Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. On behalf of BASF, I would like to welcome you to our conference call on the first quarter 2026 results. Today's presentation is being recorded. All participants will be in listen-only mode throughout. The presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer session. Today's presentation contains forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current estimates and projections of the board of executive directors and currently available information. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of the future developments and results outlined therein. These are dependent on a number of factors. They involve various risks and uncertainties, and they are based on assumptions that may not prove to be accurate. BASF does not assume any obligation to update the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation above and beyond the legal requirements. With me on the call today are CFO Dirk Elvermann and Christian Jutzi, President of BASF's Corporate Finance division. Please be aware that we have already posted the speech on our website at basf.com/qone twothousandandtwenty-six. I would like to hand over to Dirk. Yes, good morning, everyone. Christian Jutzi and I welcome you to our Q1 conference call for analysts and investors right before our annual shareholders meeting today. The first quarter unfolded in two phases. In the first two months, we saw moderate growth driven by China. Since March, developments have been shaped by the conflict in the Middle East and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to seaborne transport of oil, gas, and chemicals. In this demanding market environment, BASF demonstrated resilience and achieved EBITDA before special items of EUR 2.4 billion compared with EUR 2.5 billion in the prior year quarter. Let's start with a closer look at the sales performance of BASF Group compared with the prior year quarter. Overall, sales declined slightly on account of strong currency headwinds and lower prices. However, we achieved solid volume growth. All segments increased volumes except for Surface Technologies, where they declined slightly. Volume growth was most pronounced in the Petrochemicals, Monomers, and Nutrition & Health divisions. Thanks to the successful and on-time startup of our new Verbund site in South China and already high utilization rates, the Petrochemicals division was able to capture strong volume growth. Volumes in the Monomers division rose significantly, especially for isocyanates and ammonia. Following the restart of our vitamin production in Ludwigshafen last summer, the Nutrition & Health division also recorded considerable volume growth. Compared with the prior year quarter, prices declined, particularly in the core businesses. This resulted from ongoing competitive pressure and lower average raw material prices in Q1 2026. In the Surface Technologies segment, we achieved significant price increases, mainly due to higher precious metal prices. In Agricultural Solutions, prices were almost stable. Due to the sharp rise in raw material prices in March, notably for naphtha and natural gas, we announced price increases across our product portfolio as existing contracts allow. The impact of these price increases is expected to come through in the second quarter. Adverse currency effects dampened sales in all divisions and were mainly related to the depreciation of the U.S. dollar and the Chinese renminbi compared with the prior year quarter. Portfolio effects only slightly lowered sales and were mainly caused by the sale of BASF Decorative Paints business on October 1st and BASF Food and Health Performance Ingredients business on September 30th last year. Due to this underlying sales development, EBITDA before special items declined by six percent and came in at EUR 2.4 billion. Disregarding the currency headwinds of more than EUR 100 million, EBITDA before special items would have reached the level of the prior year quarter. Let's briefly turn to the regional volume and price development compared with the prior year quarter, excluding metals. We achieved volume growth in Greater China, thanks to our new Verbund site in Guangdong Province. Especially the Chemicals segment benefited from the new capacities and increased volumes. However, prices in Greater China declined primarily due to the imbalance between supply and demand, particularly in the upstream businesses. In Asia Pacific, excluding Greater China, we also recorded considerable volume growth driven by the Nutrition & Care and Surface Technologies segments. In this region, prices decreased, especially in the Materials and Chemicals segments. In Europe, the solid volume growth was mainly attributable to the Materials, Nutrition & Care, and Agricultural Solutions segments. Prices in Europe declined, especially in the Chemicals, Materials, and Industrial Solutions segments. In North America, volumes were stable, while prices, excluding metals, slightly declined. Particularly in the chemical segments, prices were lower than in the prior year quarter. In the region South America, Africa, and Middle East, volumes declined mainly on account of Materials. All segments recorded lower prices except for Surface Technologies. Please note that sales to customers in the Middle East accounted for less than one percent of BASF Group sales, both in 2025 and the first quarter of 2026. Over the past weeks, we have received many questions regarding the conflict in the Middle East and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Global supply chains are under severe stress, and feedstock availability is a challenge for the entire chemical industry. We have activated a cross-divisional crisis response team comprising procurement and the businesses to foster clear communication, mitigate risks, and capture opportunities. For the coming weeks, we do not see significant supply risk for our production. Our setup makes us more resilient and better positioned to keep our customers well-supplied. What sets us apart from many of our competitors are the following factors. First, with our broad and well-diversified product portfolio, BASF serves numerous customer industries worldwide. Through our long and multiple step value chains, we generate high value add. Second, BASF's local-for-local production approach and large integrated Verbund sites in all regions ensure more stable production compared to standalone non-backward integrated sites. In addition, we operate flex-feed steam crackers in Antwerp, Zhanjiang, and Port Arthur that can use naphtha and other feedstocks. This gives us flexibility in the use of raw materials. BASF is one of the few chemical companies with its own dedicated trading business for key feedstocks, which provides flexibility and optionality. We can source key raw materials such as naphtha, methanol, or