This presentation will commence shortly. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Jupiter's full year results for 2024. I'm Matthew Beesley, Chief Executive here at Jupiter. I'm joined, as always, by Wayne Mepham, our Chief Financial and Operations Officer. Today, we'll follow a similar format that you are all used to. I'll give some headlines on our results and the flow picture. Wayne will provide more details on the financials and expectations for the coming year, and I will then come back and update you on the good progress that we're making with our strategic objectives, and there will, of course, be an opportunity to ask questions at the end. 2024 has been a challenging year, both for Jupiter and for the whole industry, but we have done what we said we were going to do, and we have achieved a lot. We've transformed our UK equities capability. We've announced the hiring of a market-leading European equity team. We've brought in the Origin Asset Management investment team, adding scale in emerging market equities. We've launched our first of what could be many active ETFs. We've been awarded a new capital market services license in Singapore. We've transformed how we interact with our clients with our now digitally enabled client group. We've reviewed our approach towards our middle office, optimizing how we use suppliers and considered outsourcing models. And once again, we've delivered on costs. End of the year with fewer than 500 full-time employees, which is now the fourth consecutive year of reduced headcount. I'll put context around each of these initiatives a little later on, but I wanted to mention these all upfront today, as although not all of them can be seen through our P&L in the results today, every single one of these puts us in a stronger place to drive growth tomorrow. Wayne will cover the details of these financials shortly, but almost all of our key metrics were in line with our expectations, and likewise market expectations. Indeed, some were ahead, given our strong result on performance fees. In total, we saw just over GBP 10 billion of outflows this year. This is clearly not a position we'd want to be in. But of course, much of this was driven by the departure of the Value team. Overall, we saw GBP 6.2 billion of outflows from strategies previously managed by that team, GBP 4.8 billion from segregated mandates, and GBP 1.4 billion from mutual funds. This is in line with our expectations, and we can now draw a line under this and say we do not expect further outflows. On an underlying basis, that is to say, excluding the impact of the value team and other change in management at Chrysalis, outflows were GBP 3.3 billion in 2024, almost all of which came in the last quarter. I'll provide some more details on this shortly. Delivering positive investment outcomes for our clients, of course, remains absolutely key for us as an active manager. Our key performance indicator is investment performance over three years, for which we reported 61% of our mutual fund AUM as having outperformed their peer group median. This is slightly higher than the year before, but clearly, there is still room for improvement. That said, there really is some exceptional performance within that number, which should be highlighted. Half of our mutual fund AUM is in the top quartile, and 30% is in the top decile, including our Indian equity strategies, Asian Income, Global High Yield, Strategic Absolute Return Bond, and some systematic strategies. Across our larger funds, performance also remains strong. We have 13 funds with over GBP 1 billion of AUM. Of these, nine are above median, and eight are top quartile over both three and five years. There are, however, areas of specific performance challenges. Within our larger funds, the European Fund, as well as Dynamic and Strategic Bond, are now all below median. Given the relative size of these funds, they have a material impact on the overall numbers. As an active manager without a house view, our investment teams often take views which are contrary to consensus. And that can lead to periods of outperformance and underperformance, such as we've seen with the unconstrained fixed income funds. That team has never been afraid to be different, and this is a key strength of theirs, and is what has led to their strong long-term track record. However, there are times when sustained periods of underperformance require decisive management action. This was the case with the European equity team, and we've moved to make the required changes, bringing in a top quartile team. Moving on to the flow picture, our gross flows have improved this year and have returned to what we would call a more normalized level of over GBP 14 billion. This is really driven by a pickup from retail clients after subdued levels in the prior year. On the net side, as I mentioned before, the overall outflow is a little over GBP 10 billion, more than half of which came in the final quarter of the year. If you look at the underlying flow picture, then there were GBP 3.3 billion of underlying outflows in 2024. Almost all of these outflows came through in the last quarter of the year, and there were a few things driving that late move. In September, we announced we intended to close down some of our emerging market debt funds, which resulted in around GBP 500 million of outflows. We also announced a change in management of our European equity capability, and around GBP 350 million of