on average, what happened in 2025. Moving to the North America operation, we have a number of different situations that are worth highlighting. The situation in Canada is different than the situation in the United States. In the United States, special steels, longs, and rebar have different dynamics. It is true that we had an expansion of spreads because of our beams that had some price adjustment at the end of the year, and that didn't have the same level of recovery in decrease of prices of scrap. That does not account for our whole portfolio. We have other lines of manufacturing, such as special steel in the automotive industry of the United States, they are not recovering at the same level of production and sales that we would like to see to drive our SBQ operation in the region. I guess that overall, we don't see anything making us think that there will be a substantial reduction in the profitability of our North America segment in the short term. We continue with our order book being very strong, remaining at very high levels. I think that we actually, you know, a little above the level of the end of the quarter. We are close to 90 days rather than 80 days, so that gives us good confidence that this is not the effect of just 1 or 2 months of results, but rather it's something more recurrent. Would you like to add anything, Gustavo? Yes. Rafael, when we speak about North America, when we look at this in more detail, when we look at Gerdau results divided by business operations since 1990, plotting the results and looking at them with attention, there were many moments when the results in Brazil were much better than those in North America. Other times, North America overperforming. Rarely both were doing poorly, and very rarely both were very good. When we look at this in more detail, after we publish the results, I get bothered with a number of things about the Gerdau. One thing that does not bother me that much is that we see this discrepancy between the United States and Brazil. I would say that this worries me less than you do. I was more concerned in 2017, 2018, when our Brazil results were very, very strong, and our results in a solid economy, like the U.S. economy, were kind of poor. Why? Why do I feel that way? Because I don't see any signaling of deterioration of our margins in North America in the coming quarters for a number of reasons. When we compare the soundness of our operation, of our assets in 2017 to now, we have been operating quite well 8 years ago. The comparison of our operating performance vis-a-vis our competitors, we had a number of $30 per ton, and that was my judgment, my analysis regarding our performance gap vis-a-vis the competitors. In the last 8 years, we worked hard in the US. Not only did we close this gap, but the public indicators and the indicators we have access to clearly show that we have an operation from scrap to industrial, with very good results and a more robust operation than our main competitors. We're doing very well in terms of the operation, in terms of raw materials. We learned to use only obsolete scrap. Scrap that we have access to, that has easier access to. From the commercial standpoint, our decision to leave those products where we see greater penetration of imported steel, was a good one. When we look at the main category of products, the main structural beams, that's a product that is very difficult to import, given the size, the w8, the different gauges. I would say that we're very well-positioned. In a way, we're very well-protected in our business when we look forward. The health of our backlog in terms of infrastructure, in terms of solar power, data centers, that gives me some peace of mind that we will continue to have solid and sound results in North America in the coming quarters. We will solve the competitive issues that we have in Brazil. I don't really worry about these points. Well, I read some of the comments made in general by the market, and those don't really worry me. As regards Brazil, this has happened previously. Of course, if we have an anti-dumping of HRC, as we're expecting, there will be some improvement, and there's a lot happening in the coming quarters. Ouro Branco mill operating in a very solid way. Testimonial of that is the quality of our coke plant, the quality of our blast furnace, and we have been delaying and postponing the stoppage. I would say that our Ouro Branco mill is very differentiated. We have the new sustainable mining platform of Miguel Burnier that will increase our competitiveness. I am fully convinced that we have adequate timing or sufficient time to improve margins in Brazil, and we are far from a deterioration of margins in North America. I just wanted to stress this point. Most of the times, I agree with the comments that are made by the investors and the analysts. Right now, I kind of disagree with some of the analysis that kind of penalize our results, because there's a significant difference in margin when we compare the US operation to the Brazilian operation, okay? I have a slightly different opinion on that regard. Thank you, Rene. Just as a follow-up question: Given everything you said, and the relevance that the US operation acquired in the Gerdau business, and the difference in between the regions, that's always questioned by investors. Are you evolving with the listing possibility? How do you see this? Are you maturing this discussion at the company? Can you comment on that? Of course. Overall, themes regarding company restructuring, tax impacts, and ways to unlock value, well, these are always things that we are looking at internally. We haven't got any tangible study or action plan being executed or about to be executed regarding the listing of the company. We are monitoring some cases. We are monitoring some companies that did follow that path. They are reaping some fruit, but with some difficulty, as we are monitoring them, and then we will continue to look into that. If the management of the company concludes that this is going to unlock value for the shareholders, it's something that we might explore. Thank you very much. Thank you, Rene. Thank you, Rafael. All the best. Our next question comes from Caio Greiner with UBS. Hi, guys. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my question. I have 2 questions. I would also like to revisit something you briefly mentioned during your last answer. That refers to anti-dumping and how this is impacting the company's view. This has been a very frequent discussion point. If I recall, I think this is one of the points that you mentioned in the past, this lack of protectionism or even this unfair competition coming from imported steel that is being dumped into the country. This is what led you to think about, you know, putting some brakes on the CapEx investment. Now we are seeing some approvals, not only in regards to the anti-dumping issue, but the 25% tariff. I think somehow we see some movements on the part of the government in that direction. Certainly, the impact in terms of your products, I mean, it's there, but it's minimal. It's very small. Your products should be still impacted in the next coming decisions, just like what you said before, you already envisioned some preliminary approval. The question is: How do you see protectionism expanding in the steel milling industry in Brazil, and how does that change this relationship with your Brazil unit? Are you more comfortable today to resume investing in the region or even maybe going in the opposite direction? Maybe you could start thinking about, I mean, reopening some of your units. I would also like to revisit one of your comments. Maybe you could start thinking about investing in some rolling mills going forward. I would just like to hear your views about how this is impacting the company vis-à-vis, you know, the Brazilian market after the approval of the protectionist measures. My second question is about asset divestments. This has been a ongoing topic among your peers. Maybe you should start looking at some non-core assets. You already have a lot of things in the company. I would just like to understand whether this is something that you are discussing today in the company, if the answer is yes, whether you could give me more details. If you're looking at some assets that you think about selling, what the assets are, what do you see going forward? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Caio. I will start, Rafa will follow through. One of the main reasons that led me to be more optimistic about the trade defense measures is the fact that it's no longer a political thing, but it's becoming more technical. There are countries that, right after the election, Some countries made a political decision to introduce these defense mechanisms. I'm very careful when I use the word protection, because I never use this word when I am in Brasília. I would rather use the word defense, because we don't need to be protected by anyone. I think the industry has to be defended against unfair competition. For political reasons, in the last few years, we didn't see any expedited decisions in the steel industry, as we did see in the U.S. market. I mean, Section 232 is very important because it promotes re-industrialization, and it also promotes the growth of steel milling industries. I mean, when we are there, we see that re-industrialization is now taking place. I believe that in the future, we will see better and clearer indicators. The issue is, I would say that in a way, I'm a bit frustrated because technical trade defense could happen faster. I understand the difficulties that we have today, especially in the federal government, because we don't see a large number of experts like we had in the past. Some functional structures are being revisited, I still believe that it could have been faster than what we saw. Now, when we look at HRC and a temporary measure being put in place, this shows a transition from a political measure to a technical measure. I think it's very difficult for any government to make a decision that is not aligned to clear proof of damage to the domestic industry. I'm very confident that this HRC anti-dumping should become a definite measure come June and July, and this could be really a significant landmark in our trade defense measure. This will not change our internal decision to allocate capital or our CapEx decision. I didn't talk about it extensively, but I am of the opinion that we should continue to allocate capital in Brazil to improve our competitiveness. There are relevant alternatives in the future that indicate that we should bring our cost level to a level that would allow us to compete on equal footing with any other company, even with those that practice unfair competition. We are not gonna change our CapEx for this year of BRL 4.8 billion. My future belief is that we will continue to invest in Brazil. Probably, we might continue to translate allocated capacities for exports, you know, in the domestic