benzene, either globally or locally, whichever makes more sense at the time. Importantly, our trading activities typically handle volumes that are significantly larger than what we use to cover BASF's own demand. This gives us broad access to the market, increased flexibility, and the ability to respond quickly when supply chains are under stress. In short, scale is a key source of resilience for BASF. As outlined in our Q2 2025 conference call, we have concluded two cornerstone gas supply agreements with Equinor and Shenhua. In this way, we ensure long-term natural gas supply, high volume flexibility, and diversification across geographies, pricing models, and delivery modes. Excuse me. Let's now look at the EBITDA before special items bridge. In Q1 2026, considerable earnings growth in the Surface Technologies segment and slight earnings growth in the Materials segment were offset by lower contributions from the Chemicals, Agricultural Solutions, and Nutrition & Care segments, as well as other. Earnings in the Industrial Solutions segment were stable. Compared with the prior year quarter, EBITDA before special items in the Surface Technologies segment rose significantly, mainly due to Environmental Catalyst and Metal Solutions. The increase in earnings in the ECMS division resulted primarily from higher contributions from precious metal trading. Lower fixed cost as a result of one-off payments in connection with the successful resolution of a litigation matter also helped to boost earnings. In the Materials segment, earnings rose slightly on account of the Monomers division. Lower fixed costs and higher contribution margins contributed to the improvement. EBITDA before special items in the Chemical segment declined considerably, mainly owing to lower contribution margins due to the global overcapacities. A higher turnaround intensity in comparison to the prior year quarter, for instance, at the Port Arthur site, contributed to the decline in Petrochemicals. We incurred higher fixed costs due to the startups of the new Verbund site in South China. Let me highlight, however, that in March, the Zhanjiang Verbund site already delivered a positive EBITDA before special items. This demonstrates how quickly economics can change in a volatile market environment. The earnings of the Chemical segment improved gradually during the first quarter of 2026. Earnings in the Industrial Solutions segment matched the level of the prior year quarter as slightly higher contributions from the Dispersions & Resins division compensated for slightly lower contributions from the Performance Chemicals division. The Nutrition and Care segment generated considerably lower EBITDA before special items, owing mainly to the price-related decline in the contribution margins of the Care Chemicals division. By contrast, earnings in the Nutrition and Health division improved substantially, thanks to significantly higher sales volumes as well as reduced fixed costs. In Agricultural Solutions, earnings decreased slightly, largely due to currency-related declines in contribution margins. Slight volume growth in all regions supported the earnings development. EBITDA before special items and other decreased significantly, largely due to a measurement effect from derivatives related to hedges. With that, I will hand over now to you, Christian. Thank you, Dirk, and good morning, everybody. Let's now take a brief look at key financial figures. At EUR 2.4 billion, EBITDA before special items decreased slightly compared with the prior year quarter. Cash fixed costs declined by around five percent to EUR 3.9 billion. This is the result of our ongoing restructuring efforts as well as positive currency effects. EBIT, not shown on the slide, improved slightly and amounted to EUR 1.3 billion. In Q1 2026, we incurred special charges in EBIT of around EUR 170 million compared with around EUR 430 million in the prior year quarter. Special charges were largely related to restructuring measures. Net income improved by EUR 119 million and came in at EUR 927 million. Free cash flow rose by EUR 423 million to minus EUR 1.4 billion. You will find more details on the following slide. The increase in cash flows from operating activities by EUR 185 million was primarily due to dividends received from Wintershall Dea, which were paid after Wintershall Dea had been reimbursed under the federal investment guarantees. Lower earnings with cash impact, higher severance and bonus payments, and increased cash consumption due to the price-related buildup of precious metal trading positions lowered the increase in cash flows from operating activities. As in the prior year quarter, changes in networking capital led to a cash outflow of around EUR 3 billion and were mainly related to changes in accounts receivable in our Agricultural Solutions business following the start of the season in the northern hemisphere. Payments made for property, plant and equipment and intangible assets were reduced by EUR 238 million compared with the prior year quarter to EUR 578 million. Free cash flow came in at minus EUR 1.4 billion compared with minus EUR 1.8 billion in Q1 2025. Typically, BASF free cash flow is negative in Q1 and recovers over the course of the year. This is mainly due to the seasonal nature of the Agricultural Solutions business. Let's now turn to our balance sheet at the end of the first quarter compared with the end of March 2025. At EUR 81.8 billion, total assets were almost at the prior year level. BASF equity ratio amounted to 43.4% and remains solid despite the ongoing share buyback program. Net debt was unchanged from the end of March 2025 and higher than at year-end, reflecting the seasonality in our Agricultural Solutions business. We continue to have a single-A credit rating, which ensures unrestricted access to financial markets and favorable financing conditions. This is especially relevant in times of high volatility and unpredictability. Fitch, Moody's and S&P all recently confirmed BASF single-A credit ratings. In the coming quarters, we will focus on deleveraging. The maturity profile of outstanding bonds and loans shown in the lower part of the slide will support this. In the first quarter, we already repaid a euro-denominated bond with a nominal value of EUR 1 billion. In the following, I will give an update on the implementation of BASF cost savings programs. We are convinced that we will achieve our targeted annual cost savings of around EUR 2.3 billion by year-end. At the end of March, we had already achieved a total annual run rate of EUR 1.9 billion. We continue to expect total one-time costs of around EUR 1.9 billion, of which we incurred EUR 1.6 billion by the end of the first quarter. This shows the positive momentum in bringing down our cost base and the ongoing management focus on this crucial topic. With that, back