outflows followed. You will inevitably see outflows when management changes occur, but we believe the deliberate actions we have taken are setting us up better for long-term growth despite these shorter-term challenges. Also, like many in the industry, Q4 saw some budget-related outflows as investors looked to reposition. So, although not yet where we want to be on the retail side, you can see from the slide that it year-on-year, but clearly one which we are working to move to a net inflow position, and there were some real successes. Our Indian equity strategy was a notable standout here, with over GBP 1.2 billion of net inflows through the year. Our Asian income strategy generated GBP 500 million of net inflows. GEAR, or Global Equity Absolute Return, once again had a stellar year in terms of performance and saw a further GBP 500 million of net inflows. Within fixed income, our Catalyst Funding strategy in global high yield proved successful, with that fund growing from GBP 75 million at the start of the year to over GBP 350 million today. On the institutional side, there were total underlying net outflows of GBP 1.5 billion. This is primarily driven by one client in our systematic capability rebalancing their portfolio, regardless of, or indeed likely because of, very strong performance right at the start of the year, right at the end of the year. We're continuing to work closely with this client, and while we could yet see further investments, overall, this is the reality of an institutional book that is becoming more mature. We do, however, remain very confident in the growth of this channel. Today, we have a broader range of institutional quality investment processes than ever before. We have a strong and growing number of client relationships across the world, and we have a promising pipeline. I'm pleased to say that we are in a net positive flow position so far this year from institutional clients, which hopefully bodes well for the period ahead. Last year, we introduced this view of our investment capabilities, which provides a good overview of the diversification of our investment expertise. I won't dwell too long on the flows here, but you can see the most significant detractors are UK and global equities. Both of these are impacted, of course, by the value outflows, but on an underlying basis, the outflows are much less stark at GBP 1.5 billion and GBP 0.5 billion, respectively. Conversely, the Asian and emerging market equities capability and category, and systematic equities, saw net positive inflows, and the latter would have been much more materially so if not for that late and unexpected client rebalancing we have discussed. Perhaps more interesting on this slide, though, is how we are seeing this changing through 2025. There are plenty of opportunities for growth. I believe we now have the strongest U.K. equity lineup Jupiter has ever had, and arguably the best across the industry. We don't know when sentiment will shift, but we are perfectly positioned to capture that growth when it does. Because of our decisive action, we now also have a real chance to reestablish our position as a market leader in European equities. Our new team brings a strong track record and a differentiated investment process that appeals to both retail and institutional clients. We are very bullish about the opportunity ahead in this large and important category. The Origin Equities team are now on board, and those assets, just under GBP 750 million, transferred to us in January. By joining Jupiter, they will get access to a new distribution platform that should allow them to engage with more clients in new geographies. There was lots of white space for this team to attack and a strong track record that extends back two decades. The systematic team also continues to deliver very impressive investment performance. Beyond their current product range, we're looking at new platforms to allow a broader range of clients to access their proven expertise. So, with a more diversified business now than ever before, with a significant number of changes having been made to some of our key capabilities, and with the geopolitical backdrop so uncertain, it is, of course, very difficult to predict short-term flows. However, looking down this list, there's very much a case to be made for most of these investment capabilities to be larger in a year's time than they are today. With that, I'll hand over to Wayne. Okay, good morning, everyone. Matt has already given you the key financial metrics and provided some color on the AUM movements for the year. I'm going to run through our numbers in a little more detail. But before I get started, I wanted to share three messages from our announcement today. Firstly, we have delivered resilience results this year. We knew there would be challenges, but we largely knew what these would be and planned accordingly. Secondly, we continue to have a clear and resolute focus on cost discipline, year-on-year and non-comp costs broadly flat. That discipline allows us to invest across the business to help support the execution of our strategy. Finally, we continue to work hard to manage our capital alongside making returns to shareholders. That means our retained capital is put to work, leaving us with appropriate liquidity for both organic and inorganic options. Let's start by summarizing the key movements for the year. Underlying profit before tax and performance fees was down, as we expected, mainly