Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Kuehne + Nagel Q3 2025 results conference call and live webcast. I am Valentina de Corus, call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in listen-only mode and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session. You can register for questions at any time by pressing star one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Stefan Paul, CEO of Kuehne + Nagel. Please go ahead. Thank you very much, Valentina, and good afternoon and welcome for the presentation of Kuehne + Nagel's nine months 2025 financial results. I am CEO Stefan Paul, joined today as always by our CFO, Markus Blanka-Graff. We go through the slides first, and then, as Valentina said, we focus on the Q&A in about 15 - 20 minutes from now. Let's go into page number two, the nine-month results 2025. Overcapacity and softer demand in the third quarter of 2025 made the logistics market environment more challenging. Even so, we significantly expanded our global market share in air logistics and also in the SME segment in sea logistics. Year to date, group EBIT declined by 13% year-over-year, excluding currency effects, as yield came under greater pressure. This was centered in sea and air logistics, which combined year to date EBIT down 16%, again excluding negative currency effects. The combined Sea and Air conversion rate was 28% over the first nine months of the year. The consolidation of IMC has reduced the combined conversion rate by about 100 basis points since January this year. Group EPS declined 18% year-over-year, or 15% excluding currency effects. In addition to our expanding market share, the box in the Q3 result is the further improvement of our free cash flow conversion. It reached 105% in Q3 alone, the first time it has exceeded 100% since Q3 in 2022. Conversion over the first nine months of the year was 66% versus 33% last year. In response to the Q3 financial performance, we are announcing measures to reduce recurring operation costs by at least CHF 200 million over the coming quarters. Markus will provide you with more details shortly, but first, let's turn to the usual review of the performance by business units. Page number three, we start as always with sea logistics, volume in container units on the left, GP per TEU, and then EBIT per TU, always in Swiss francs. Sea logistics headline, overcapacity puts pressure on yields. Underlying sea logistics volume grew by 2% in Q3, while the addressable market was flat. This growth did not meet our aspirations; however, after we have achieved 5% underlying growth in the first half of the year versus addressable market growth of + 2. Trade was weakest in the Transpac, where we have relatively large exposure, followed by European and North American export markets. In contrast, European imports were quite strong. Overall, SME share expanded Q over Q in Q3. Deployed capacity in Q3 far exceeded demand and intensified pressure on margins. This is evident in the central chart on this slide, where the average yield declined 10 percentage points Q on Q. The Q3 EBIT was CHF 111 million, reflecting the near full effect of the yield pressure, as operating costs were down only 1% Q after Q. With this result, sea logistics conversion rate stands at 24% in Q3, or 25% on an active basis. Let's move quickly to air logistics, page number four. Ongoing market share expansion. In air logistics, volume grew by 7% in the third quarter, well ahead of the estimated 4% market growth. This is consistent with 7% volume growth in the first half of this year. Perishables and semiconductors, including hyperscalers, drove volume expansion in Q3, with the latter accounting for about half of the overall year-over-year growth. Average year air logistics yields also came under pressure. They declined by 6% Q on Q due to excess capacity. e-commerce demand contracted sharply following the elimination of the U.S. SMEs exemption. An absolute reduction of operating costs by 3% quarter-over-quarter offset about a third of the yield pressure. This resulted overall in a Q3 EBIT of CHF 92 million and a conversion rate of 23%. We also announced today that Partners Group exercised its option to put its 24.9% equity stake in Apex to Kuehne + Nagel. The transaction is expected to be settled in cash during Q4 against the recognized liability of CHF 886 million in our balance sheet. The transaction will be financed by bank loans. Let's have a look, page number five, road logistics. Overproportional exposure to weak European market. We achieved a net turnover growth of 6% in Q2, in Q3, excluding currency effects or 2% excluding the contribution from TDN. That's our recent Spanish acquisition, which we consolidated for the first time in Q3. We continued to expand our global customs activities in an environment of fast-changing tariffs, mainly in the U.S., but as well in Europe. Our core European road markets remained under pressure in Q3, which was also seasonally the weakest quarter over the year, July and August. Demand levels are still below the last year's level. We continue to mitigate these challenging market conditions effectively by focusing on pricing, capacity management, and cost control. Road logistics overall delivered an EBIT of CHF 20 million in Q3, which is a decline of 9% year-over-year versus an underlying 23% drop year-over-year. The conversion rate of 6% was one percentage point lower than last year in road logistics. Now, contract logistics, page number six, steady growth momentum. Contract logistics produced an EBIT of CHF 62 million in Q3. This is the second strongest quarterly result ever and reflects 