to you, Dirk. Thank you, Christian. Before we move on to the outlook, I would like to reiterate BASF capital allocation framework. I will start with cash contributions shown on the left. As you are aware, we expect to close the coatings transaction with Carlyle in the 2Q, subject to customary regulatory approvals. We will receive pre-tax cash proceeds of around EUR 5.8 billion at closing. Taxes are assumed to be in the mid triple-digit million euro range. We are also making good progress with the monetization of our oil and gas assets. In the 1Q, proceeds from the sale of a portion of our Harbour Energy shares amounted to around EUR 300 million. The largest tranche, 80 million shares, was sold via an accelerated book building offering. Our remaining shareholding in Harbour Energy now stands at around 30% when considering all shares outstanding. As we have stated on several occasions, we consider our participation in Harbour Energy to be a financial investment, and BASF strategy remains to exit over time, being mindful of the value. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, we received dividends from Wintershall Dea of almost EUR 800 million related to the federal investment guarantees for expropriated assets in Russia in the first quarter. With these payments and the payments in the second half of 2025 amounting to EUR 900 million, the insurance claims of Wintershall Dea under the capital coverage have been settled. Now let's move on to the use of cash on the right-hand side. We are committed to attractive shareholder distributions. Subject to the approval of today's annual shareholder meeting, we will pay a dividend of EUR 2.25 per share on May sixth. We have been buying back shares since November 2025. The program, with a volume of up to EUR 1.5 billion, is scheduled to be concluded by the end of June. So far, we have bought back shares under this program for around EUR 880 million or around two point two percent of the outstanding shares. These share buybacks are part of the total buyback volume of at least EUR 4 billion by the end of 2028, announced at our Capital Markets Day in September 2024. As mentioned before, we will use a considerable part of the cash proceeds to deleverage. Compared with the prior planning period, we will reduce capital expenditures in the next four years by roughly 20%. CapEx will consistently stay below depreciation until 2028. We will also consider value-accretive M&A as a potential lever to strengthen and grow BASF core businesses. Now let's turn to our outlook. Given the high level of uncertainty about how the conflict in the Middle East will play out, BASF is not, at this time, changing its assumptions regarding the global economic environment in 2026 that were presented in the BASF report 2025. From today's perspective, the assumptions made in February regarding growth in global GDP, industrial production, and chemical production may prove to be too optimistic. The oil price may be higher than our existing assumption, owing to impeded production and exports as a result of the conflict in the Middle East. The US dollar may appreciate compared to the euro, which would have a slightly favorable effect. For now, the BASF Group's forecast for the 2026 business year published in the BASF report 2025 is therefore maintained, including EBITDA before special items of between EUR 6.2 billion and EUR 7 billion, and free cash flow of between EUR 1.5 billion and EUR 2.3 billion. CO2 emissions will likely be between 17.2 million metric tons and 18.2 million metric tons. We are, of course, closely monitoring the situation in the Middle East and will leverage opportunities and mitigate risks. Now, Christian and I are glad to answer your questions. Ladies and gentlemen, I would now like to open the call for your questions. If you wish to ask a question, press star and then enter 11 on your telephone. For the best sound quality, we kindly ask you to be sure to unmute your phone and use your headset when asking your questions. Please limit your questions to only two at a time so that everybody has a chance to ask their questions in our short conference call right before the annual shareholders meeting. We have quite a list already. We will start with Katie Richards from Barclays, then have Alejandro Vigil, and then Thomas Wrigglesworth. Now, Katie Richards. Barclays, please go ahead with your question. Hi guys. Thank you for taking my questions. I'll just ask a few on guidance then, please. You've chosen to maintain the range at EUR 6.2 billion to EUR 7 billion. Can you comment on whether the recent pricing and spreads movements leave scope to exceed the higher end of this range, or is it too early to assess? Could you also give us some directional guidance on Q2, please? Do you think it would be fair to say it's stronger or in line with the estimates we've seen for Q1 today? Katie, good morning. Thank you for your question. Let me take this one. First of all, when it comes to the outlook, let me say, we are really satisfied how the first quarter came in. This is in a very challenging environment, I think, a great and tremendous achievement by the team. We are optimistic for the second quarter. We see pricing power across many of our businesses that will now unfold in the second quarter. The first quarter was all still bound by contractual terms that were negotiated earlier. Now in the second quarter, I think the pricing power that is now coming up will unfold. Short-term, we are optimistic. For the rest of the year, there is a question mark, of course, like everybody has a question mark right now because we do not know for how long the crisis in the Middle East will continue, and we do not know yet how the demand pattern will continue. So far, we see no declines in demands, but we can of course not be certain that the current demand levels will uphold depending on how this crisis goes on. We said everything that we would now change would be arbitrary. Let's stick to the numbers that we have, which is still our best estimate. Of course, we are mindful that there might be changes in the second half of the year. Once we see that clearer, we will certainly react. For now, we see no reason to change, and this is why we do not change it. Looking into the second quarter and giving you a little bit more flavor on the respective businesses, let me say the following. Starting with upstream. For the chemicals and materials segments, we are expecting considerable improvements in earnings compared with the prior year quarter. This of course, has to do with the current situation in the Middle East. The businesses are certainly benefiting from tighter supply conditions, and also get pricing power. On top of that, also, Zhanjiang, which already contributed positively in March, as I've said, will do its part to the results of Petrochemicals. On the other hand