market. There's still some gain, maybe some rolling mill or some production capacity that we believe will make sense for the future if it is to replace any additional capacity that we have in terms of exports. Our main CapEx focus for Brazil will be aligned. with what we are about to ramp up in Miguel Burnier, which is to bring our, you know, cost equation and competitiveness to a new level. I think I covered all your questions, but if you have any additional question, let me know. Now, I will turn the floor to Japur because he's the one leading the subject of non-core assets, so he has more details on that subject than me. Over to you, Japur. Hi, Caio. I don't wanna make anyone nervous. That guidance is 4.7 million and not 4.8 million, okay? I don't want anyone to be nervous, you know, with the number. Now, going back to your question in terms of non-core assets, I think here we have 2 main sources. I think we are speaking to investors, you know, as they approach us with the subject. The first front regards our forest assets and farms that we have in Brazil, and we have those assets because of our coal production to produce iron ore, to produce the iron we need. Today we have excess capacity, both in terms of land and forest. Certainly this has some value, and this has to be justified in our P&L. I mean, it's nice to have assets, but they have also to generate value. We understand that then if we have more clarity, and we are now working to validate that. In fact, it's important that we have an important, you know, amount of forests and farms that could be monetized throughout time. Another front of non-core assets has to do with real estate. Gerdau, both in Brazil and abroad, we grew a lot through acquisitions, and these acquisitions, sometimes they come with some property, with some real estate attached. Sometimes due to operating aspects and the way we operate and the way we are organized. I mean, at the end is we end up keeping these properties, and we use them, sometimes in full, sometimes not in full. Now we are beginning to revisit some of our units and take a look at Comercial Gerdau in Brazil and say, "Okay, this property was very well located, but this is not the case nowadays anymore. This, I mean, this asset, I mean, changed in terms of its location and the surroundings, so it's not so important to us anymore." This asset portfolio, which is very fragmented, we are talking not about one or two, but hundreds of properties. We understand that some of them have still a lot of value. We are trying to understand now how much it is worth and what will be the best way to extract value, you know, in the timelines. Having said that, it's important to make a distinction. In time, I mean, along many years, Gerdau made an important effort to deleverage its balance sheet. We are keeping a very robust and sound balance sheet so that we can continue to invest in our growth, you know, paying off our shareholders without taking up unnecessary risks in such a cyclical industry, like steel and commodities. Therefore, any divestment of non-core assets will certainly be subordinate to value generation for the company. We don't feel the need to make any sale. Of course, I'm not against those who are doing it. What we want, I mean, at the end of the day, is to create value and not simply just, you know, carry out an operation just to take it out of our balance sheet. Because what we want is to indeed evaluate our asset portfolio and determine what will be the best location for every asset. When we realize that we are no longer the natural owners of the assets, be it a farm or any particular property, we will try to create value through that. I think this is the main, you know, idea behind it. We don't have any guidance. We don't have any concrete plan, but as we move forward, we will certainly inform the market. Thank you. Thank you, Caio. I'll go back to you, Ariana. The next question is from Carlos de Alba with Morgan Stanley. Thank you. Thank you, Carlos, very much for your 3 questions. I will try to answer each one at a time, starting with, you know, shareholders' return and non-core assets. Then we'll talk a little bit more about CapEx, right? Hi, Carlos, it's good to see you again. As we already said in the past, we've been maintaining the dividend payout slightly above our policy. This has been so in a very consistent way. The average has been 45%-50% payout, which has been the case in the past. Taking into account the value of our shares today, we still believe that it is below the intrinsic value of how much they should be worth it, taking into account the cash generation level, I mean, in North America, our profitability in that geography, and the moment where we find ourselves in the CapEx cycle. As we start to decreasing our investments in CapEx, and then we start generating more free cash flow to our shareholders. In time, we understand that in the long run, we want to return more value to our shareholders. Not only, you know, the amount that we are paying now above the mandatory level, we want to add some more with the buyback program. In terms of capital allocation, taking into account the current status of our shares. We must also look at taxes, because this may impact our foreign shareholders, because now they will be subject to, you know, withholding taxes over dividends, and the buyback is not subject to that tax. That's why when we take into account the shareholders' base of Gerdau S.A., and considering that more than half of that base