9% year-over-year EBIT growth or 12% excluding currency effects. Net turnover grew by 5% year-over-year in Q3 on a constant currency basis, in line with the growth over the first half of the year. This reflects continued market share expansion, which gains, as always, centered in healthcare and e-commerce. The conversion rate of 7% in Q3 is also comparable to recent quarters, an improvement versus Q3 last year. This concludes my comments on the performance of the business units. With this, I now hand over to Markus for a closer look at the financials and, in particular, our cost reduction program. Thank you, Stefan, and good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for your interest once again in Kuehne + Nagel and taking the time today to review our latest financial results. On the income statement, I would like to draw your attention to the most significant development in the third quarter, which relates to yield pressure and ongoing currency headwinds. Yield pressure in both sea logistics and air logistics intensified in Q3, contributing to the net CHF 80 million decline of group gross profit. This includes a 4% negative currency impact in the third quarter alone, which equates to CHF 85 million. I will come back to this topic when reviewing our updated outlook in a few moments. Before that, let's take a quick look at working capital. Working capital, we can see some increase of the net working capital intensity to 5.1% at the close of the third quarter versus 4.8% at mid-year and 5.1% to the same level at the end of Q1. Both DSOs and DPOs came under pressure over the most recent quarter, with DSO up 1.6 days and DPO down 0.6. This development and volume growth contributed to a 6% quarter-over-quarter increase in the net working capital. I will elaborate a bit more on the working capital development with the review of free cash flow generation. Continuing with the cash and free cash flow, in the third quarter, we produced CHF 226 million of free cash flow, which equates to a conversion rate of 105% versus 82% last year. For a better illustration, let me move on to the next slide. In Q3, overall net working capital generated a net positive inflow of CHF 10 million, despite the expansion of our core net working capital. This is the first inflow since the fourth quarter 2023. On a year-over-year basis, this represents an improvement of CHF 131 million. This contributed to the significantly improved third quarter cash conversion of 105%, as I mentioned before, which compares to the 82% of last year. However, that is below the historical average for a third quarter, as you can see on the slide. We attribute the gap, which continues to close, to relatively robust air freight volume and contract logistics turnover growth. We expect this to continue and note that the fourth quarter is typically the strongest quarter of the year when it comes to free cash flow generation. Now, as Stefan mentioned, let me talk about our actions and how we are taking action to mitigate the effects of a challenging market environment. This comes in the form of a cost reduction program targeting at least CHF 200 million of annualized savings. We estimate just over half of these savings are linked to staff-related costs, including FTE reductions. The balance of savings is split almost equally between facilities-related costs and a basket of other variable expenses. We anticipate achieving the full run rate of these savings by year-end 2026, or in other words, they should be fully reflected in the first quarter 2027 result. The costs associated with this program should not exceed a mid-double-digit million and are to be booked in the fourth quarter 2025 and the first quarter 2026. Before we move on to the updated outlook, let me emphasize that these measures will not impede our ability to grow in line with our already communicated strategy. From today's perspective, we anticipate a fourth quarter recurring result comparable to that of the third quarter. Based on that expectation, our year-to-date financial performance and the challenging market conditions, we are using recurring EBIT guidance to greater than CHF 1.3 billion. Note that our guidance excludes non-recurring items such as the CHF 16 million charged in the second quarter and the items that we plan to book in the fourth quarter associated with our cost reduction program. Lastly, the Apex transaction will result in significantly expanded net debt by year-end 2025. Note that long-term, we continue to prefer a small net cash position. We can also confirm that this transaction will have no impact on our dividend policy. With this, I would now like to close our prepared commentary and presentation with a summary of key takeaways. We are launching a sizable cost reduction program in response to the challenging market environment. The tough conditions are putting heavy pressure on sea logistics and air logistics yields. At the same time, we maintain our long-term focus on market share gains in attractive sectors and continue to make progress. The expansion of our stake in Apex will be accretive to our EPS basis. Lastly, we are adjusting our outlook for recurring EBIT in 2025. With this, I want to thank you all for your attention and hand back to Valentina to open the Q&A session. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you have entered the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Questioners on the phone are requested to disable the loudspeaker mode and eventually turn off the volume from the webcast while asking a question. In the interest of time, please limit yourself to two questions. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question comes from Alex Irving from Bernstein. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Hope you're well. My two on the cost reduction program announced this morning. First of all, what functions will you be eliminating? Are we scaling back to calibrate to lower volumes, or is there additional structural change? You also say the measures will not impede your ability to grow volume. What gives you that confidence? Secondly, what facilities are going? I noticed there was CHF 50 million of facility reduction expense in the release this morning. Are there services that will disappear, either entirely or in certain geographies? The more clear here would be helpful. Thanks. Hi, Alex. It's Markus. Let me do the cost reduction pieces. First, your question on the cost reductions on the functions. I think currently we are looking into trimming, I would call it, structural costs, taking out structural costs that can be management layers, but also locations connected to the second point, operating locations. Of course, we are adjusting our operating workforce according to our progress in being more efficient, automation, and putting work out into global services and shared service centers. I think it's a combination, but it's an acceleration, very clearly, and a deeper cut into the cost structure of not only operational but also structural and overhead costs. It's not a single function that will be untouched. Everybody will have a clear focus on the cost reduction program. On the facility side, the major savings are coming from putting operational locations, so network locations, be it international or domestic, putting them together, improving network density by reducing locations and operational locations. Something that I think in the industry, when volumes are reduced, is a common practice to consolidate locations and hence reduce not only staff but also location costs. Yeah, Alex, Stefan speaking, maybe a little bit more caveat on the sales side, right? Because you're alluding as well on what do you do on the commercial side, in order to be still confident to grow the business. We are not reducing commercial staff, in particular not in the SME sector. In the meanwhile, sea logistics has 45 customer care locations, around 700 SME people, or it's dedicated small, medium-sized enterprise-focused hunters. We will not reduce there. We will, of course, intensify our efforts into the hyperscaler market. We talked about it now a couple of quarters already. You see that is paying off already to a certain degree in air logistics in particular, where we gained market share, even more so in the third quarter. We will definitely look into verticals which are not growing at present, for instance, automotive and certain industrial and solar panel activities from Asia into the U.S. Overall, commercial people will not be as affected as the operational side as just mentioned by Markus. Clear. Thank you. The next question comes from Uday Khanapurkar from TD Cowen. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks. This is Uday on for Jason Seidl. Maybe on the cost again, you've described it as at least CHF 200 million in cost out. Are you guys reserving upside there in case the market environment worsens further? Or is it more that you're starting out with a conservative number and could exceed it, you know, irrespective of the market? Hi, Uday. It's Markus. Clearly, this is our ambition and our target that is reachable from today's perspective with the program that we have launched. If there is, assume for a moment, there might be a further deterioration coming through the year 2026, we will, of course, not stop. This is not all we have to give. If there is a further deterioration or a more adverse commercial environment or whatever else could happen, we can continue doing that, and we will continue doing that. To add a little bit of caveat on that as well, from my side, we are talking about cost efficiencies now in the program. We are looking pretty much as well into the digital ecosystem. I mentioned that a couple of times already. We are at the very early beginning, but looking at the large language models and the digital agent capabilities from the software coming to the market are already available in the market. We will identify, have identified, and will further identify areas where we can leverage digital agents, and that should as well help us to reduce our cost to serve. Okay, that's helpful commentary. For my follow-up on sea logistics, can you give us your expectations on ocean capacity trends in 2026? What magnitude of an ocean demand recovery do you think is needed to start seeing a firming up or a recovery in ocean rates off of these depressed levels? Yeah. We all see and know that the carriers add significant more capacity into the marketplace, which is not helping the yield position overall, pretty clearly. Maybe to give you a little bit of a number, China to the U.S. in the third quarter was down approximately, I would say, 25%, 26%. More so in the large customer base, less in the SME and smaller customer base. What definitely needs to come back is this 20%, 30% down in the key accounts base. We need to have a significant uptick in terms of volumes in the market in order to reverse the current pressure on yields. The capacity as well, to give you a precise number, which is growing or coming into the marketplace, is roughly between 6% and 9% of the overall capacity, which is added now into 2026. We need to have a significant uptick in demand, especially in the U.S., in order to reverse the situation from a yield perspective. Very