side, we will also have a turnaround of a cracker in Ludwigshafen. We should also not be too optimistic, but I think overall, for Petrochemicals and Materials, the picture for Q2 is good. For Industrial Solutions, make the story short here, we would also expect to come in above the prior year quarter. There we are continuing with good restructuring. We also see solid demand, and we see overall a good market environment for the second quarter. When it comes to Nutrition & Care, I would say we should come in around previous year's quarterly level. We have challenging market conditions, particularly in Care Chemicals, which are also likely to persist, but we also see some room for a betterment here. On the health side, with the revamp of our vitamins grid, we should certainly see a continuation of positive contributions, which we already shown in the first quarter. Surface Technologies is expected to be below the previous year quarter level. Automotive market, as we all know, is lower compared to 2025, and the PGM prices are also doing their effect. For Agricultural Solutions, the business is fundamentally really a good one, I have to say. The result that we saw in the first quarter was impacted by FX effects mainly. Otherwise, the colleagues would have achieved more or less the same result as last year. What is a slight watch out, of course, is the pricing and buying power of the farmers. They anyway still suffer from soft commodity prices, which are not very high. On top of that, you see now fertilizer prices also spiking due to Strait of Hormuz, and that is then impacting the buying power of the farmers as well. Putting all of this together, for the second quarter, as I've said, a positive outlook, beyond the second quarter, too early to tell. Thank you. We move on to Alejandro Vigil, Santander. Yes, hello. Thank you for taking my questions. One is more strategic. Looking at the situation in the Gulf, if in your conversations with your client, you see a additional boost to the restoring to be closer to the clients, to be local for local. That's the first question. The second question is about your expectations in terms of net debt by the end of the year. I think there are many moving parts, the working capital first quarter, the divestments. If you can give us an indication on how you expect to be at the end of the year? Thank you. Yeah. Chris, Alex, I take the first question, and Christian takes your financially related questions afterwards. Yes, indeed, Alex, we see that the resilience that we have built over the last couple of years is now playing out. I think the good Q1 result and also the good prospect for the second quarter is thanks to a couple of factors. One being, and you mentioned it, the local-for-local production that we have. We have on average 90% local for local for sales, but also for the procurement side. We do not see so far in this crisis any supply shortage for us. The physical product supply is secured also for the second quarter of the year. We have the possibility to play our long value chains also. This together with the closeness and proximity to our customers is really playing off. We see this resilience point strongly playing out these days. Christian. Yes, thanks very much, Alejandro Vigil, for your question. Compared to the end of last year where our net debt was at EUR 18.3 billion, it went up now to EUR 20.5, which is on the level of the last year, which is due to the seasonality of the Agricultural Solutions. Regarding the future now, evidently this will come down. You saw us in Q1 already, we paid back a EUR 1 billion euro-denominated bond. This will continue. There is further opportunity to reduce our net debt and pay back bonds and loans of EUR 1.2 billion, which we will do. Of course, subject to the closing of our portfolio measures, we're considering further measures. There is a certain likelihood that we would potentially even pay back early some loans and/or bonds, and that would of course then further reduce net debt. This is our plan. As Dirk has said, our clear capital allocation framework is laid out. We will deleverage. Okay. Now we move on to Thomas Wrigglesworth. We will then have later on, Christian Faitz, Matthew Yates, and Tony Jones. Now it's Tom Wrigglesworth. Please go ahead. Morgan Stanley. Thanks very much, Stefanie. Two questions, if I may. Firstly, just in terms of the more downstream-focused divisions where you're exposed to automotive, maybe more of the, you know, more of the consumer durable manufacturers. Two things. What is BASF's message to your downstream customers around availability and pricing over the next, you know, through 2026? Like, what are you actually communicating? Are you sensing any demand destruction in those downstream, noting that your upstream business is obviously passing through? The second question, if I may. Obviously, the China Zhanjiang, Verbund, EBITDA positive in March, is that just a function of stocking effects that are one-time in nature? Do you feel that's actually an underlying step up in performance in the business that means going forwards, you know, the rest of the year will be at a minimum, you know, maybe not, you know, EBITDA positive to neutral? Thank you. Yes, good morning. Let me start with the China question, and Christian is taking your downstream question. First of all, let's say we have been delighted that already in March we could show for the site in Zhanjiang first time an positive EBITDA result. This is, of course, a function of a couple of factors. First of all, the ongoingly very successful startup of the site, which brought up the capacity utilization very quickly, all products in spec, and also very good customer relations on the ground. That's first. Secondly, of course, we benefited from volatility, as I've said already in my speech. We had the possibility to react quickly here at time when Asia was impacted by this Middle East crisis. Would we dare now to say, after March, we will stay continuously positive in Zhanjiang for the rest of the year? Certainly, no. We maintain our more cautious forecast for Zhanjiang, saying it will probably be rather slightly negative, but at least this is already an early signal of strong resilience also in this new site. We're happy about it, but I would not overdo it at this point in time. Regarding the question on the, let's say, more downstream divisions. It's quite a, let's say, a change in the first quarter. What you saw on the first two months of the quarter was really good volume development, of course, in the chemicals division or chemical segment and also in Nutrition & Care, but not so much in the other downstream divisions. That changed in March. You really saw an uptick in volumes. Now, it's evidently very difficult to judge this because there are several things happening at the same time. On the one hand, if you look at