due to lower revenues. That was partly offset by other gains, mainly strong alpha returns on our seed portfolio, demonstrating the performance of the capabilities that we have seeded. Combined, that results in profits of GBP 79 million. We have had another strong year of performance fees, delivering nearly GBP 19 million of profit. In total, our underlying profit before tax is just under GBP 98 million. And after the final year of exceptional costs relating to the Merian acquisition, our statutory profits for the year were over GBP 88 million. Although the Merian exceptional costs are now done, for 2025, I expect exceptional items of around GBP 4 million. That relates to the various changes we announced in 2024. So let's break those returns down in a little more detail, starting with AUM. Matt is taking you through the flow numbers. So the combined impact of markets, positive investment returns, and net outflows across the two years delivers an average AUM year-on-year. but we end the year at just over GBP 45 billion of AUM, compared with the average for 2024 of around GBP 51 billion. We delivered net revenues, excluding performance fees, of GBP 333 million for the year. That's down from GBP 356 million the year before. As the average AUM was largely unchanged, the reduction all came from lower average fee margins, which was down from 70 to 65 basis points. That came from changes in the business mix, from flows and market movements over the past two years, and the tiered pricing I announced this time last year. But at the year-end, our average run rate was back up at 68 basis points, largely driven by the reduction in institutional AUM. I've consistently said I'm not concerned by a fall in the fee margins where it reflects a change in our business mix, where it's aligned to our strategy of growing our institutional business and other typically lower fee areas. But that has to be combined with growth in our AUM over time. Clearly, that has not been the case this year, but increasing scale continues to be a key part of our strategy. And looking out from here on the outcome for 2025, well, the longer-term challenges remain, but I don't have any one-off changes to announce this year. If my expectations of AUM movements across the year play out, I think we might be around 67 basis points on average for 2025, and that's largely because we expect to see assets grow again in the institutional channel, so we've seen a setback in revenue terms in the short term, but we have taken many decisive actions this year to put us in a strong position to grow AUM and revenue in the medium term. The other part of our revenue performance fees were over GBP 31 million for 2024. That is, of course, another strong year of delivery and well above my budget and more recent expectations. This demonstrates how difficult they are to predict. My guidance is largely unchanged. I have GBP 10 million in my budget, and I'll update you on our progress at the half year, so let's move on to costs. Over the last few years, we've had a particular focus on cost discipline. We announced GBP 20 million of annualized savings in 2022. We delivered lower costs again in 2023. And whilst costs are slightly up this year, we have managed below the guidance we provided at the beginning of the year. And you all know my ethos to cost management. We spend money where we believe we should. We control the total spend where we think we can, and we constantly focus on how we can improve our cost ratios. Turning to the cost outcome for 2024, well, it's better than I guided to at the beginning of the year, starting with a total compensation ratio, which is 45%. That's down two percentage points on guidance at the start of the year and lower than my update in July, all against a backdrop of the medium-term range that I set in 2022 of mid to high 40s. Given our lower AUM, you would normally expect this ratio to trend higher, but within that range. Indeed, that is what I expected at the start of the year. But with the outflows being later than I forecast and the change in investment managers also late in the year, this has held down the ratio. Looking forward with lower AUM at the start of the year and the announced additions in our investment teams, I expect the ratio to move to the top of my range. That's 49% for 2025. My guidance going forward will be focused on the overall compensation ratio. I will not be splitting out the fixed and variable cost components, so you should adjust your models accordingly. Turning to non-compensation costs, we deliver below original guidance and in line with my update at the half year. And in 2025, I expect our non-compensation costs to be marginally higher at GBP 110 million. So where are we going from here? And what am I targeting from the cost ratio perspective? We're at 78% for 2024. My guidance will see that go up in 2025. But I have previously said that a cost ratio of around 70% should be achievable for a business of our complexity with increased scale. Well, we're not there today or for the next year, but I do see a path to how we can get there in the medium term, and that is what we are working towards. So how do we achieve that? You know that we have a relentless focus on costs, and Matt and I have a strong track record of delivering on our cost commitments. Today, we have announced our intention to outsource certain operational activities to BNY as part of a strategic relationship. There are a number of reasons