helpful. Thank you for the time. The next question comes from Muneeba Kayani from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yes, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. Just continuing on this question around sea yields. In the scenario that ocean freight rates remain under pressure over the next year, should we expect kind of your ocean yields to continue to decline, or do you have any mechanisms in there to kind of protect the yield within the context of your strategy to gain market share? Secondly, on the road segment, your competitor today talked about the road market stabilizing. It seems like you don't see that. Am I right? What are the trends you're seeing on the road side? Yeah. I'm Muneeba. Stefan, I take the road question first. I think what we have seen is now that we, over the year, had 6%- 7% less volume in the large domestic networks, particularly in France, the U.K., and Germany. Germany worst of worst. That is not a surprise. It is stabilizing a bit now. It was stabilizing at the end of September, a little bit more uptick than expected in October. Is that a tipping or turning point? I would say no. There's still less volumes in the networks versus the previous years. I would say if it's not 6%, it's still 3%- 4% less. It's stabilizing a bit, but it's not a tipping or turning point as we see it right now. Maybe on the sea freight yield side, I think we have already a situation today where rates are on a very low basis. I think our portion of the gross profit that stems from the capacity is already heavily compressed under current conditions. From that perspective, we believe that's pretty much at the bottom range of a potential corridor in that cycle. Let's not forget it's still a cycle for business we talk about. That is our current feeling. What we are focusing on clearly is on expanding our SME share with higher yields, and we are successful in doing that. We expanded on a quarter-over-quarter basis, and we are focusing on more services per shipment. You remember our strategy on the land side, on the land side value-added services that we have completed and extended at the beginning of the year with IMC is one of these steps. These are the areas we can focus on. These are the areas that are, from a yield perspective, fully under our control, and we are going to expand on that. From that perspective, I think I would not necessarily expect further deterioration as you put into your question. Thank you. The next question comes from Marco Limite from Barclays. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. Just a follow-up on the last question you just answered. When we think about Q4, I think you mentioned that we should expect Q4 flattish versus Q3. By looking at the different moving parts, I guess you're sort of guiding for GP/TEU not deteriorating further versus the Q3 levels. Does that mean also that the headwinds from FX now are fully in the base? We are not going to see any further FX pressure, would be my first question. My second question, again, on the gross profit per Q point, you have just said that you think you are getting to the bottom in a way, but we are still at quite higher levels versus pre-pandemic. I know a lot has changed in terms of volume mix, MX acquisition, but at the same time, also 20% currency devaluation. What gives you the confidence that also the service part of the GP, not just the procurement part of the GP, is going to be stable and won't go down in the future? Thank you. Hi, Marco. We were just looking at each other. I take the second one. What makes us confident? First of all, the yields are already very much compressed. What we have just shared again is that our focus and the results in terms of our NYOCC SME volume is getting traction slowly, but more and more getting traction. We are growing double-digit in SME growth, which is helping us to maintain a certain yield position. Unfortunately, our large customers in the sectors I have just described are declining massively into the U.S., which we have not a huge influence over. What makes us confident is that we get more and more traction into the SME market. It took us quite a while, right? Now, with the 45 new customer care locations, with the highest sales force or largest sales force ever in the history of Kuehne + Nagel, and with a share of SME, which is north to 50% in the meanwhile, that makes us confident that we have at least a chance to maintain a certain GP level, which is not going down further significantly in the fourth quarter and the quarters to come. There is, of course, no guarantee. We do not know the market dynamics completely, but anticipating what we see currently, that should help us to maintain a certain position. Maybe just completing it for the first question on the fourth quarter outlook, I think adding to what Stefan just said on the additional services component, on the origin and destination services. From an FX perspective, we will continue to see a pressure on the FX for another quarter because in the consolidation, you know, we consolidate standard with average exchange rates over the year. Obviously, as long as the U.S. dollar, predominantly that is the currency that impacts here the most, is residing at a level of $0.80 or $0.79 towards the Swiss franc, we will continue to see for another quarter an impact. Thank you. Sorry, on the Q4 in air logistics, I guess in the past, we're talking about big season. What's the view now also in terms of GP per ton in air if you can add any color? Thank you. Sure. What we see currently is that the volume, the market share gains continue in the fourth