consists of foreign shareholders, it is important that we bear that in mind. I mean, the effective return of how much money we place in the hands of shareholders, not necessarily how much cash leaves the company. About the question on proceeds from non-core assets. I don't see any reason why. I mean, other liquidity of things that we may have through our assets, of course, this should be returned to our shareholders. Throughout last year, if we look at the history of all the quarters, we basically saw an increase in net debt of BRL 2.4 billion, and we paid out BRL 2.4 million to our shareholders. We experienced higher leverage throughout the year, so quarter after quarter, we continue to remunerate our shareholders. This last quarter, when there was a significant, you know, release of cash, we thought that this would be the adequate moment to reduce our net debt, and therefore, we would have more breadth, space, and flexibility going forward in this current environment. I think this can, you know, throw some light. I mean, I look at your report, and you expected BRL 0.13, and I think you have now a better explanation of what led today. About CapEx, Carlos, I don't have any guidance or any detailed information about guidance for 2027 onwards. As Japur put it well, CapEx disbursement for this year is BRL 4.7 billion, not BRL 8, right? BRL 4.7. What I can tell you, Carlos, is that we will be really diligent, and we will not disperse CapEx that is not aligned with our capacity to generate cash. In the future, we don't wanna commit the financial health of our balance sheet or the levels of debt just to increase CapEx. I mean, we have strong beliefs, therefore, we will not discuss any changes regarding these limits in the next coming years. As any other companies, we have a wish list which is full of projects. What we notice today is that the wish list, in terms of investments in the future, this list is more populated by reinvestments to seek for further competitiveness, cost reductions, rather than investments that will allow us to grow in capacity. Certainly, in the future, we may make investments just to replace some, you know, capacity or exports of semi-finished goods or high added value just to serve the domestic market, or maybe some marginal increase in capacity in one of our plants that may be directly related to the development of a new product or any product that may add up to our product mix of products. Going forward, I believe we will invest in things that will allow us to promote, you know, cost reductions or to increase competitiveness. I also want you to bear in mind that at some point in the next 10 years, we will have to invest in our Ouro Branco mill. That mill has been operating at a very intense pace in terms of our, you know, glass furnaces and the coke production unit and, you know, shutdowns for maintenance. At some time, we will have to deal with the lifespan of the equipment, therefore, this may require some more relevant investment in Ouro Branco. Obviously, if the need arises, this will be compensated by a CapEx reduction in other areas of Gerdau in order to maintain a disciplined balance sheet, which has been the case in the past few years. We'll see you soon. Next question from Caio Ribeiro with Bank of America. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity. My first question is regarding avenues for growth in the U.S. segment. The company has the Midlothian operation that aims to be more competitive and increase its footprint in the U.S. market. I would like to explore 2 related themes. Firstly, how do you see the option of growing through micro-mills, considering the products where you operate the most in the United States? On that same topic, other than organic growth options, would you consider M&A inorganic growth, mainly via smaller players in the U.S. market? My second question is about the project that you were looking into in Mexico. Could you give us more color on how a possible renegotiation of the USMCA could lead to an increase in tariffs of the United States? Could this impact your decision to go through with this, the investment or not? Thank you. Hello, Caio. Sorry, my mic was muted. Well, looking forward, we don't have any great wish or great ambition to significantly grow our production capacity. Growing for the sake of growing for many years now has not been part of our life. I would say that overall, what we expect for the coming years is organic growth, where we can add some capacity for higher added-value products and products that may bring value, not just for Gerdau, but for our customers. When we look at these micro-mills, in our view, they make more sense or they will make more sense to reduce our production costs rather than adding capacity. We see that this is a very modern and smart solution in terms of joining hard rolling with a melt shop, so we won't need to reheat the billets. It's interesting. In our view, if this is included in Gerdau's plans, the goal would be to replace some existing production capacity, which is more inefficient from the cost standpoint. As regards mergers and acquisitions or any such growth, of course, we are always attentive, as we have always been. I take the opportunity to congratulate our team, because if in the future we can find an opportunity for M&A, this is the result of our discipline in the past few years of having a company with a very sound balance sheet. We see in the market some companies that are facing difficulties, a lot of difficulties. We