consumer confidence, this is actually not very strong in any of the regions, neither in Europe, nor in North America, nor in China. Of course, the Middle East crisis is also not helping. We did see clearly an uptick in March. Also, the PMI in Europe went up. It's difficult to evaluate now, are we talking about restocking effects, or is this really an underlying demand development? Because at the end of the day, what you see in Asia, specifically in Southeast Asia, you see really a certain supply unavailability, and therefore, actually certain imports into Europe are not coming across the board anymore. There is certain uncertainty which is helping demand. This is, of course, different in some of the different businesses. There are businesses which are really growing simply strongly overall, like Electronic Materials, which is having a really good run. Others, you see really positive developments in terms of demand, because there are some products which are not simply shipped anymore to the same extent as before. This we're gonna have to see, and this is what Dirk meant at earlier. We have to see how long this lasts, and this is if this is sustainable. Regarding pricing, evidently, we now see a significantly higher freight cost. We also see higher raw material costs. Those have to be pushed through. This is why you see price increases across the board, and they are to a large extent, also sticking. Thank you both. Very clear. Now we move on to Christian Faitz, Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead. Yes, thanks. Good morning, Dirk, Christian, Stefanie, and team. Two questions, please. First of all, on Agricultural Solutions. Given rather dry weather conditions throughout the Northern Hemisphere at this point in time, how is the inventory situation in crop protection products? My second question would be on your share buyback program, which I believe is scheduled to be concluded by June, the first EUR 1.5 billion trench. Are you considering to continue right after that with another trench out of your overall EUR 4 billion buyback program? Good morning, Christian. I take the two questions. First on the Agricultural Solutions. The channel inventory is currently not the biggest concern, I would say. We see, and you have seen, a healthy volume development also in Agricultural Solutions. On this side, I don't see a major topic. We will be able also for the rest of the year to push the volumes into the market. The bigger concern, as I was mentioning, is the buying power on the farmer side and therefore the pricing power and of course, the ongoing FX effect. These are the two bigger ones. Fundamentally, and this I would also like to repeat, the Agricultural Solutions business is on track here to achieve what they want to achieve for the year 2026. On the share buyback program, I'm happy with the progress. I think we also see that the ongoing share buyback program is supporting us and our strategy. We will, as planned, complete the program, this tranche, EUR 1.5 billion, by the end of June. We still have EUR 2.5 billion outstanding. For these EUR 2.5 billion, we have time until end of 2028. Will we continue immediately or take a little bit time, certainly also depends on cash in from for instance the coatings transactions and other elements. Long story short, we do not know yet whether we will immediately continue. It is not ruled out, but will be decided at a later point in time. Okay, great. Thanks, Dirk, and, as always at this time of the year, I wish you a good and most importantly, short AGM. Thanks very much. I appreciate. Okay, now we move on to Matthew Yates, Bank of America. Your turn. Hey, good morning, everyone. A couple of quick ones. Can you just elaborate a little bit more on the extent of the maintenance schedule for Q2, just as we're trying to calibrate any constraints you may have to capitalize on this environment? The second question is, I wondered if you could talk a little bit more about your trading business for feedstock, not necessarily something that we've talked about a lot in the past, but in this environment, as you say, potentially very interesting advantage. You just elaborate a little bit more on the size of that business and how it functions. Thank you. Hi, Matthew. I take your trading question, and then I think Christian can give you a short overview of the maintenance schedule. Our trading business, which we have in our so-called BASF Intertrade, this is a business that is not just, which is apparently more than a procurement function. We are trading on an ongoing basis, volumes for all our relevant feedstock, naphtha, methanol, et cetera, et cetera, far beyond our own demand, which in normal times gives you apart from your direct sales business, a trading result, which you typically see reflected under other. In these crisis times where we have to also secure our physical supply, it gives you more optionality with the higher volumes that we can procure worldwide to also put them into captive rather than to sell them on. It gives us, I would say, a nice buffer on top of the financial support that it also yields. That's the basic, the basic significance of the trading business, which works nicely. Secondly, in terms of market intel, obviously, we have very good insights into all the raw material feedstock markets worldwide, and the intertrading colleagues are therefore also an active part of our crisis response team. With that, Christian to maintenance. Yes. Matthew, regarding regarding maintenance. Typically in the first half of the year, you have the TAR season. This is the typical turnaround season in the chemical industry, and you saw this already in Q1, where we had Port Arthur down in the chemical segment in the second quarter. The larger Ludwigshafen cracker will be offline. Of course, this will impact the chemical segment. We also have an intermediate. We have a couple of turnarounds in amines and a few others, formic acid, that are going to impact, but that is all implied in the outlook that Dirk already gave. This is a material effect, but nothing unusual in this time of the season. One thing I would like to mention, as you are alluding to the current situation, we're actually taking active measures to make sure that we continue stability of supply and also supply our customers. There, for example, in the Monomers division, we had planned for an ammonia turnaround in the second quarter, and we pushed this now into the fourth quarter in order to ensure a continued supply for all our customers in the current environment. Thank you both. We will now move on to Tony Jones, Rothschild, and then we will have Sebastian Bray, Georgina Fraser, and Chetan Udeshi. Now it's Tony Jones, Rothschild. Please go ahead. Good morning, everybody. Thanks for taking my questions. Firstly, on AG Solutions, another good performance with volumes up, looks