quarter, especially in the area of the hard cargo where we have been more successful than in the first. E-commerce is going down further, so no support from e-commerce to be expected, but there are two main verticals where we see nice growth, which is the perishable and the hyperscaler semicon market, which is going to continue. What is clear, and that is what we said as well during the last Q call, there is no peak season to be expected. No additional support in the marketplace, but we would estimate the same growth pattern in the fourth quarter, which we have seen in the last two. On yields, I would say stable yields and no further deterioration in terms of the GP per unit is concerned. Thank you very much for your clarity. The next question comes from Alexa Dogani from JPMorgan. Please go ahead. Alexa, your line is open. Sorry. Apologies. Thank you for taking my question. Just firstly, on the cost reduction program, can you please discuss why CHF 200 million is the right number? Because when I look at the addressable cost base that you have, this represents just around 3%, which could be seen as just covering inflation. Can you just a little bit explain why you think this is enough? When I look at a very high level, the run rate of profitability of this business, given what you delivered in Q3, we are looking at numbers very close to 2019 levels. Why have things kind of unwound so quickly in the past few years? What can you do to regain some of the more positive trajectory you had seen? Secondly, on financial leverage, obviously, you talk about the commitment to the dividend, the fact that you want to go back to a net cash neutral. When we look at net debt to EBITDA, including leases, you're already at a range of around 1.5 x- 2 x. How high are you willing to let this metric go before you have to, I guess, take more urgent action? Thanks. Yeah. Alexa and Stefan, I will take the first question, the cost savings and the basis of the cost savings. I think what we have to do is here we need to distinguish between the freight forwarding sea logistics, air logistics, and road logistics, where our cost base is roughly CHF 4 billion. We focus pretty much on this CHF 4 billion, right? The cost reduction is significantly higher than the 3%. In contract logistics, the cost is always related to the execution of the customer contracts. As more we win, as more we add. This is a little bit independent from what we have put forward in the cost program, cost efficiency program. This is pretty much focusing on the network side of the house. Here we have a starting point, a cost position of roughly CHF 4 billion. That's the reason why the percentage point is a little bit higher. As Markus said a couple of minutes ago, if there is a need for further cost reduction or cost-saving measures, we are able and willing to take them, right? This is only what we have identified so far since August this year. Let me answer on the debt position. I think you're right. It's 1.5 x what we currently look at from a debt position. Yes, we have said we prefer a small net cash position going forward. That means we're going to focus even more on our free cash flow generation going forward. You know our current net working capital is expanded. It's expanded more than what we usually would require for that business. Our net working capital intensity corridor is 3.5% - 4.5%. We are at 5%. Clearly, that speaks for a certain business pattern that we currently experience, namely in the air logistics arena on the charter businesses that are taking a larger portion than what we have experienced in the past. It's a couple of moving points there, but I think something that we will manage even closer. That gave us the confidence to go out with this confirmation of the dividend policy as well as our long-term. It's nothing that's going to happen next year or at the end of next year that we will get back to a net cash position. It's something that clearly remains in our strong focus. Thank you. Do you mind if I just follow up on the point about the cost savings? I appreciate that it's 5% of the kind of the more forwarding side. Is there something that you can do on the revenue, do you think? Or really, the only lever you have is the cost base to improve profitability? No, the revenue side, you mean the GP side, right? It's more the GP side. Yeah, it's more the GP side. Yeah, it's more the GP side, of course, right? It's how do you do the pricing? Where do you focus? SME, we touched already quite intensively. In air freight, it's the mix, basically. Less growth, basically, in perishables, but more growth in the semicon and the hyperscaler in the industrial side of the house or in the hard cargo because here the yield per 100 kg is much higher. That is what you can do and what you do on a constant basis with our sales force focusing on the high yield in the business and look into additional services, the so-called value-added services before and after port-port or airport-to-airport. We have certain examples for that. The customs clearance piece, the transloading piece, the white glove service, the value-added service in the U.S., for instance, right? There are a couple of things which you can expand, which we do in order to offset the pressure on port-port or airport-airport rates. Thank you. The next question comes from Marc Zeck from Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead. Thank you for taking my question. Just a couple of quick ones on your recent acquisitions, to put it that way. Can you give us a feeling of what you expect for Apex in Q4? I believe it's very much geared towards the Transpacific and probably