have seen them in difficulty for quite a while now, and we were very disciplined in our actions to have the company's balance sheet at a certain level that will allow us to think about M&A in the future. We're very down-to-earth. It doesn't make sense to make an acquisition that will not add value for the company in the long run. Of course, there are always things that can complement our business. We can always seek some synergies when we analyze a possible acquisition. We are always keeping our ears and eyes open for an acquisition that will help us get to the Gerdau that we want, a smaller Gerdau, but one which is more profitable, more well-prepared to face the coming years, and the Mexico investment has to do with that. We have a business case that is ready. Mexico, regardless of USMCA, is going through very substantial change. I see in Brazil a growing debate on reducing working hours. Few weeks ago, they approved a reduction in their working hours. Mexico, as a country, has been losing competitiveness at the industry level. These are always relevant elements that we have to take into account in our business case. The USMCA, the new USMCA, that will be debated as of June of this year, will be a very relevant point for us to review our business case and make a decision whether it's worthwhile, whether it's worth investing in this new mill of special steel. It is an opportunity. We understand that the U.S. market, with its ups and downs, with heavy and light vehicle market, remains an opportunity for us. We will be very diligent in allocating significant CapEx for a greenfield mill in Mexico, considering the debates involving Canada, U.S., and Mexico. Okay? Let me just add a couple of points to your question about growth. We have been doing some important things to improve our profitability in North America. In recent years, we opened 2 downstream segments in Midlothian, thermal treatment and solar piles. When we look at our quarterly report in the year-to-date, the different lines of products, we see that the downstream line item in the North America segment increased 39% compared to 2024. Into 2025, these are high added-value products that are less susceptible to competitive imports, and the ones in which we have greater differential or competitive edges. I think that this matches what Gustavo said, we are very cautious and very prudent in allocating capital for growth in North America. In addition, we're growing with smaller acquisitions and upstream investments, which is the case of scrap producers that happened last year, that increased our scrap potential and our ability to process scrap in a cheap way. That's more the kind of growth that we're thinking of, rather than a major acquisition, as we have seen in some cases in North America. Okay? Perfect. That's very clear. Thank you very much, Vernec and Japur. Thank you, Caio. All the best. Next question from Igor Gepur with Genial. Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to ask question. Looking at the level of exports, 370,000 tons are growing quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year. We saw a level of BRL 140 million in the consolidated EBITDA, compared to BRL 80 million in Q3, and only BRL 24 million in Q4 2024. Given that you export a large amount of semi-finished steel coming from you in Brazil, even to other regions in South America, you mean cut, bend, hot rolling, this higher level of eliminations, would it be related with intercompany transactions, or was it due to other reasons? Second question: you mentioned that part of the CapEx in Q4, there was BRL 1.5 billion, was allocated to a restructuring and improvement in the Ceará unit, Maracanaú, about BRL 100 million. However, in one, this was one of the 2 mills that you hibernated together with Barão de Cocais. I'd like to explore that. Could you share with us what kind of changes have you made to these mills, and how does this fit now in the footprint of the company? Will you reactivate the mill with more efficiency than before? If you could comment on that, it would be interesting. Thank you very much. Okay. Hi, Igor. It's always good to see you. You made some interesting questions. Let me start with the eliminations regarding imports or exports and eliminations. In eliminations, we have eliminations of all possible businesses between the reportable segments. Since we have little exports from North America to South America, what we have is more business between the Brazil segment and the South America segment. I think in the previous question, we mentioned we had a large volume of exports of billets from Argentina to some of our Gerdau units in Brazil and in South America, Peru, and that kind of increased the amount of eliminations that we had. It was a lot because of that, because of this greater volume of exports from Argentina, which typically is not a country that exports a lot and all the time. That increased the atypical volume that we had in the line item of eliminations. To your second question about Maracanaú, that's a very good question. Back in 2024, when we had the hibernations, we also hibernated the Maracanaú, the mill in Ceará, and we said that it was going to go through a modernization project in the program. What was the goal of that modernization program? Today, the Maracanaú unit operates integrated with our rolling mill, that we also have in Ceará, that we acquired from Silat when we acquired it in 2019. That's a rolling mill, state-of-the-art rolling mill that we have, very