to be benefiting from your BASF strong product mix. I wanted to check, are there any gains in the quarter from quarterly phasing, either delayed from last year or pulled forward from the next? How are the newly launched products going? Are there gains starting to come through there despite the credit tightness? I suppose it would be good to check, is everything on track in the IPO process? My second question is higher level, really. Some companies are now starting to talk about exploring new investments in North America with the low costs and perceived lower political risk. Do you see any possibility BASF might look to assess whether it's this right time to invest again in North America, either organically or via M&A? Thank you. Hi, Tony. Good morning. I think I take both of your questions. First on AG, I would confirm this is the Q1 has been a clean quarter. There was even due to market dynamics, I think, rather the need in the fourth quarter 2025 to do a little bit more. If you will, the first quarter 2026 was even then a little bit weaker, but there is no big pre-pullment or anything. It is rather a clean quarter for the Ag division. On U.S. investments, let's not forget, we are currently doing a very large investment with the MDI expansion in Geismar, which is fully on track, which is supposed to be completed by mid of this year. We'll then ramp up quickly, a startup first and ramp up quickly still also within this year. This is a big investment, which we are very hopeful for, that it will also render its positive contribution extremely quickly. On top of that, as you know, we are at the end of an investment cycle, we are fully invested, well invested company right now. Therefore, nothing big out of the extraordinary can be expected neither in the U.S. nor elsewhere, but rather we focus now on other things and run the assets to the best of our abilities. Thank you, Dirk. Very helpful. Best of luck for the AGM today. Okay, we move on to Sebastian Bray, Berenberg. Hello, good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. I'd have two, please. The first is on regional profitability. The temptation when looking at these results is to say, well, BASF has benefited quite heavily from global footprint, particularly in the U.S. upstream, given some of the peers have reported quite nice results there. Can you talk about the extent to which U.S. upstream chemicals were the primary driver of Q1, and give us any relative sense for the relative profitability of China, and particularly with the new operations, Europe and the U.S.? My second question is on working capital. Is the EUR 3 billion in Q1 really seasonal, or is there a chance that BASF needs to hang on to some of this because of the need to secure supply or be able to deliver for end customers together with raw material inflation? Thank you. Morning, Sebastian. I take your question on the regional split, and then I think Christian talks a bit about the working capital effects and development. On the regional side, if you look into the top line, I think volume-wise, we were better particularly in Asia, and they are driven by China. This has to do with the overall market dynamic still, but also of course, with the contribution of our new site in Zhanjiang. If you want to split it a bit, I think is a significant part of what we see as volume increase in China is coming from the new site, of course. Europe also, in terms of volumes, growing in the first quarter of 2026, whereas North America for us volume-wise, was rather flattish. This instinct that the U.S. needs to go up now in this current situation, at least on the top line, we do not see in our books. It is the pattern Asia is driving, but also Europe showing here a nice contribution. If you look into the prices in the first quarter, they still have been down compared to previous year's quarter, for the reasons I explained, price increases not yet coming through. If you look into the earnings pattern, here you see start with North America, you see a slight improvement, but not something spectacular. Here, you see the biggest contribution coming from Asia again. In our home market, we saw in the first quarter an improvement in Germany, where Europe altogether was rather down. Again, a mixed picture, but nothing that is being driven yet by the U.S. Christian, to working capital. Yeah. Sebastian, thanks for the question. While I was talking earlier about the demand development in Q1, which really picked up than in March, more than in the month before, actually on the pricing side, we did not see that same development. Actually, it was pretty much the same all over the quarter. This really hasn't come through the price increases. This would be more in the second half. Regarding net working capital, for me, this is rather, and you see, we saw an impact of around EUR 3 billion, similar to what we saw in the last year's quarter, first quarter. Very similar development, mainly driven by the seasonal seasonality of the ag business. We, of course, also saw a little bit higher inventory that came from the startup of the Zhanjiang Verbund site, but nothing, let's say spectacular. Now looking into Q2, this will play a role. Regarding the free cash flow and the operating cash flow in the second quarter, last year we had a free cash flow of EUR 0.5 billion in the second quarter. What you will see this year, in line with what we said on CapEx, you will see lower CapEx, between EUR 200 million and EUR 300 million lowers. Lower because for the full year, we had already announced in February that we would go down by EUR 0.9 billion. You will see these EUR 200 to EUR 300 also in the second quarter. We will see higher net working capital due to the higher oil and gas price environment. This, of course, will be a drain on cash flow and therefore, expectation here is that operating cash flow will be lower than in the second quarter than last year. However, due to the lower CapEx, you will see this somewhat as a compensating effect, yeah. Probably slightly down in free cash flow, compared to prior year. That's helpful. Thank you. Given the fact that there are still six analysts in the queue, I suggest we move to one question or would appreciate if you could restrict yourself to one question. It's Georgina Fraser, Goldman Sachs. We then have Chetan, then Peter Spengler, and then Laurent Favre. Georgina Fraser, please go ahead. Thank you very much. Thankfully, I do just have one question. It's on your outlook and this topic of supply security that we've spent a lot of time so far. In the material that you published this morning, it read to me that you were highlighting a lot of downside risks to your outlook, but the commentary on the call has been a lot more positive, at least in the short term. I want to dig in a little bit into the assumptions that you've made. You said there are no significant