also does a bit of e-commerce business. You might say all the wrong places to be in right now. What will be kind of the rough added contribution from Apex that you expect? On IMC, could you give us an update on what IMC is currently doing in terms of profitability and what ocean yields will look like ex IMC? Are we still above 400 with excluding MSC or already in the 300s? Just a quick follow-up on the free cash flow and working capital development. It was my impression that in the past, you talked about elevated working capital being kind of a relict or artifact of the pandemic and high freight rates. Obviously, freight rates came down quite a bit. Why is free cash flow or working capital lagging in normalizing above and beyond what you said on the air freight charter business? That's from my side. Thank you. Yeah, I'll start a little bit with Apex, right? You're absolutely right, Mark. Apex is Transpac in particular, and it was more focusing on e-commerce where we see a certain reduction in terms of volume is concerned. We leverage Apex as Kuehne + Nagel pretty much as the carrier. To give you one example, we have now 14 charter operations out of Hanoi, Vietnam, purely on the high-tech side, on the hyperscaler, semicon, and high-tech customers, which is operated by Apex. We jointly leverage the capacity towards the U.S. We get the best out of both worlds, so to say. Apex margins are currently more under pressure based on the business mix and the situation. They are focused more on the U.S. and general cargo basis. Nevertheless, we utilize them as the carrier with their 747 charter operations for both legacies, which will add future value to the growth of the hyperscaler market. Mark, it's Markus. On IMC, I think strategically, we talked about it a bit before. I think the right thing to do, quite happy with the land side operation, how we can also consolidate operation, KN with IMC and so on. Your specific question on the gross profit per GU, the first answer is do not forget we have CHF 22 on currency headwinds on that. What you can clearly see is a deduction of, say, roughly CHF 50 for IMC contribution into gross profit per GU brings you to a 370 number plus the CHF 22 on the FX headwinds. I would say from a U.S. dollar perspective, we're still around the $400, sorry, correcting for the U.S. dollar impact, we're still on the CHF 400 line. You have the full transparency on the breakdown as well in the stats books that we have published. That is from a quick calculation on the back of the envelope. That is the reality. Free cash flow and working cap, I think yes. The pandemic situation was extraordinary in many ways, one of which obviously was also on the rates and on the working capital needs. That has passed some time ago. Currently, we are looking predominantly on the portion of charter business in the air freight arena versus the business that was on value regular carrier business, what was in the past. That is still the main driver for the extended networking capital intensity. It's nothing else out there. We will continue to manage DPOs and DSOs and at the same time try to optimize the business model as it stands today. Thank you. The next question comes from Michael Foeth from Vontobel. Please go ahead. Yes. Hi, gentlemen. Two questions from my side. Can you just remind us what the basis for the Apex valuation was in the deal with Partners Group now? In hindsight, what the benefits of selling the stake to Partners Group, taking it back, has been for Kuehne + Nagel, both financially and strategically? The second question, just a clarification. You said that the yields on the hyperscaler data center part of the business is much higher, much higher than perishables, I think you said. Is it above the group average as well, the yield on that business? That would be those two questions. Thank you. I answer the last one. Yes, the overall semicon, high-tech, in particular, hyperscaler margin end-to-end is higher than the average on group level. Significantly higher than group perishables, sorry. On Apex, maybe just for transparency, Partners Group had a put option. It is not so much about us selling. They exercised the put option at the back end of the summer. I think what we have certainly taken out from that cooperation and that partnership is an excellent view into further growth opportunities on the M&A side at Apex. The way how to operate and look at business, I think from a highly professional partner like Partners Group in managing the business in Asia. There are a lot of things that we have positively learned and taken away experience. From that perspective, I think we can be strategically very happy that we had this partnership in place. From a valuation point of view, I think we have disclosed that since the put option was in place in our financial statements, in principle, it is a multiplier on the financial performance of the company. Okay. Thank you. Very clear. The next question comes from Gian Marco Werro from Zürcher Kantonalbank. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone. One question also on Apex and the terminated partnership there with Partners Group. Can you, despite this termination of the partnership, tell us about the pipeline for bolt-on acquisitions there in Asia? How did it evolve over this partnership, and how does it look at the moment? Does it look less promising now compared to one year ago? The second question is on DSV and the volumes from the DB Schenker integration that might come to the market. Did you see already some volumes coming into your direction? Could you benefit in the last quarter now from some clients who have diversified their portfolio of freight forwarders? Thank you. Hi Gian Marco, it's Markus. Let me take the Apex since we talked about it already before. Clearly, the visibility that Partners Group had to potential targets is much higher quality than what we have had internally. I think that is clear. The pipeline for potential acquisition objects or targets is there. I think, without giving away anything, over the next 12 - 24 months, we will see some actions there in a bolt-on acquisition type, of course. We have not changed our view on that. It is something where I think we get extremely good value for money. Going forward, I think it has proven to us that that can be a future model for developing business in areas where a partner is really of substance and help to us. Yeah, Gianmarco, Stefan, I tackled the DSV- Schenker question. Yes. In particular, in air logistics, we have seen significant volumes on the market. If you compare now Q3 volumes and sea logistics on both companies, you see that it's a head-on-head race. It's not so clear anymore that one is larger than the other one, which we need to take as a sportive race like soccer, right? You have to have fun sometimes as well in business life. Overall, I can confirm that we have taken advantage out of that merger. As I said, in air logistics, now road logistics as well is helping us with the white glove service, with the value-added services, particularly in the U.S., which we hadn't had before. Overall, it has benefited us. Look at the, again, at the numbers, compare the numbers in sea logistics third quarter in total both companies and us, then you see that it's almost equal now. It will be interesting to see in the next couple of quarters and years to come who can leverage the customer side for its own benefit. Thank you. Just maybe a small follow-up. What is the hurdle to not also gain volumes in sea logistics from DB Schenker? The air freight market is much quicker. In sea freight, you have one or two RFQ cycles, mainly one RFQ cycle for the westbound and for the Transpac a year. You have to wait for the RFQ cycle. The air freight customers, in particular, decide more on a monthly or quarterly basis. The share of wallet needle has moved much quicker in air freight than in sea freight. The risk or the purchasing guidance is more obvious in air freight than in sea freight. That can come and should come during the next RFQ cycle. Very clear. Thank you. The next question comes from Laura Bucher from Octavian. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon. Thank you for taking my question. It's more of a follow-up, really. You've mentioned expanding SME as a way to potentially increase the GP. I'm interested in knowing how that flows to EBIT per TEU. I think you once mentioned that SME offered, I think it was 1.8x the average GP per TEU, but that it also had much higher costs. I'm interested in how has that developed over time and if you're addressing any of it with the CHF 200 million cost reduction program. Hi, Laura. It's Markus. Good to hear you after we met a couple of months ago. SME, clearly, two factors, and you're absolutely right, two factors, higher GP, but also higher cost to serve. I can cut there to the end. Our cost reduction program that we have started today, and I think Stefan has also put a lot of color around which areas are lesser impacted, like on the sales side or so. To be absolutely clear, we maintain in focus our service quality and our ability to grow. That also means for SME customers, we will continue that high-level service that we are able to deliver. There is not going to be an impact on the service quality. We save cost on areas where we think we can do that without impacting these service levels. 1.8x, that is still the correct number, at least from our experience that we see, that also returns with a conversion rate or with a conversion rate in line with our ambition. That is between 30% and 35% towards the bottom line. As long as we maintain the service quality, then the customer loyalty is going to be the SME section will expand. We are going to continue that journey. Nevertheless, when we automate or digitize or eliminate process steps, tasks within the execution, that will also benefit for the profitability of SME customers, for sure. That's nothing that a customer will feel as a change or if a change, then to the better and for his customer service. Optimization, efficiency gains are also still valid for SME, but overall, your business case is still very valid. Okay, thank you. The next question comes from Cedar Ekblom from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Thanks. Just one from me. On the cash return, I wonder, would you ever consider going from a dividend to a buyback considering where shares are? Do you think that there is any opportunity to express a view that shares are maybe undervalued, particularly if you believe that you can deliver your medium-term targets that you set at the Capital Markets Day only a couple of months ago? Thank you. Sure, Cedar. Fair question and I think a fair consideration. I can only reflect what the supervisory board is sharing with us. Clearly, their preference is the side of dividends. It's not much more that I can say for that. Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Stefan Paul for any closing remarks. Thank you very much for your questions, for listening in, your interest. Stay tuned and have a good winter. The weather here is getting really now more to the skiing season. Thank you again for your interest and talk to you soon. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines to go.