to deliver this change, including as part of a package of activities that are designed to improve the client experience. But it's also taking undue complexity out of our business and delivering cost savings, which will come through in the future. And of course, there is the impact on our headcount, which at 492 is already back to around 2016 levels, earlier than my original expectations. And with this outsourcing, it will come down further still. That's just one example of the opportunities we see to get us to that 70% ratio in the future. You have my cost guidance for 2025. You have my longer-term expectation for cost ratios, and you can see from the past three years that we deliver on our cost commitments. Finally, I'll take you through our strong capital position and how we're thinking about it from here. At 31 December, we had regulatory capital of GBP 324 million. The final ordinary dividend of GBP 0.022, taking our full-year dividends to GBP 0.054, is simply our policy of distributing 50% of pre-performance fee earnings. We have announced our intention to redeem the subordinated debt that will complete in April and is the earliest possible date. That's the full redemption of the GBP 50 million debt, but only a GBP 16 million reduction in our regulatory capital. We also announced the full use of our share buyback authority. That's 3% of issued share capital, which will commence in March and is expected to cost around GBP 13 million. After this capital use and our regulatory capital requirement of GBP 63 million, we have a very healthy surplus of GBP 220 million. Our capital allocation framework is very familiar to you. We think about the needs of the business and options for investment, both before paying annual dividends and considering additional returns on a less frequent basis. As usual, our organic opportunities are mainly the seed portfolio. That's GBP 127 million invested at the year-end, and since then, I have authorized a further GBP 32 million to be deployed, some of which was in our first active ETF, which we launched earlier this month. You know that we are very deliberate in curating our fund lineup, and I take a very strict approach to seed deployment too. That's proving to be successful in focusing our attention on the best opportunities for growth. Of course, the Origin transaction shows that we see real opportunities for inorganic growth too. We need to consider potential liquidity needs here as well. That's optionality for the future, and I have nothing to announce today. After the returns of capital we have just announced and the additional seed use I have authorized, remaining liquidity is around two times the regulatory requirements, and that is exactly where it should be for now. Returning returns to shareholders, making sure our capital is working for us, but holding some capacity to invest further as we assess all the available options are key parts of our thinking. With a commitment that if we don't see opportunity to invest to deliver long-term returns, we will return excess capital to shareholders at the right time. And I'll hand back to Matt, who will give you an update on our strategic objectives. Thank you, Wayne. So before we go to questions, I'd like to give a brief update on the progress against our strategic objectives and put some context around that longer list that I opened with. I think it's clear by now that it's been a challenging year, but that should not detract from the progress we've made here to set ourselves up for future success. Everything we have done in 2024 has been about building scale. I've touched on these already, but we've materially strengthened the breadth and depth of our investment expertise. And despite the headline challenges, there is very good underlying growth too from some of our existing teams. Today, we have a broader base of institutional-ready investment processes than we have ever had before. We have our enhanced client group, who are now even more adept at delivering bespoke products and servicing. Wayne has covered some of this already, but if I can summarize, I would say that our focus on cost discipline remains intense and resolute, and the results speak for themselves. We've worked very hard to keep non-compensation costs as low as possible. They are little changed this year and are down 12% over the last three years, which in this inflationary environment is a real achievement. We've continued to create our product offering, closing or merging a total of 11 funds in 2024, focusing as always on those that are subscale or out of client demand. As Wayne has detailed, we've also reviewed our operating model, resulting in outsourcing parts of the middle office and the exploring of further supplier consolidation. Of course, the key way we can take complexity out of manual processes is by better use of technology and automation. We've transformed how we use data this year. It's hard to sound glamorous or exciting, but it's absolutely crucial to our ongoing drive for efficiencies. We've migrated to a new data platform, simplified our data infrastructure, and are exploring practical and commercially additive business cases for AI. This transformation in how we use technology and data is most clearly evident within our client group. In the first full year since they have been established, we've completely changed how we interact with our clients, aiming to improve the client experience at every single touchpoint that our clients