supply risks. For now, can you help us understand what are you looking out for? When would real supply risks commence if the Strait of Hormuz remains shut? Do you see competitors already facing supply issues in Europe that don't have the same feedstock diversification and trading platform and all of the advantages that you highlighted? Thank you. Hi, Georgina, I take this one. If we say we do not see supply risk for now, I'm talking about the time horizon until end of Q2. As you can imagine, we are now doing both supply risk analysis, physical, but also pricing on a rolling basis. The foresight that we have gives us confidence that until end of the second quarter, we will not see any major supply disruptions. We do see the major bottlenecks for supply still in Asia. If you look into the list of force majeures declared, these days they are all coming from Asia. They are not so much coming from Europe. Will this change over time? It's not to be excluded, but for now, it is still predominantly an Asian topic. To our outlook. The trends that we've shown with regard to the assumptions that are the basis for the outlook are to demonstrate that there is currently a lot of volatility, and that we can rather expect from today's perspective for GDP, et cetera, a downward trend. No way is this alone sufficient to say we need to change our outlook because these days we see a lot of countervailing factors. At the moment you see price increases due to higher feedstock on your raw material cost, but have the ability to pass on prices or even expand margins. Even the sensitivity analysis that we are typically doing is not so helpful. Therefore we see currently downside risks, but we also see upside opportunities. It's at this point not possible to clearly make a net amount out of it. But it is certainly the case that for the first half of the year, we see for us, for our business, more opportunities than risks. Then we really have to see, so bear with us. We will keep you updated also then at the half year's call. Thank you so much. We move on to Chetan Udeshi, JP Morgan. Yeah. Hi. Morning. Thanks for my questions. Just one quick other clarification. On Agricultural Solutions, I heard, Dirk, you talked about the farmer economics, but if I just look at your Q2 last year, you had quite a strong volumes. There's always a phasing between comps and stuff, but I'm just curious, do you think in Q2 we should still assume the EBITDA to be down year-on-year because of FX, but also because the comps and volumes were quite tough? The second question, you know, Wacker yesterday was talking about orders in April, basically going to January and February levels after a surge in March. Have you seen any of these dynamics across your business? Thank you. Yeah. Good morning, Chetan Udeshi. Let me start with your question on Agricultural Solutions. For the second quarter, we believe this will deliver, and I said already earlier, a seasonally typical contribution, yeah, which will probably be broadly in line, maybe slightly below the previous year quarter. The main factors being the reasons that I've mentioned, so commodity prices. I mentioned the fertilizer effect, which is we are not in the fertilizer business, but it is obviously weighing on the buying power of the farmers. This is more or less is it. Economic conditions are certainly different. Currently, we have some dry conditions here in the middle of Europe, better in the South. This is a mixed bag. My tagline would really be, expect a seasonable typical contribution, maybe slightly below pre-previous years', level. Christian, on the second question. Evidently in the current environment, the typical view that we have towards the next weeks actually has even been shorter now. We have a view maybe towards the next four weeks or so, at this point in time, had even come down from two months currently due to this uncertain environment. We have not seen a broad-based reduction in demand. Actually, we have a pretty good order book and we feel confident. Evidently, what I mentioned earlier, the consumer confidence is down. On the other hand, due to all the, let's say, situation from less imports into Europe, for example, also a necessity to supply in Southeast Asia where there are shortages, has not led to a reduction in our demand in the short, at least in the short foreseeable future. Thank you. Now we have a question from Peter Spengler, DZ Bank. Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Cash proceeds of approximately around EUR 5 billion net of tax are expected to be received in the second quarter from Carlyle. Can you help model the impact in the P&L? How should we think about the expected dividend contribution from the retained 40% stake going forward? Peter, good morning. The net contribution, a bit higher than you would expect. We said tax effect is middle triple digit. I would expect that the net is coming in a little bit higher. On the joint venture side. The joint venture will do everything to increase its value. I would not expect that the joint venture with Carlyle obviously being the majority player and BASF holding the minority stake, that this joint venture will pay dividends in the short term. The financial effect that we are getting from this transaction is of course higher retained earnings and a cash in event. We will use the cash that we are getting upon closing of the transaction, as we've already alluded to with our priorities of the users of cash. We will use it to significantly deleverage our balance sheet. You know that we are also having a distribution framework, and these are the uses of the proceeds. I think that is it. Thank you. Thank you. Now we move on to Laurent Favre, and then two more to follow with Jaideep Pandya and James Hooper. Now it's Laurent Favre, BNP. Thanks, Stefanie. Morning all. Part of the hope of recovery to mid-cycle was the sort of capacity shutdowns that would offset some of the new additions either in Europe or Asia. I guess now we're seeing margins that are, you know, much better for those who can run. Strategically, the situation shows that maybe you're not able to rely on upstream overcapacity to run your economy. I'm wondering, I mean, do you think this situation is likely to slow down capacity shutdowns? On the other side, accelerate them for those who've already had to mothball capacity and maybe they won't restart? Laurent Favre, yes, it was very hard to understand you. I tried to extract what I understood. You were asking about the shutdowns, the ability to move TARs, and what to expect. Let me maybe first say, we have this year a higher turnaround intensity than last year. Amongst them, you have the five-year turnaround in Port Arthur, which started in the first quarter and is about to be closed now successfully very soon. We have the big cracker turnaround in Ludwigshafen to come up. Those are