modern. The melt shop. I'll be a little technical here. The melt shop made smaller billets, relatively small billets, about 6 meters long. When we rolled it and put it in the rolling furnace and started rolling it in a more robust rolling mill, a more modern rolling mill, the rolling mill of Seleti, we didn't have a level of optimal cost and yield, because oftentimes I had to be feeding that furnace with smaller billets. The project we had was to adapt the size of the billets manufactured at the Maracanaú melt shop to 12 meters. They are closer to the ideal size to be consumed in the Seleti rolling mill. With that, we can increase our competitiveness in the Northeast operation. Again, as Gustavo has highlighted before, a good part of our portfolio projects at Gerdau has been focusing on increasing our level of competitiveness, our ability to be cost-efficient, to compete with any competitor anywhere in the world, and this is an example of this goal. We are not making a new mill, we are modernizing an existing mill and thinking about how to better integrate these 2 assets that we have in the state of Ceará. That's basically the rationale behind this project to modernize the Maracanaú mill. Just a follow-up question, Japur. In terms of integrating the mill to the footprint, one more time, would that entail any cost increase? Perhaps a one-off cost increase that we should be paying attention to, or would it be like a smooth transition, just to have an idea? No, no, it's basically the melt shop that will start operating again, supplying billets for the Seleti rolling mill. There will be no one-off cost increase, no additional cost. It's basically allocating billets, also imported billets, that will get to Seleti, and then, that now we will be supplying to a neighboring mill in the state of Ceará. Perfect. Thank you very much, Japur. Everyone, Thank you, Igor. All the best. Our next question from Ricardo with Safra. Good morning, and thank you for taking my question. I have just 2 very quick questions, but they were very important in the discussions we had yesterday. First, looking at your cash flow, I would just like to understand what is your outlook? You have 2 lines, mainly working capital. There was any significant release of working capital. How much of that is structure, or how much of that can be reverted in the short run? The second line is the cash financial expenses. There was a significant drop of almost BRL 4 billion, but I just want to understand how much more reduction you anticipate in this line, or whether we could review, like, more expensive debt being paid out and the balance paid at a lower interest rate. My second question is that I would like some help to build a double-digit margin for Brazil in 2026. Japur, I think you said that if it were not for the deterioration of market conditions, we could probably reach double digits throughout the year or even year-to-date, you know, including Miguel Burnier. I just want to understand if, in your number, are we starting with a weaker margin, and this will improve in the Q2 and maybe getting even better in the H2? Or probably there is some room for getting a better margin quarter-on-quarter, and with that, you will create a bigger buffer. Therefore, you know, throughout the H2, you will be able to deliver a double-digit margin. Hi, Ricardo. Working capital, your first question. Yes, we believe that there will be a use of working capital, even because of the strong results that we posted in our North America operation. We saw increase in volumes, increased shipments, and also there was an increase in the average of our product mix, and this will require, you know, some additional working capital, in addition to the, you know, resumption of our operations, especially considering our operations in Brazil, because of seasonality. There should be a certain level of working capital, you know, used, but we will not go back to everything that we were able to build. Especially when you look at the inventory line, we posted important gains of efficiencies. Not really thinking about working capital, but cash conversion cycle, days of working capital. This quarter, since we had the settlement of our, you know, make-whole call, we had to pay interest that had been accrued until the make-whole date. There was an increase of what was expected in terms of cash interest, because not only I had to pay for what we already anticipated in terms of payments in the due date, but also there was a make-whole of the bonus that was settled in full. That interest account was a bit bigger. If you break down our P&L, you look at the fact that we break down the debt per currency and type of debt. This is very clear in our P&L. You could have WCD in U.S. dollars and reals, you know, looking forward, you can have an estimate of that interest account. In terms of cash flow, all you have to do is pay more attention to the maturity date of the bonds, because they follow, you know, dates that are more concentrated in April and then October. These are the 2 months that concentrate the bulk of the interest. Finally, about the Brazil operation. I'll start with the end of your question. Significant improvement in Brazil in terms of margins, I think this is a bit far-fetched, looking at the current situation. Again, if we hadn't seen this very strong move of over 20% in coal increase that we saw from the 4th quarter onwards, probably we could have seen a more consistent improvement in the Q1 of the Brazil operation, despite