have with us at Jupiter. Full data integration across a now digitally enabled platform supports and complements really high-quality client service. We've also taken steps to reach more clients. Earlier this month, we secured a capital market services license in Singapore, which allows us to access the important and growing mass affluent sector in the region. I've talked to you all on a number of occasions about exploring new methods of delivery. And earlier this month, we launched our first active ETF, an actively managed global bond strategy listed on the LSE. We're excited to see how this develops, and it could well be the first in a range. So we're working hard to improve the experience for our existing clients, to reach new clients altogether, and develop new ways for clients to access our expertise. Finally, our fourth objective is to deepen relationships with all of our stakeholders. Our shareholders are obviously a key part of this strategic objective. We're, of course, working very hard to drive growth in the business and continue to deliver a positive total shareholder return. Wayne has talked about our capital position and how we're deploying that capital in various ways: through the dividend, through seed capital, through the share buyback, and through redemption of the sub debt. And all at the same time, exploring, continuing to explore strategic inorganic options. Our people are ultimately what defines the success of Jupiter. As you know, we regularly conduct opinion surveys, and I was delighted to see that in our most recent survey, our engagement score year-on-year. it's now at 79%, which is 4% ahead of the financial services benchmark. Our business is special, and because of our people, I thank each and every one of them for their hard work and their focus. And of course, we exist only because of our clients. We continue to deliver positive outcomes with 50% of our AUM in the top quartile and 30% in the top decile. So to wrap up before we hand over to questions, let me reiterate what I said right at the start. Everything that has happened this year is broadly as we expected it. That said, although most of our key metrics are where the market expected, they are not where we ultimately want them to be. And that delta really belies the huge amount of activity that has been going on and continues to go on and the progress we've made against each of our strategic objectives. We know that not all this progress is immediately visible through the P&L, but everything that Wayne and I have talked about today serves to position us better for growth in 2025 and beyond. So with that, I'm going to hand over to questions, first in the room and then also online. Alex. David, please. Great morning. It's David McCann from Deutsche Numis. Yeah, free for me. Can I start on the capital slide? I guess questions for both of you there. So when you mentioned the, I think you said you had two times the requirement in the surplus. So effectively, that's three times the actual requirements. That does seem quite a large amount to be holding in surplus. Just what's the justification for needing quite so much capital? Because you certainly didn't always have that sort of level of cover in the past. I guess, yeah, related to that, I mean, does this signal that you are looking much more at the inorganic opportunities than perhaps you've done in the more recent past? Just trying to square the circle why you feel the need to have so much surplus capital retained on the balance sheet. I'll stop there. I've got a couple more in a minute. Okay, I'll start with capital and the two times and perhaps talk about organic focus. Then Matt maybe will pick up on the inorganic. I mean, what actually said in the prepared remarks was that we have a two times coverage of the capital requirement. So it's not three times, it's two times. So if you look at our capital position, I think sometimes people can get confused. The capital we have includes the seed portfolio. There's not a separate asset group that covers that. So when you strip out that invested capital, you get to a two times coverage of our regulatory requirement through liquidity. In terms of why we're holding that, well, our policy has always been to combine annual dividends with a periodic return of capital. We haven't defined the periodic, but typically we've been thinking two to three years. So it wouldn't happen naturally every year. The last time we made a return, as you recall, would have been 18 months ago now, outside of the buyback today. And the final piece before I hand over to Matt is on the organic, sorry, the organic side. I mean, I've mentioned today two areas that we've already deployed further capital. So that's already in the numbers before you get to the two times liquidity that we have remaining. We see plenty of other opportunities to invest internally. We've got the first of our active ETFs that could lead to more. We need to make sure we've got liquidity available for those sorts of investment. Thank you. I mean, as you heard me say in my prepared remarks, we look at our current business. We talked about those seven investment capabilities that we have. And I made the point that we think it's a great case you made that five, six, seven, many, many of these can grow as we look into 2025. So we're excited by the organic opportunities ahead of us. But if there is an ability for us to supplement that organic growth with inorganic growth opportunities as