things that you cannot postpone because they need to be done and are also planned for a long time. At the same time, we are showing flexibility with a turnaround postponements. Christian alluded already to ammonia. If you wanna take a fraction, so what can be postponed, what has to be done? I would say it's rather 80% has to be done, 20% overall can be successfully postponed so that we are able to deliver and supply our customers. That's more or less the mix. Despite of the more intensive TAR season that we have, you will see for the first half of the year and now the better results of the upstream businesses coming in. We are able to overcompensate the turnaround effects, partly of course, out of our working capital, but also partly due to the pricing power that we have recently gained. I hope this answers your question because it was hard to understand. All right. Thank you. Jaideep Pandya On Field Research. Your turn now. Hi. I have a sort of similar question to actually what Laurent Favre was trying to ask. you know, when you look into the context of the sector prior to the war, I guess overcapacity out of China or Middle East was the biggest headache for European/American chemical companies. You know, now that the cost curve is sort of pushed sort of steeper, how much of this you think is sort of structural, especially in China, you know, with the lack of availability of feedstock or some of the sort of really old plants having to take a run cut or a mothball. How much of this is really going to structurally help the upstream demand supply balance, you know, when you look across the value chains? Just sort of a added follow-up, if you could, just highlight us, you know, your naphtha/ethane sourcing, you know, in Europe as well as in China. That would be great. Thanks a lot. The first question, of course, is a little bit of a crystal ball question. How much is structural? How much will change back? Let me try to narrow down a little bit the playing field here. We have a huge production set up in Asia, mainly China, but then also ASEAN. This very broad setup is hinging upon a very thin lifeline, which is the Strait of Hormuz. The preponderance of the feedstock for Asia is coming from. The vulnerability that comes with that, we are currently seeing. Do we see as a result of that, plant stoppages in Asia? Yes, of course, we see a lot of them. We see force majeures also. Do we see less supply into Europe? The pricing power that Europeans are currently getting is telling that. Is this long-term or is it short-term? For me, Jaideep, it's too early to tell. What is clear, customers in Europe are getting more sensitive about their procurement security. What we see is that more customers are also diversifying their supplier base. Also looking who, apart from an Asian supplier, can supply us in Europe. There, of course, in many, many cases, BASF is the first choice. Here, this effect we clearly see, and this is certainly a positive. Would I call it structural right now? Too early to tell, this is certainly a positive thing. Christian, maybe you add? Sure. On the feedstock sourcing, for our European steam crackers, Ludwigshafen and Antwerp, the raw materials are primarily sourced in Europe and in Northern Africa regarding naphtha, as well as North America regarding liquefied propane, because the cracker in Antwerp can actually use naphtha as well as propane. Our steam cracker in Zhanjiang is a flex-feed cracker, so can use both naphtha and butane. The raw materials are primarily sourced in the Middle East and North Africa, but also North America. We talk naphtha here, butane. At the Verbund site in Nanjing, as well as in Port Arthur, the joint ventures are sourcing the raw materials and this is therefore ensured that we also have in those in those crackers security of supply. Oh, sorry, just to follow up. Are you sourcing any naphtha out of the Gulf, or have you had any supply issues in China since the lockdown? No, we have not. I mean, yes, there are some Middle East sources for Zhanjiang, but we also have other sources and therefore we have security of supply here. It's ensured we have not had issues regarding sourcing naphtha or other raw materials for any of our crackers, including Zhanjiang. Okay. Thank you. Now hopefully one final question from James Hooper, Bernstein. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you very much for the chance to ask the question. My question is a bit more on pricing and contracts. Can you tell us a little bit more about the pricing approach? Are you seeking to lock in customers for longer at the higher prices? Are you using surcharges or are you using full pricing? I can ask a quick follow-up to the last question. How long in terms of time does it take to change your kind of feedstock power from one source to the other if the supply situation does get worse? Thank you. James, I start with the second one. It's the easier one. This feedstock change goes relatively quickly. It's a, I would say, is a matter of days or weeks. It's not a matter of months. That's an actual and powerful flexibility that we have to change on relatively short notice. Why is the first question a little bit more difficult? It's a sensitive question where we need to be mindful of what to say about pricing. Let me say it in general. We entertain a mix of contract prices. We also have in certain business, of course, formula prices as you would expect, and we also have a certain degree of spot prices. Now, if it comes to price increases, of course, to come to a higher spot price share, you need to take some time. This is why the price effects that we, that we see will now come into the second quarter and were not visible really in the first quarter. First quarter was a volume game. Second quarter will also now be something where you will see price effects. Are we making comprehensive price increases or are we also passing on special price components? Here we have all kind of possible pricing approaches, always customary and in line with your compliance standards that you would like to have, but also in line with market standards. It's really a broad base of things. Most importantly for me, we have regained pricing power, and you will see it in the second quarter. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now at the end of today's conference call. We will present our second quarter and half year results on July 29. Prior to that, we would like to invite you to a virtual deep dive on our Zhanjiang Verbund site, which we will hold on Monday, June 8th from 12:00 A.M. to 1:30 P.M. In May, we will provide further details on our website. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the BASF IR team. BASF's annual shareholders' meeting will be held at Congress Center Rosengarten now, starting at 10:00 A.M. CEST. Thank you for joining us today, and goodbye for now.