the fact that the market is not growing so much. Maybe the data could have been worse in January. I don't think it's so far-fetched yet to think about a 2-digit margin, considering that in the H2 of the year, we will already post concrete benefits related to our Miguel Burnier ramp-up, the mining project. A bit of this construction, I would say, is like a Q1, very close to the margin we have today, which is high single digits, and maybe other coming quarters with a gradual improvement. If you look at the combined numbers, if everything else remains constant, we may say that by year-end, if you look at the combined numbers of the year, the EBITDA margin, you know, everything combined, would be around 2 digits. Perfect. Just to confirm, Miguel Burnier's EBITDA will be around BRL 400 million a year? It will certainly depend on our capacity to deliver the Miguel Burnier project, you know, in due time and at the stability level that we want to imprint in the project. It's important to mention that this is not an existing mill, because something that is new and starts ramping up every month from the end of the year that I eliminate, I have to do the math accordingly, and this affects the calculation. We don't have any number in terms of what would be the ramp-up result of the Miguel Burnier's operation. As soon as we have more information available, and the project is in its integrated task phase, so as soon as we have additional information, we will soon share that information with you. This is very important to achieve the competitive level that we expect to have. Our last question from Emerson Vieira with Goldman Sachs. Good morning, and thank you for taking my question. I would like to review the U.S. profitability level. It's very clear what you said, that you will maintain the levels in the short run. My question, especially if I look at cost and the scrap prices, the pricing have not recovered in a way that it would make sense, given the rebar price level, because this is growing in the US. Looking towards the H2, do you think that there will be a more relevant scrap prices or the current scenario, I mean, or this scenario is very unlikely, and it will be more likely for us to see the same scenario that we have today? The second question is about, what is your view regarding the potential impact of the anti-dumping measures related to steel exports coming from Vietnam and Algeria, and whether this should lead to some, you know, marginal share gain, or this is not really impacting the company in the U.S.? Well, let me share the answer with Japur, because I don't want him to answer everything by himself. I mean, it's very difficult for us to project scrap prices in the U.S. I mean, looking at prices 2, 3 quarters ahead. We believe that with this level, semi-finished, produced in the world, produced based on coal and, you know, iron ore coming from China, I mean, this will probably take some share of scrap coming from the U.S. Therefore, the trend going forward would be for scrap prices to be more stable. Reinstating what I said before, this lead us to believe that the metal spread will be very similar to the levels we are seeing now. This is another reason, in addition to all of the reasons that I mentioned before, this is one of the reasons that lead us to be more certain about the stability of our results coming from the North America when you look at the entire year of 2026. Now, I will turn to Rafael Japur to talk about anti-dumping. The point is that when we look at the product portfolio, rebar is a product that is a feeder of our line. Like I have the full rolling mill with the products that I want to produce, then I dilute my fixed cost by producing rebars. It's not something that it's a very significant portion of our business. I mean, it accounts for about 10%-15% today because, you know, beams and others have a strong price. Rebars account for about 10% of our price. What happens, Emerson, is that at times when there are producers that make merchant bars and rebars, when profitability increases on the rebar side, and they have modern assets or micro-mills that are vocationed for the production of rebars, their appetites decrease to use, I mean, in terms of using scrap for merchant bars, because not necessarily this has to do with the anti-dumping measures when you look at our own rebar producers. This would be a secondary effect to improve merchant price, merchant bar prices, and producers have to look at a trade-off, because they can at times produce rebars and at times produce merchant bars. Okay, thank you. Very well. Our Q&A session is now closed. I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to our next earnings conference call that will take place on April 28th. Werneck, you have the floor for your final comments. Well, before we disconnect, I would like to send my very best to Maddie. She's not here with us today. She's living a very special moment. She had a baby called Pedro Antonio, so I would like to send her all the best and wish all the best for baby and mother. I would like to thank Ariana, that you called Ari during this call. Well, I'd like to congratulate her on how well she conducted this call today. This only reinforces Gerdau's commitment and culture to have excellent teams on board. On my own behalf, on Japur's behalf, I'd like to close this call, wishing you all the very best, and I am sure that I will see you in April when we discuss our Q1 earnings results. Thank you very much. I will see you then.