we think we can as relates to the Origin acquisition last year, then of course you want to take advantage of those opportunities. Certainly having available capital to deploy is going to give us that optionality where those options to present themselves. Maybe just to follow up on that last point there, what sort of criteria would you look for in acquisitions, either in terms of what they can offer, but also financial criteria? What do they need to do for the group? If you were to do one, how should we be thinking? Are you doing a good job or not? I mean, I'll start with Wayne again, might jump in. Look, Jupiter stands for being active in everything that we do. Everything that we do is not just active, but also differentiated. There are lots of asset categories that we're not currently present in that lend themselves well to active management. If we can find differentiated investment teams that exist in those categories that lend themselves well to active management, categories that typically are going to be large and growing, then they could be of interest to us. And we continue to look for those opportunities to build out our business as and when those opportunities arise. What's great about the position we find ourselves in today is we're not reliant on those inorganic opportunities to drive us forward. As I've said, both in answer to the previous question, but in my prepared remarks, we're really quite bullish about what is ahead of us into 2025. We've made a lot of proactive changes to our investment management lineup. That plus the underlying momentum in many of our strategies gives us lots of optimism for what is ahead in 2025 and beyond. But if we can find additional opportunities in new adjacent categories, then we have the capital to be able to potentially grab hold of those opportunities. And we'll do so. Yeah, in terms of financial metrics, I mean, clearly financial metrics are just one of many things that we need to consider when we look at these opportunities for us. But clearly the key ones that we'd be thinking about would be EPS accretion. It'd also be looking at, and that would be double digit at least, or low double digit at least. And then obviously, of course, we'd be looking at the rate of return that we can get. I mean, that's clearly on day one. The key part for me that perhaps isn't the financial metric is the growth opportunity that comes with it as well, which often isn't in the day one numbers. Great. Thank you. And if it's okay, when I've still got the mic, a few more technical ones. So you mentioned the 68 basis points fee margin run rate going to 67 for the year as a whole average. Can you give us any color on the sort of segmental margin in that? Because the averages for last year were 26 basis points for institutional, 74 for retail. Are there any sort of drivers within at that level that it's worth thinking about? Just trying to square, obviously, how you got from last year's number to this year. Obviously, the institutional outflows will have been part of that. But just trying to understand if there's anything relevant that sort of supplements. That's the first technical one. Then on the comp ratio, 49 guidance top of the range, is that mainly a function of lower run rate revenues and just the fixed cost component? Or is there any real change to the variable comp element in that? And then final one, not providing any flow guidance this year. Any reason why not? I'll let you take the flow one. I'll do the first two. Look, I think you're right. The fee run rate fee ratio, sorry, margin went up at the end of the year. I mean, it goes up. It's not a good thing in my mind because it means we've lost institutional business. The reason it's looking to come back down again or expected to come back down is because of that weighting principally to more institutional business. But not only institutional business, we see opportunities for growth in some of our other lower than the average fee margin areas. So that's what's driving it. But I think the key part of that is the institutional growth, which I said in the presentation. We see a positive, very strong pipeline. So opportunity to see that grow again this year after the outflows we saw last year. In terms of the ratio, the cost ratio, there's nothing underlying this. It is the change in the mix. I mean, the reason I gave that guidance is because we obviously saw that there were some challenges in the very near term. So that range of potential cost ratios or total compensation ratios, you wouldn't be surprised to see that where our AUM today, where it is, it's towards the top of that range. There's nothing changed in terms of the mix of the underlying business. But of course, we do have fixed components within our total compensation. So those don't move in line with falling revenue. You see that ratio move up, but the way in which we reward is broadly unchanged. Well, flow guidance is so difficult and challenging normally at the best of times. I think it's even harder this year for us at Jupiter because of so many changes that we've talked about. Having brought in two new U.K. equity teams, and while they're gathering momentum to date, lots of client interaction, it's very hard to know when that's going to turn into assets. We've made the changes on our European equities capability. We acknowledge that that's led us to go backward in the very short term, but I think it's going to take us very far forward in the medium term, and then, of course, we've undertaken the Origin acquisition as well. And with that, so it comes with a very strong track record, lots of client relationships, consultant relationships, and now a much wider distribution footprint than we've had before. But putting that all together in what is also still, of course, a challenging geopolitical backdrop, makes it really hard to know how these things are going to play out in the next 12 months. I think one important thing we did say in our remarks earlier is that so far, year to date, our institutional business is positive from a flow perspective. That's been a big driver of growth for us over many years. We talk a lot about institutional quality investment processes at Jupiter. That is just one insight into the optimism that we have as we look into next year. But we know there's lots of uncertainty as well that make it really hard to predict how that's going to play out from a quarter to quarter basis. Hi, good morning. Thank you for the presentation. So I have just a follow-up on the flows. You've shared that year to date, you've seen positive inflows in the institutional, but maybe can you share a bit more color on the retail side? What are you seeing year to date? And then it would be great if you can share a bit more color on the initial investor demand of the recently launched active ETF and any other products that you're working on that would be useful. And finally, if you have any updates on the international operations in terms of progress made there, how much inflows or flows have you seen in the international business? Thank you. Okay, well, why don't I jump in and try and take all of those, and Wayne will then sweep up after me and fill in all the gaps of all the things that I've missed. So obviously, on the institutional side, as noted, lots of strong positive momentum into this year. And as I just answered the previous question, we're excited by that medium-term opportunity. On the retail side, it's been a bit more mixed year to date. Nothing unexpected, certainly in terms of how we were thinking this year might start. We've seen some profit taking in asset classes where there was strong performance in 2024. So, for example, in Indian equities, and we've seen some weakness in our Dynamic and Strategic Bond capability, again, consistent with market trends and also underlying investment performance. But look, as we see it today, this year is so far very much as we thought it might be when we started budgeting for this year back at the end of 2024. You asked about active ETFs and demand there. Well, frankly, it's too early to tell. We're excited by the fact that we now have a toehold into this market. We have an understanding. We have some knowledge within the business around how active ETFs can work. We've clearly done this because we're listening to our clients, and clients are telling us this is probably likely a much more important method of delivery for them, a much more important channel for them in terms of how they want to access our investment capabilities. And as a result, you should expect us to be thinking about what is going to happen next in this category and how we're going to play a role there. So look, watch this space, more on that to come. And then also you asked about the international parts of our business as well. We're aware that in some of these presentations, we talk a lot about institutional, sometimes about international, some about UK. Obviously, we've talked a bit more about non-international related strategies today. But international is still a very important part of our business. It's about a third of our assets as of the end of the year. We did touch on the new capital markets license we have in Singapore. This is going to be a big driver of growth for us in the region. It gave us access to a client that up until this moment, we haven't been able to access properly. And we know we've got a range of investment capabilities that should resonate well in that particular marketplace. So international is still very important to us and still going to be a big growth driver for Jupiter as we look to 2025 and beyond. I don't think you've really left me very many gaps to fill here. But the only thing I'll perhaps add is just to remind you that, of course, a lot of our institutional business is also international. And we see plenty of opportunity there as well. Okay, we've had a number of questions come in online. There's a number around capital, which I think most of which have already been answered, but a couple outstanding there. Wayne, of the 220 million cash surplus, can you confirm that that includes the seed capital of 127 million? And if so, can you break down broadly which asset classes and how long that has been invested? Yeah, just to be clear, 220 million is the surplus. Actually, you'll step it back up and say the 283 million. The other thing you said there was liquidity is not liquidity. 283, to the point, includes the 127 million at the year end of seed portfolio. And now, obviously, gone up by a further 32 once we finalize that deployment. Yeah, in terms of how it's split, it's actually in your pack in the appendix. Roughly a third of it is in Asian EM. A further third approximately is in fixed income, and the final is in systematic equity. Most of those are relatively recent. The only one that's been there for a longer period is actually Global High Yield, and that was originally seeded. And then we, as you may recall from last year, we added to that and applied some Catalyst Funding, and it's really served to grow the assets under management. So it's done what it intended. Sticking with debt, a question saying, "Are you contemplating issuing any new debt, or are you aiming to be debt-free going forward?" Yeah, I mean, look, certainly, I mean, in the short term, there's no intention to raise any debts. We're repaying the full amount. It is the earliest possible date that we could do it. Equally subordinated debt is regulatory capital too. I think you can see from our capital position that that's not what is needed today. We clearly have less liquidity because we're using that capital. But I still think there's plenty there as we've been asked about already. Thank you. Matt, a question around flows in our presentation, including total flows and then underlying net flows. A question around underlying net flows, which exclude the outflows associated with fund manager departures. And why do you believe this is a valid measure, and how do you treat assets flowing in? Yeah, so obviously, the intention when we introduced this concept of underlying just a year ago was to try and give complete visible transparency to shareholders as it's how we thought things would play out in 2024, given that we obviously announced the departure of the value team back in January 2024. And then just we'd also commented on the role we were playing in helping make the change as it relates to Chrysalis and the move from that team to a more independent structure. And so we wanted to be open and transparent about that and allow investors to see the difference of the impacts of our business, both as it relates to those two changes, but also beyond those two changes. As I said in my prepared remarks and also otherwise commented, we don't expect there to be further outflows, further impact as a result of value team change. That is now behind us. And as such, as of now, underlying is actual flows. So that measure was there simply to help bring transparency. And from this point onwards, it's not something that we're going to need to be talking about. Thank you. Two more questions, both cost-related. One about headcount and then on the cost-income ratio. From the data pack, I see that if we add back the NZS employees, the number of staff is 500 compared to 509 back in 2022. Do you think this is acceptable given the business results and the supposed focus on cutting costs? Acceptable. I mean, look, the NZS business was once consolidated. It's not anymore. We announced that this time last year. So they're now an associate undertaking for us. So the guidance I've been giving throughout the year in terms of where we would get to with headcount, clearly took that into account because they were no longer a subsidiary this time last year. So yeah, I mean, clearly it is acceptable because those are the employees working for you. Do you think you've done enough in terms of cost cutting? In terms of cost cutting, I mean, we have, as I went through the presentation, we undertook a process in 2022. That's not once and done. It's not finished. We continue to focus on cost management. So Matt and I spoke at length today about the opportunities that we see. We continue to focus on them every day. So yeah, we're managing costs despite the inflationary environment we're obviously living with. Maybe just jump in and just again repeat a line that Wayne used in his prepared remarks. We do spend money where we think we should. We're here to try and grow this business on behalf of our shareholders, but we control costs where we can. We talk internally of a relentless pursuit of efficiency. And as Wayne just alluded to, we're never one and done in our desire to manage all of our costs, headcount and non-headcount related, but always looking for, and indeed, we tried to create a culture that is constantly seeking ways to be more efficient, to be more agile, to move quicker, recognizing that's for the benefit of both our shareholders, but also our clients. So yes, I think there's opportunities for us to further manage costs carefully next year and beyond. And you should expect that as an ongoing feature of the management of this business. And finally, around that same point about the five, can we talk a bit more about the drivers around that 5% rise in the cost-income ratio and how that fits in with that philosophy around cost management? Yeah, of course. Look, I mean, the absolute costs are broadly flat this year. They're better than we guided to. But of course, the impact of a ratio is not only the cost, but also the income. The income has obviously fallen this year for the reasons I outlined. That is one of the challenges. So this is why we focus on both managing the cost at an appropriate level. I think that's quite right. It's not just about cost reduction. It's about making sure we have appropriate investment too. But then the outcome of that is also a ratio. So it's a combination of factors that we need to think about. Clearly, one of our most, if not the most important part of our strategic objectives is to increase scale. And that, of course, itself will help control that ratio. Thank you. There's no further questions here. Look, if there's no further questions, it simply remains for me to thank you all for being here today. Thank you for joining us on the phone or on the webcast. I wish you a very pleasant rest of the day. Thank you for your support.